References
- 1Banks, W. P. (1977). Encoding and processing of symbolic information in comparative judgments. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 11, 101–159. DOI: 10.1016/S0079-7421(08)60476-4
- 2Cantlon, J. F., Platt, M. L., & Brannon, E. M. (2009). Beyond the number domain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13(2), 83–91. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2008.11.007
- 3Cantrell, L., Boyer, T. W., Cordes, S., & Smith, L. B. (2015). Signal clarity: an account of the variability in infant quantity discrimination tasks. Developmental Science, 18(6), 877–893. DOI: 10.1111/desc.12283
- 4Cantrell, L., Kuwabara, M., & Smith, L. B. (2015). Set size and culture influence children’s attention to number. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 131, 19–37. DOI: 10.1016/j.jecp.2014.10.010
- 5Cantrell, L., & Smith, L. B. (2013). Open questions and a proposal: a critical review of the evidence on infant numerical abilities. Cognition, 128(3), 331–52. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.04.008
- 6Clayton, S., Gilmore, C., & Inglis, M. (2015). Dot comparison stimuli are not all alike: the effect of different visual controls on ANS measurement. Acta Psychologica, 161, 177–184. DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2015.09.007
- 7Dakin, S. C., Tibber, M. S., Greenwood, J. A., & Morgan, M. J. (2011). A common visual metric for approximate number and density. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(49), 19552–19557. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1113195108
- 8Dehaene, S., & Changeux, J. P. (1993). Development of elementary numerical abilities: a neuronal model. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 5(4), 390–407. DOI: 10.1162/jocn.1993.5.4.390
- 9Feigenson, L., Dehaene, S., & Spelke, E. (2004). Core systems of number. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(7), 307–314. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2004.05.002
- 10Gebuis, T., Cohen Kadosh, R., & Gevers, W. (2016). Sensory-integration system rather than approximate number system underlies numerosity processing: A critical review. Acta Psychologica, 171, 1–71. DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2016.09.003
- 11Gebuis, T., & Reynvoet, B. (2011). Generating nonsymbolic number stimuli. Behavior Research Methods, 43(4), 981–986. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-011-0097-5
- 12Gebuis, T., & Reynvoet, B. (2012a). The interplay between nonsymbolic number and its continuous visual properties. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 141(4), 642–648. DOI: 10.1037/a0026218
- 13Gebuis, T., & Reynvoet, B. (2012b). Continuous visual properties explain neural responses to nonsymbolic number. Psychophysiology, 49(11), 1649–1659. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2012.01461.x
- 14Gebuis, T., & Reynvoet, B. (2013). The neural mechanisms underlying passive and active processing of numerosity. NeuroImage, 70, 301–307. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.12.048
- 15Gevers, W., Cohen Kadosh, R., & Gebuis, T. (2016).
The sensory integration theory: an alternative to the Approximate Number System . In: Henik, A. (Ed.), Continuous issues in numerical cognition, 405–418. (1st ed.,). Elsevier. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-801637-4.00018-4 - 16Halberda, J., Mazzocco, M., & Feigenson, L. (2008). Individual differences in non-verbal number acuity correlate with maths achievement. Nature, 455(7213), 665–668. DOI: 10.1038/nature07246
- 17Hurewitz, F., Gelman, R., & Schnitzer, B. (2006). Sometimes area counts more than number. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103(51), 19599–604. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0609485103
- 18Inglis, M., & Gilmore, C. (2013). Sampling from the mental number line: How are approximate number system representations formed? Cognition, 129(1), 63–639. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.06.003
- 19Leibovich, T., Al-Rubaiey Kadhim, S., & Ansari, D. (2017). Beyond comparison: physical size affects non-symbolic but not symbolic number line estimation. Acta Psychologica. In press.
- 20Leibovich, T., & Ansari, D. (2016). The symbol-grounding problem in numerical cognition: A review of theory, evidence, and outstanding questions. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70(1), 12–23. DOI: 10.1037/cep0000070
- 21Leibovich, T., & Henik, A. (2013). Magnitude processing in non-symbolic stimuli. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 375. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00375
- 22Leibovich, T., & Henik, A. (2014). Comparing performance in discrete and continuous comparison tasks. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67(5), 899–917. DOI: 10.1080/17470218.2013.837940
- 23Leibovich, T., Henik, A., & Salti, M. (2015). Numerosity processing is context driven even in the subitizing range: an fMRI study. Neuropsychologia, 77, 137–147. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2015.08.016
- 24Leibovich, T., Katzin, N., Harel, M., & Henik, A. (2017). From “sense of number” to “sense of magnitude”: The role of continuous magnitudes in numerical cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 40, e164. DOI: 10.1017/S0140525X16000960
- 25Leibovich, T., Vogel, S. E., Henik, A., & Ansari, D. (2015). Asymmetric processing of numerical and non-numerical magnitudes in the brain: an fMRI study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 28(1), 166–176. DOI: 10.1162/jocn_a_00887
- 26Mathôt, S., Schreij, D., & Theeuwes, J. (2012). OpenSesame: an open-source, graphical experiment builder for the social sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 44(2), 314–24. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-011-0168-7
- 27Meyers, L. S., Gamst, G., & Guarino, A. J. (2006). Applied multivariate research: Design and interpretation. SAGE. Retrieved from:
http://www.google.co.il/books?hl=en&lr=&id=7e4npyN3BasC&pgis=1 . - 28Mix, K. S., Huttenlocher, J., & Levine, S. C. (2002). Multiple cues for quantification in infancy: Is number one of them? Psychological Bulletin, 128(2), 278–294. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.128.2.278
- 29Park, J., DeWind, N. K., Woldorff, M. G., & Brannon, E. M. (2015). Rapid and direct encoding of numerosity in the visual stream. Cerebral Cortex, 26(2), 748–763. DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhv017
- 30Salti, M., Katzin, N., Katzin, D., Leibovich, T., & Henik, A. (2017). One tamed at a time: A new approach for controlling continuous magnitudes in numerical comparison tasks. Behavior Research Methods, 49(3), 1120–1127. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-016-0772-7
- 31Smets, K., Gebuis, T., & Reynvoet, B. (2013). Comparing the neural distance effect derived from the non-symbolic comparison and the same-different task. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7(February), 28. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00028
- 32Soltész, F., & Szűcs, D. (2014). Neural adaptation to non-symbolic number and visual shape: an electrophysiological study. Biological Psychology, 103, 203–211. DOI: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2014.09.006
- 33Tibber, M. S., Greenwood, J. A., & Dakin, S. C. (2012). Number and density discrimination rely on a common metric: Similar psychophysical effects of size, contrast, and divided attention. Journal of Vision, 12(6), 8. DOI: 10.1167/12.6.8