‹
Back
16:30 - 18:00
Parallel sessions 3
›
16:30 - 18:00
Room: C-Building - N14
Chair/s:
Krzysztof Cipora
Automatisation is crucial for humans’ everyday functioning: it helps release limited cognitive resources and relatively effortlessly process information in a repeatable manner. As a workhorse of cognition, automatisation does not always work to our advantage. If the task requires non-typical actions, automatisation misguides us. Such situations offer a valuable window into the nature of automatic processing and cognition in general. 
Several domains, including numerical cognition, investigate the automatic processing of certain stimuli to better understand information processing.
In this symposium, we look into how numerical information can be processed automatically when it is not required by task demands. In particular, we discuss how automatically processed semantic information on numbers, specifically their magnitude can be associated with space, and the limitations of these associations in individuals with different math skills levels. 
While numbers are associated with space in multiple ways (cf. Spatial-Numerical Associations), this symposium explores ways in which semantic information about numbers is triggered while not being required by task instructions, and how this information interacts with spatial processing.
First, we discuss whether the well-researched SNARC effect (i.e., association of small / large magnitude numbers with left / right response side), is triggered when asking participants to judge non-semantic features of the stimuli, such as orientation (Talk 1, V. Prpic) or colour (Talk 2, K. Cipora). We also explore whether such effects differ between the general population and professional mathematicians. 
Following up on links between automaticity of number processing, its spatial associations and their relation to mathematical expertise, we discuss (Talk 3, M. Sroka) how numerical magnitude influences font size judgments (i.e., size congruity effect), and whether these associations differ between professional mathematicians and control groups.
Going beyond traditional paradigms with participants seated in front of a computer screen, we look into whether generating random numbers, which does not require magnitude processing per se, affects spatial decision making in virtual reality (Talk 4, M. Murgia).
We conclude with a talk about breaking the automaticity of S-R mappings in the SNARC effect and whether this makes the SNARC more predictive of math abilities (Talk 5, J.-P. van Dijck).
Submission 477
Orientation Judgment and the SNARC Effect: Investigating the Neural Overlap Hypothesis and Automatic Number Processing
SymposiumTalk-02
Presented by: Valter Prpic
Valter Prpic 1, Alberto Mariconda 2, Stefano Pileggi 2, Serena Mingolo 2, Mauro Murgia 2
1 eCampus University, Italy
2 University of Trieste, Italy
The neural overlap hypothesis (Fias et al., 2001) suggests that magnitude information is automatically extracted from digits whenever there is sufficient neural overlap between the systems involved in processing relevant and irrelevant features. Because numerical information is primarily processed in parietal regions, a visual feature that strongly engages these areas—such as orientation—should interact with number magnitude. Conversely, such an interaction should be minimal when processing features with little parietal involvement, such as colour. This prediction aligns with previous findings showing a SNARC effect during orientation judgments but only limited evidence during colour judgments. Despite the influence of the neural overlap hypothesis, only a few studies have attempted to replicate the original results. In the present work, we sought to replicate a key experiment introduced by Fias and colleagues (line orientation judgment), testing both digits and letters. Based on the neural overlap account, a SNARC effect should emerge only for digits, and should be weak or absent for letters, given their differing degrees of overlap with parietal structures. Across two experiments conducted both online and in the laboratory, we consistently failed to observe a SNARC effect for either numbers or letters. An aggregated analysis of 155 participants confirmed the absence of the effect. Our findings challenge the neural overlap hypothesis and suggest that, in non-semantic tasks, only a small SNARC effect might be detected by testing very large sample sizes, as recently shown in studies using colour judgment.