» Articles » PMID: 37239174

Electrophysiological Correlates of the Interaction of Physical and Numerical Size in Symbolic Number Processing: Insights from a Novel Go/Nogo Numerical Stroop Task

Overview
Journal Brain Sci
Publisher MDPI
Date 2023 May 27
PMID 37239174
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The interaction of physical and numerical size has been investigated and repeatedly demonstrated in the numerical Stroop task, in which participants compare digits of different physical sizes. It is, however, not entirely clear yet what psychological processes contribute to this interaction. The aim of the present study is to investigate the role of inhibition in the interaction of physical and numerical size, by introducing a novel paradigm that is suitable to elicit inhibition-related event-related potential components. To this end, we combined the go/nogo paradigm with the numerical Stroop task while measuring EEG and reaction times. Participants were presented with Arabic number pairs and had to press a button if the number on one side was numerically larger and they had to refrain from responding if the number on the other side was numerically larger. The physical size of the number pairs was also manipulated, in order to create congruent, neutral, and incongruent trials. Behavioural results confirmed the well-established numerical distance and numerical Stroop effects. Analysis of electrophysiological data revealed the classical go/nogo electrophysiological effects with numerical stimuli, and showed that peak amplitudes were larger for nogo than for go trials on the N2, as well as on the P3 component, on frontal and midline electrodes. When analysing the congruency effects, the peak amplitude of N2 was larger in incongruent trials than in neutral and congruent trials, while there was no evidence of a congruency effect on the P3 component peaks. Further analysis of the electrophysiological data revealed an additional facilitatory effect in the go trials, as well as an additional interference effect in the nogo trials. Taken together, it seems that interference effects are probably resolved by inhibitory processes and that facilitatory effects are affected by different cognitive control processes required by go versus nogo trials.

Citing Articles

How learning influences non-symbolic numerical processing: effects of feedback in the dot comparison task.

Hofmann W, Kinder A, Pekar J Front Psychol. 2024; 14:1287429.

PMID: 38352965 PMC: 10861774. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1287429.

References
1.
Szucs D, Soltesz F . Event-related potentials dissociate facilitation and interference effects in the numerical Stroop paradigm. Neuropsychologia. 2007; 45(14):3190-202. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2007.06.013. View

2.
Brydges C, Anderson M, Reid C, Fox A . Maturation of cognitive control: delineating response inhibition and interference suppression. PLoS One. 2013; 8(7):e69826. PMC: 3720932. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0069826. View

3.
Kaufmann L, Koppelstaetter F, Delazer M, Siedentopf C, Rhomberg P, Golaszewski S . Neural correlates of distance and congruity effects in a numerical Stroop task: an event-related fMRI study. Neuroimage. 2005; 25(3):888-98. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.12.041. View

4.
Groom M, Cragg L . Differential modulation of the N2 and P3 event-related potentials by response conflict and inhibition. Brain Cogn. 2015; 97:1-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.bandc.2015.04.004. View

5.
Smith J, Smith E, Provost A, Heathcote A . Sequence effects support the conflict theory of N2 and P3 in the Go/NoGo task. Int J Psychophysiol. 2009; 75(3):217-26. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2009.11.002. View