» Articles » PMID: 28261078

Preattentive Processing of Numerical Visual Information

Overview
Specialty Neurology
Date 2017 Mar 7
PMID 28261078
Citations 6
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Humans can perceive and estimate approximate numerical information, even when accurate counting is impossible e.g., due to short presentation time. If the number of objects to be estimated is small, typically around 1-4 items, observers are able to give very fast and precise judgments with high confidence-an effect that is called subitizing. Due to its speed and effortless nature subitizing has usually been assumed to be preattentive, putting it into the same category as other low level visual features like color or orientation. More recently, however, a number of studies have suggested that subitizing might be dependent on attentional resources. In our current study we investigated the potentially preattentive nature of visual numerical perception in the subitizing range by means of EEG. We presented peripheral, task irrelevant sequences of stimuli consisting of a certain number of circular patches while participants were engaged in a demanding, non-numerical detection task at the fixation point drawing attention away from the number stimuli. Within a sequence of stimuli of a given number of patches (called "standards") we interspersed some stimuli of different numerosity ("oddballs"). We compared the evoked responses to visually identical stimuli that had been presented in two different conditions, serving as standard in one condition and as oddball in the other. We found significant visual mismatch negativity (vMMN) responses over parieto-occipital electrodes. In addition to the event-related potential (ERP) analysis, we performed a time-frequency analysis (TFA) to investigate whether the vMMN was accompanied by additional oscillatory processes. We found a concurrent increase in evoked theta power of similar strength over both hemispheres. Our results provide clear evidence for a preattentive processing of numerical visual information in the subitizing range.

Citing Articles

Predicting the unpredicted … brain response: A systematic review of the feature-related visual mismatch negativity (vMMN) and the experimental parameters that affect it.

Male A PLoS One. 2025; 20(2):e0314415.

PMID: 40014603 PMC: 11867396. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0314415.


Theta phase coherence in visual mismatch responses involved in access processing to visual awareness.

Kurita Y, Urakawa T, Araki O Front Hum Neurosci. 2023; 17:1051844.

PMID: 36908709 PMC: 9995375. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2023.1051844.


Visual Mismatch Negativity Reflects Enhanced Response to the Deviant: Evidence From Event-Related Potentials and Electroencephalogram Time-Frequency Analysis.

Zeng X, Ji L, Liu Y, Zhang Y, Fu S Front Hum Neurosci. 2022; 16:800855.

PMID: 35350445 PMC: 8957826. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2022.800855.


Automatic integration of numerical formats examined with frequency-tagged EEG.

Marinova M, Georges C, Guillaume M, Reynvoet B, Schiltz C, Van Rinsveld A Sci Rep. 2021; 11(1):21405.

PMID: 34725370 PMC: 8560945. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-00738-0.


A brain connectivity characterization of children with different levels of mathematical achievement based on graph metrics.

Torres-Ramos S, Salido-Ruiz R, Espinoza-Valdez A, Gomez-Velazquez F, Gonzalez-Garrido A, Roman-Godinez I PLoS One. 2020; 15(1):e0227613.

PMID: 31951604 PMC: 6968862. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0227613.


References
1.
Harvey B, Klein B, Petridou N, Dumoulin S . Topographic representation of numerosity in the human parietal cortex. Science. 2013; 341(6150):1123-6. DOI: 10.1126/science.1239052. View

2.
Pazo-Alvarez P, Cadaveira F, Amenedo E . MMN in the visual modality: a review. Biol Psychol. 2003; 63(3):199-236. DOI: 10.1016/s0301-0511(03)00049-8. View

3.
Kimura M, Katayama J, Murohashi H . Attention switching function of memory-comparison-based change detection system in the visual modality. Int J Psychophysiol. 2007; 67(2):101-13. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2007.10.009. View

4.
Kimura M . Visual mismatch negativity and unintentional temporal-context-based prediction in vision. Int J Psychophysiol. 2011; 83(2):144-55. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2011.11.010. View

5.
Kenemans J, Jong T, Verbaten M . Detection of visual change: mismatch or rareness?. Neuroreport. 2003; 14(9):1239-42. DOI: 10.1097/00001756-200307010-00010. View