The malleable impact of non-numeric features in visual number perception.

Non-numeric stimulus features frequently influence observers' number judgments: when judging the number of items in a display, we will often (mis)perceive the set with a larger cumulative surface area as more numerous. These "congruency effects" are often used as evidence for how vision extracts numeric information and have been invoked in arguments surrounding whether non-numeric cues (e.g., cumulative area, density, etc.) are combined for number perception. We test whether congruency effects for one such cue - cumulative area - provide evidence that it is necessarily used and integrated in number perception, or if its influence on number is malleable. In Experiment 1, we replicate and extend prior work showing that the presence of feedback eliminates congruency effects between number and cumulative area, suggesting that the role of cumulative area in number perception is malleable rather than obligatory. In Experiment 2, we test whether this malleable influence is because of use of prior experiences about how number naturalistically correlates with cumulative area, or the result of response competition, with number and cumulative area actively competing for the same behavioral decision. We preserve cumulative area as a visual cue but eliminate response competition with number by replacing one side of the dot array with its corresponding Hindu-Arabic numeral. Independent of the presence or absence of feedback, we do not observe congruency effects in Experiment 2. These experiments suggest that cumulative area is not necessarily integrated in number perception nor a reflection of a rational use of naturalistic correlations, but rather congruency effects between cumulative area and number emerge as a consequence of response competition. Our findings help to elucidate the mechanism through which non-numeric cues and number interact, and provide an explanation for why congruency effects are only sometimes observed across studies.