‹
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 600
Strengthening the SNARC Effect Through Dynamic Stimulus-Response-Mapping: A Preregistered Study
SymposiumTalk-05
Presented by: Jean-Philippe van Dijck
Jean-Philippe van Dijck 1, 2, Amandine Notelaers 3, Charlotte Anckaert 3, Wim Gevers 3
1 Thomas More Antwerp-Mechelen, Belgium
2 Ghent University, Belgium
3 Free University of Brussels (ULB), Belgium
The SNARC effect, typically measured with magnitude comparison or more commonly with parity judgment tasks, is robust at the group level yet markedly variable across individuals. We propose that its reported size and robustness underestimate its true value. In standard tasks, participants rapidly learn automatic number–response associations (e.g., 1→left, 2→right), enabling performance without activating magnitude information or its spatial associations. To prevent such automatic mapping, we conducted a preregistered study (N = 64) using a parity judgment task in which the response mapping switched randomly on every trial. This design was intended to block stimulus–response learning and enforce continuous reactivation of magnitude–space links.

The switch condition yielded a clearly enlarged SNARC effect, largely attributable to a scaling factor arising from prolonged response latencies. Importantly, the proportion of individuals showing a consistent SNARC pattern remained stable, indicating that dynamic task demands modulate effect size but not the distribution of SNARC‑consistent responders. This aligns with the assumption that cognitive control and stimulus–response learning attenuate effect magnitude but do not obscure its presence.

Participants also completed a mental arithmetic speed task. Given prior inconsistent findings linking SNARC and arithmetic, we expect any true relation to emerge when automatic mappings are disrupted. A final analysis examines the specific impact of mapping switching versus repetition trials, with the targeted prediction that the SNARC effect will be more pronounced under switching, consistent with reduced learning opportunities and stronger reliance on magnitude‑based spatial processing.