| Title |
Mapping of non-numerical domains on space: a systematic review and meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Experimental Brain Research, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00221-017-5154-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anne Macnamara, Hannah A. D. Keage, Tobias Loetscher |
| Abstract |
The spatial numerical association of response code (SNARC) effect is characterized by low numbers mapped to the left side of space and high numbers mapped to the right side of space. In addition to numbers, SNARC-like effects have been found in non-numerical magnitude domains such as time, size, letters, luminance, and more, whereby the smaller/earlier and larger/later magnitudes are typically mapped to the left and right of space, respectively. The purpose of this systematic and meta-analytic review was to identify and summarise all empirical papers that have investigated horizontal (left-right) SNARC-like mappings using non-numerical stimuli. A systematic search was conducted using EMBASE, Medline, and PsycINFO, where 2216 publications were identified, with 57 papers meeting the inclusion criteria (representing 112 experiments). Ninety-five of these experiments were included in a meta-analysis, resulting in an overall effect size of d = .488 for a SNARC-like effect. Additional analyses revealed a significant effect size advantage for explicit instruction tasks compared with implicit instructions, yet yielded no difference for the role of expertise on SNARC-like effects. There was clear evidence for a publication bias in the field, but the impact of this bias is likely to be modest, and it is unlikely that the SNARC-like effect is a pure artefact of this bias. The similarities in the response properties for the spatial mappings of numerical and non-numerical domains support the concept of a general higher order magnitude system. Yet, further research will need to be conducted to identify all the factors modulating the strength of the spatial associations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 2 | 40% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 2 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 57 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 16% |
| Researcher | 8 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 11% |
| Professor | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 19% |
| Unknown | 13 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 24 | 42% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 9% |
| Philosophy | 2 | 4% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 4% |
| Linguistics | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 9 | 16% |
| Unknown | 14 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 January 2018.
All research outputs
#7,442,205
of 23,012,811 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#875
of 3,242 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#150,858
of 441,813 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#14
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,012,811 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,242 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 441,813 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.