The role of visual information in numerosity estimation.

Mainstream theory suggests that the approximate number system supports our non-symbolic number abilities (e.g. estimating or comparing different sets of items). It is argued that this system can extract number independently of the visual cues present in the stimulus (diameter, aggregate surface, etc...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Titia Gebuis, Bert Reynvoet
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2012
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/52ba9012caaa44beada523e8d4957121
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:52ba9012caaa44beada523e8d4957121
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:52ba9012caaa44beada523e8d49571212021-11-18T07:18:16ZThe role of visual information in numerosity estimation.1932-620310.1371/journal.pone.0037426https://doaj.org/article/52ba9012caaa44beada523e8d49571212012-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/22616007/?tool=EBIhttps://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203Mainstream theory suggests that the approximate number system supports our non-symbolic number abilities (e.g. estimating or comparing different sets of items). It is argued that this system can extract number independently of the visual cues present in the stimulus (diameter, aggregate surface, etc.). However, in a recent report we argue that this might not be the case. We showed that participants combined information from different visual cues to derive their answers. While numerosity comparison requires a rough comparison of two sets of items (smaller versus larger), numerosity estimation requires a more precise mechanism. It could therefore be that numerosity estimation, in contrast to numerosity comparison, might rely on the approximate number system. To test this hypothesis, we conducted a numerosity estimation experiment. We controlled for the visual cues according to current standards: each single visual property was not informative about numerosity. Nevertheless, the results reveal that participants were influenced by the visual properties of the dot arrays. They gave a larger estimate when the dot arrays consisted of dots with, on average, a smaller diameter, aggregate surface or density but a larger convex hull. The reliance on visual cues to estimate numerosity suggests that the existence of an approximate number system that can extract numerosity independently of the visual cues is unlikely. Instead, we propose that humans estimate numerosity by weighing the different visual cues present in the stimuli.Titia GebuisBert ReynvoetPublic Library of Science (PLoS)articleMedicineRScienceQENPLoS ONE, Vol 7, Iss 5, p e37426 (2012)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Titia Gebuis Bert Reynvoet The role of visual information in numerosity estimation.
description	Mainstream theory suggests that the approximate number system supports our non-symbolic number abilities (e.g. estimating or comparing different sets of items). It is argued that this system can extract number independently of the visual cues present in the stimulus (diameter, aggregate surface, etc.). However, in a recent report we argue that this might not be the case. We showed that participants combined information from different visual cues to derive their answers. While numerosity comparison requires a rough comparison of two sets of items (smaller versus larger), numerosity estimation requires a more precise mechanism. It could therefore be that numerosity estimation, in contrast to numerosity comparison, might rely on the approximate number system. To test this hypothesis, we conducted a numerosity estimation experiment. We controlled for the visual cues according to current standards: each single visual property was not informative about numerosity. Nevertheless, the results reveal that participants were influenced by the visual properties of the dot arrays. They gave a larger estimate when the dot arrays consisted of dots with, on average, a smaller diameter, aggregate surface or density but a larger convex hull. The reliance on visual cues to estimate numerosity suggests that the existence of an approximate number system that can extract numerosity independently of the visual cues is unlikely. Instead, we propose that humans estimate numerosity by weighing the different visual cues present in the stimuli.
format	article
author	Titia Gebuis Bert Reynvoet
author_facet	Titia Gebuis Bert Reynvoet
author_sort	Titia Gebuis
title	The role of visual information in numerosity estimation.
title_short	The role of visual information in numerosity estimation.
title_full	The role of visual information in numerosity estimation.
title_fullStr	The role of visual information in numerosity estimation.
title_full_unstemmed	The role of visual information in numerosity estimation.
title_sort	role of visual information in numerosity estimation.
publisher	Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate	2012
url	https://doaj.org/article/52ba9012caaa44beada523e8d4957121
work_keys_str_mv	AT titiagebuis theroleofvisualinformationinnumerosityestimation AT bertreynvoet theroleofvisualinformationinnumerosityestimation AT titiagebuis roleofvisualinformationinnumerosityestimation AT bertreynvoet roleofvisualinformationinnumerosityestimation
_version_	1718423662786248704

The role of visual information in numerosity estimation.

Ejemplares similares