A Systematic Investigation of Accuracy and Response Time Based Measures Used to Index ANS Acuity

Overview

Journal PLoS One

Specialties General Medicine
Science

Date 2016 Sep 17

PMID 27637109

Citations 9

Authors

Julia Felicitas Dietrich

Stefan Huber

Elise Klein

Klaus Willmes

Silvia Pixner

Korbinian Moeller

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The approximate number system (ANS) was proposed to be a building block for later mathematical abilities. Several measures have been used interchangeably to assess ANS acuity. Some of these measures were based on accuracy data, whereas others relied on response time (RT) data or combined accuracy and RT data. Previous studies challenged the view that all these measures can be used interchangeably, because low correlations between some of the measures had been observed. These low correlations might be due to poor reliability of some of the measures, since the majority of these measures are mathematically related. Here we systematically investigated the relationship between common ANS measures while avoiding the potential confound of poor reliability. Our first experiment revealed high correlations between all accuracy based measures supporting the assumption that all of them can be used interchangeably. In contrast, not all RT based measures were highly correlated. Additionally, our results revealed a speed-accuracy trade-off. Thus, accuracy and RT based measures provided conflicting conclusions regarding ANS acuity. Therefore, we investigated in two further experiments which type of measure (accuracy or RT) is more informative about the underlying ANS acuity, depending on participants' preferences for accuracy or speed. To this end, we manipulated participants' preferences for accuracy or speed both explicitly using different task instructions and implicitly varying presentation duration. Accuracy based measures were more informative about the underlying ANS acuity than RT based measures. Moreover, the influence of the underlying representations on accuracy data was more pronounced when participants preferred accuracy over speed after the accuracy instruction as well as for long or unlimited presentation durations. Implications regarding the diffusion model as a theoretical framework of dot comparison as well as regarding the relationship between ANS acuity and math performance are discussed.

Citing Articles

Large-scale study of the precision of the approximate number system: Differences between formats, heterogeneity and congruency effects.

Malykh S, Tarasov S, Baeva I, Nikulchev E, Kolyasnikov P, Ilin D Heliyon. 2023; 9(4):e14912.

PMID: 37064479 PMC: 10102223. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e14912.

Developmental Changes in ANS Precision Across Grades 1-9: Different Patterns of Accuracy and Reaction Time.

Malykh S, Kuzmina Y, Tikhomirova T Front Psychol. 2021; 12:589305.

PMID: 33841232 PMC: 8024480. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.589305.

The Relationship Between Non-symbolic and Symbolic Numerosity Representations in Elementary School: The Role of Intelligence.

Tikhomirova T, Kuzmina Y, Lysenkova I, Malykh S Front Psychol. 2019; 10:2724.

PMID: 31866910 PMC: 6906201. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02724.

Differences in Counting Skills Between Chinese and German Children Are Accompanied by Differences in Processing of Approximate Numerical Magnitude Information.

Lonnemann J, Li S, Zhao P, Linkersdorfer J, Lindberg S, Hasselhorn M Front Psychol. 2019; 9:2656.

PMID: 30671001 PMC: 6331648. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02656.

Comparing Numerical Comparison Tasks: A Meta-Analysis of the Variability of the Weber Fraction Relative to the Generation Algorithm.

Guillaume M, Van Rinsveld A Front Psychol. 2018; 9:1694.

PMID: 30271363 PMC: 6142874. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01694.

References

Ratcliff R, McKoon G . The diffusion decision model: theory and data for two-choice decision tasks. Neural Comput. 2007; 20(4):873-922. PMC: 2474742. DOI: 10.1162/neco.2008.12-06-420. View

Voss A, Nagler M, Lerche V . Diffusion models in experimental psychology: a practical introduction. Exp Psychol. 2013; 60(6):385-402. DOI: 10.1027/1618-3169/a000218. View

Lyons I, Nuerk H, Ansari D . Rethinking the implications of numerical ratio effects for understanding the development of representational precision and numerical processing across formats. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2015; 144(5):1021-35. DOI: 10.1037/xge0000094. View

Libertus M, Feigenson L, Halberda J . Is Approximate Number Precision a Stable Predictor of Math Ability?. Learn Individ Differ. 2013; 25:126-133. PMC: 3692560. DOI: 10.1016/j.lindif.2013.02.001. View

Ratcliff R, Thompson C, McKoon G . Modeling individual differences in response time and accuracy in numeracy. Cognition. 2015; 137:115-136. PMC: 4353499. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2014.12.004. View

Ratcliff R, Smith P . A comparison of sequential sampling models for two-choice reaction time. Psychol Rev. 2004; 111(2):333-67. PMC: 1440925. DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.111.2.333. View

Nieder A, Merten K . A labeled-line code for small and large numerosities in the monkey prefrontal cortex. J Neurosci. 2007; 27(22):5986-93. PMC: 6672244. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1056-07.2007. View

Fazio L, Bailey D, Thompson C, Siegler R . Relations of different types of numerical magnitude representations to each other and to mathematics achievement. J Exp Child Psychol. 2014; 123:53-72. DOI: 10.1016/j.jecp.2014.01.013. View

Dehaene S, Changeux J . Development of elementary numerical abilities: a neuronal model. J Cogn Neurosci. 2013; 5(4):390-407. DOI: 10.1162/jocn.1993.5.4.390. View

10.

DeWind N, Brannon E . Malleability of the approximate number system: effects of feedback and training. Front Hum Neurosci. 2012; 6:68. PMC: 3329901. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00068. View

11.

Fuhs M, McNeil N . ANS acuity and mathematics ability in preschoolers from low-income homes: contributions of inhibitory control. Dev Sci. 2013; 16(1):136-48. DOI: 10.1111/desc.12013. View

12.

Halberda J, Ly R, Wilmer J, Naiman D, Germine L . Number sense across the lifespan as revealed by a massive Internet-based sample. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012; 109(28):11116-20. PMC: 3396479. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1200196109. View

13.

Cantlon J, Platt M, Brannon E . Beyond the number domain. Trends Cogn Sci. 2009; 13(2):83-91. PMC: 2709421. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2008.11.007. View

14.

Chen Q, Li J . Association between individual differences in non-symbolic number acuity and math performance: a meta-analysis. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2014; 148:163-72. DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2014.01.016. View

15.

Huber S, Mann A, Nuerk H, Moeller K . Cognitive control in number magnitude processing: evidence from eye-tracking. Psychol Res. 2013; 78(4):539-48. DOI: 10.1007/s00426-013-0504-x. View

16.

Nieder A . Supramodal numerosity selectivity of neurons in primate prefrontal and posterior parietal cortices. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012; 109(29):11860-5. PMC: 3406836. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1204580109. View

17.

Halberda J, Mazzocco M, Feigenson L . Individual differences in non-verbal number acuity correlate with maths achievement. Nature. 2008; 455(7213):665-8. DOI: 10.1038/nature07246. View

18.

Holloway I, Ansari D . Mapping numerical magnitudes onto symbols: the numerical distance effect and individual differences in children's mathematics achievement. J Exp Child Psychol. 2008; 103(1):17-29. DOI: 10.1016/j.jecp.2008.04.001. View

19.

Mundy E, Gilmore C . Children's mapping between symbolic and nonsymbolic representations of number. J Exp Child Psychol. 2009; 103(4):490-502. DOI: 10.1016/j.jecp.2009.02.003. View

20.

Cohen J . A power primer. Psychol Bull. 2009; 112(1):155-9. DOI: 10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155. View