TY - JOUR
T1 - Nonsymbolic and symbolic representations of null numerosity
AU - Zaks-Ohayon, Rut
AU - Pinhas, Michal
AU - Tzelgov, Joseph
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
PY - 2022/3
Y1 - 2022/3
N2 - Previous research has shown that null numerosity can be processed as a numerical entity that is represented together with non-null numerosities on the same magnitude system. The present study examined which conditions enable perceiving nonsymbolic (i.e., an empty set) and symbolic (i.e., 0) representations of null numerosity as a numerical entity, using distance and end effects. In Experiment 1, participants performed magnitude comparisons of notation homogeneous pairs (both numerosities appeared in nonsymbolic or symbolic format), as well as heterogeneous pairs (a nonsymbolic numerosity versus a symbolic one). Comparisons to 0 resulted in faster responses and an attenuated distance effect in all conditions, whereas comparisons to an empty set produced such effects only in the nonsymbolic and symbolic homogeneous conditions. In Experiments 2 and 3, participants performed same/different numerosity judgments with heterogeneous pairs. A distance effect emerged for "different" judgments of 0 and sets of 1 to 9 dots, but not for those with an empty set versus digits 1–9. These findings indicate that perceiving an empty set, but not 0, as a numerical entity is determined by notation homogeneity and task requirements.
AB - Previous research has shown that null numerosity can be processed as a numerical entity that is represented together with non-null numerosities on the same magnitude system. The present study examined which conditions enable perceiving nonsymbolic (i.e., an empty set) and symbolic (i.e., 0) representations of null numerosity as a numerical entity, using distance and end effects. In Experiment 1, participants performed magnitude comparisons of notation homogeneous pairs (both numerosities appeared in nonsymbolic or symbolic format), as well as heterogeneous pairs (a nonsymbolic numerosity versus a symbolic one). Comparisons to 0 resulted in faster responses and an attenuated distance effect in all conditions, whereas comparisons to an empty set produced such effects only in the nonsymbolic and symbolic homogeneous conditions. In Experiments 2 and 3, participants performed same/different numerosity judgments with heterogeneous pairs. A distance effect emerged for "different" judgments of 0 and sets of 1 to 9 dots, but not for those with an empty set versus digits 1–9. These findings indicate that perceiving an empty set, but not 0, as a numerical entity is determined by notation homogeneity and task requirements.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85104124409&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s00426-021-01515-4
DO - 10.1007/s00426-021-01515-4
M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.article???
AN - SCOPUS:85104124409
SN - 0340-0727
VL - 86
SP - 386
EP - 403
JO - Psychological Research
JF - Psychological Research
IS - 2
ER -