MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058554575 · doi:10.1080/17470218.2014.994538

Continuous visual properties of number influence the formation of novel symbolic representations

2015· article· en· W2058554575 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Rebecca Merkley, Gaia Scerif

Bibliographic record

VenueQuarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaJames S. McDonnell Foundation
KeywordsNumerosity adaptation effectSymbol (formal)Numerical cognitionCognitionPsychologyCognitive psychologyArithmeticCommunicationPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsComputer scienceNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Numerical symbols are thought to be mapped onto preexisting nonsymbolic representations of number. A growing body of evidence suggests that nonsymbolic numerical processing is significantly influenced by the associated visual properties of continuous quantity (e.g., surface area, density), but their role in the acquisition of novel symbols is unknown. Forty undergraduate students were trained to associate novel abstract symbols with numerical magnitudes. Half of the symbols were associated with nonsymbolic arrays in which total surface area and numerosity were correlated ("congruent"), and the other symbols were associated with arrays in which total surface area was equated across numerosities ("incongruent"). As numbers are represented in multiple formats (words, digits, nonsymbolic arrays), we also tested whether providing auditory nonword labels facilitated symbol learning. Following training, participants engaged in speeded comparisons of the newly learnt symbols. Comparisons were affected by the ratio between the numerosities associated with each symbol, a characteristic marker of numerical processing. Furthermore, comparisons were hardest for large-ratio comparisons of symbols associated with incongruent area and numerosity pairing during learning. In turn, these findings call for the further investigation of visual parameters on the development of numerical cognition.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.079
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.323 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuarterly Journal of Experimental PsychologySame topicCognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skillsFrench-language works237,207