Influence of Number Location on the SNARC Effect: Evidence From the Processing of Rotated Traditional Chinese Numerical Words

Wang, Zhiwei; Zhu, Xiaotong; Jiang, Yingjie

doi:10.1177/2041669520917169

Cited by 8 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 63 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Three possible research directions could be taken. First, in the stage of the spatial representation of the magnitude, the load intensity of the input information could be changed to improve or reduce the cognitive load of the magnitude representation and processing (e.g., adding task-irrelevant color information as a stimulus to improve the representation load) to examine its influence on the SNARC effect (Deng et al, 2017; Schuller et al, 2014; Wang et al, 2020). Second, in the stage of the spatial representation of the response selection, the set of responses could be changed (Pinto, Pellegrino, Lasaponara, et al, 2019; Schneider & Logan, 2014), such as expanding the responses from two buttons to four buttons to investigate its influence on the SNARC effect.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Processing Stage Flexibility of the SNARC effect: Task Relevance or Magnitude Relevance?

Xiang

Yan

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous studies have shown that the processing stage of the spatial-numerical association of response codes (SNARC) effect was flexible. Two recent studies by Nan et al. (2021) and Yan et al. (2021) used the same experimental paradigm to check whether the SNARC effect occurred in the semantic-representation stage but reached contradictory conclusions, showing that the SNARC effect was influenced by a magnitude Stroop effect in a magnitude comparison task but not by a parity Stroop effect in a parity judgment task. The two studies had two distinct operational factors: the task type (magnitude comparison task or parity judgment task, with the numerical magnitude information task-relevant or task-irrelevant) and the semantic representation stage-related interference information (magnitude or parity Stroop effect, with the interference information magnitude-relevant or magnitude-irrelevant). To determine which factor influenced the SNARC effect, in the present study, the Stroop effect was switched in the two tasks based on the previous studies. The findings of four experiments consistently showed that the SNARC effect was not influenced by the parity Stroop effect in the magnitude comparison task but was influenced by the magnitude Stroop effect in the parity judgment task. Combined with the results of Nan et al. (2021) and Yan et al. (2021), the findings indicated that regardless of the task type or the task-relevance of numerical magnitude information, magnitude-relevant interference information was the primary factor to affect the SNARC effect. Furthermore, a two-stage processing model that explained the observed flexibility of the SNARC effect was proposed and discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Processing Stage Flexibility of the SNARC effect: Task Relevance or Magnitude Relevance?

Xiang

Yan

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Three possible research directions could be taken. First, in the stage of the spatial representation of the magnitude, the load intensity of the input information could be changed to improve or reduce the cognitive load of the magnitude representation and processing (e.g., adding color information as a stimulus to improve the magnitude representation load) to examine its influence on the SNARC effect ( Schuller et al, 2014 ; Deng et al, 2017 ; Wang et al, 2020 ). Second, in the stage of the spatial representation of the response selection, the set of responses could be changed ( Schneider and Logan, 2014 ; Pinto et al, 2019a ), such as expanding the responses from two buttons to four buttons to investigate its influence on the SNARC effect.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Processing stage flexibility of the SNARC effect: Task relevance or magnitude relevance?

Xiang

Yan²,

Fu³

et al. 2022

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous studies have shown that the processing stage of the spatial-numerical association of response codes (SNARC) effect is flexible. Two recent studies used the same experimental paradigm to check whether the SNARC effect occurred in the semantic-representation stage but reached contradictory conclusions, showing that the SNARC effect was influenced by a magnitude Stroop effect in a magnitude comparison task but not by a parity Stroop effect in a parity judgment task. Those two studies had two distinct operational factors: the task type (magnitude comparison task or parity judgment task, with the numerical magnitude information task-relevant or task-irrelevant) and the semantic representation stage-related interference information (magnitude or parity Stroop effect, with the interference information magnitude-relevant or magnitude-irrelevant). To determine which factor influenced the SNARC effect, in the present study, the Stroop effect was switched in the two tasks based on the previous studies. The findings of four experiments consistently showed that the SNARC effect was not influenced by the parity Stroop effect in the magnitude comparison task but was influenced by the magnitude Stroop effect in the parity judgment task. Combined with the results of those two contradictory studies, the findings indicated that regardless of the task type or the task relevance of numerical magnitude information, magnitude-relevant interference information was the primary factor to affect the SNARC effect. Furthermore, a two-stage processing model that explained the observed flexibility of the SNARC effect was proposed and discussed.

show abstract

“…Therefore, polarity correspondence between numbers and responses causes the SNARC effect in processing numbers (Proctor & Cho, 2006; Proctor & Xiong, 2015; Reber et al., 2010). Note that polarity encoding is observed for not only number processing but also processing other information, such as sequence symbols and locations (Mapelli et al., 2003; Proctor & Cho, 2006; Proctor & Xiong, 2015; Shi et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2021, 2020). For example, when the numerical location is stressed by presenting numbers on the left or right side of the screen, individuals may encode the left-hand presentations as having negative polarity and the right-hand presentations as having positive polarity; this encoding leads to the spatial stimulus-response compatibility effect in numbers cognition, in which left-hand stimuli elicit faster left-key pressing than right-key pressing, and vice versa, even in a location classification task (Wang et al., 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Encoding Numbers in the Context of Multiple Overlapping Cues: Evidence from a Chinese Finger Number Cognition Study

Wang

Tao

et al. 2021

Percept Mot Skills

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How people encode numbers in the context of multiple overlapping encoded cues remains unclear. In this study, we explored Chinese finger numbers, which contain both a numerical magnitude cue and a left-right hand cue offered by the expressing hand, to investigate the number encoding mechanism in the context of multiple overlapping cues. Chinese finger numbers expressed by the left or right hand were randomly and centrally presented on a computer screen to participants who were asked to perform a hand classification task (Experiment 1), a magnitude classification task (Experiment 2), a parity classification task (Experiment 3) and a magnitude classification or ring classification task (Experiment 4). We discovered (a) only an association effect between the pressed key and the expressing hand in hand classification and parity classification tasks, (b) the SNARC effect only on the magnitude classification task, (c) the association effect between the pressed key and the expressing hand on the larger, Chinese finger number, magnitude classification task in Experiment 2, and (d) the SNARC effect and the association between the pressed key and the expressing hand were reversed on the ring classification task. From these results, we concluded that people can flexibly choose appropriate number encoding cues and how numbers are encoded in the context of multiple overlapping cues depending on (a) which cognition task individuals perform and (b) the character of the numbers involved.

show abstract

Influence of Number Location on the SNARC Effect: Evidence From the Processing of Rotated Traditional Chinese Numerical Words

Cited by 8 publications

References 63 publications

Processing Stage Flexibility of the SNARC effect: Task Relevance or Magnitude Relevance?

Processing Stage Flexibility of the SNARC effect: Task Relevance or Magnitude Relevance?

Processing stage flexibility of the SNARC effect: Task relevance or magnitude relevance?

Encoding Numbers in the Context of Multiple Overlapping Cues: Evidence from a Chinese Finger Number Cognition Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About