(Dis)similarities between non-symbolic and symbolic number representations: Insights from vector space models.

Acta Psychol (Amst)

Department of Psychology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh 15260, PA, USA; Learning Research and Development Center, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh 15260, PA, USA; Center for the Neural Basis of Cognition, Pittsburgh 15260, PA, USA.

Published: August 2024

Empirical evidence in support of a shared system for non-symbolic and symbolic number processing has been inconclusive. The current study aims to address this question in a novel way, specifically by testing whether the efficient coding principle based on co-occurrence of number symbols in natural language holds for both non-symbolic and symbolic number processing. The efficient coding principle postulates that perception is optimized when stimuli frequently co-occur in a natural environment. We hypothesized that both numerical ratios and co-occurrence frequencies of symbolic numbers would significantly influence participants' performance on a non-symbolic and symbolic number comparison task. To test this hypothesis, we employed latent semantic analysis on a TASA corpus to quantify number co-occurrence in natural language and calculate language similarity estimates. We engaged 73 native English speakers (mean age = 19.36, standard deviation = 1.83) with normal or corrected vision and no learning disorders in a number comparison task involving non-symbolic (dot arrays) and symbolic stimuli (Arabic numerals and English number words). Results showed that numerical ratios significantly predicted participants' performances across all number formats (ps < 0.001). Language similarity estimates derived from everyday language also predicted performance on the non-symbolic task and the symbolic task involving number words (ps < 0.007). Our results highlight the complex nature of numerical processing, pointing to the co-occurrence of number symbols in natural language as an auxiliary factor in understanding the shared characteristics between non-symbolic and symbolic number representations. Given that our study focused on a limited number range (5 to 16) and a specific task type, future studies should explore a wider range of tasks and numbers to further test the role of the efficient coding principle in number processing.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2024.104374DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

non-symbolic symbolic
16
symbolic number
16
number
9
number processing
8
efficient coding
8
coding principle
8
natural language
8
numerical ratios
8
number comparison
8
comparison task
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!