↓ Skip to main content

Examining the Triple Code Model in numerical cognition: An fMRI study

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
98 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Examining the Triple Code Model in numerical cognition: An fMRI study
Published in
PLOS ONE, June 2018
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0199247
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mikael Skagenholt, Ulf Träff, Daniel Västfjäll, Kenny Skagerlund

Abstract

The Triple Code Model (TCM) of numerical cognition argues for the existence of three representational codes for number: Arabic digits, verbal number words, and analog nonsymbolic magnitude representations, each subserved by functionally dissociated neural substrates. Despite the popularity of the TCM, no study to date has explored all three numerical codes within one fMRI paradigm. We administered three tasks, associated with each of the aforementioned numerical codes, in order to explore the neural correlates of numerosity processing in a sample of adults (N = 46). Independent task-control contrast analyses revealed task-dependent activity in partial support of the model, but also highlight the inherent complexity of a distributed and overlapping fronto-parietal network involved in all numerical codes. The results indicate that the TCM correctly predicts the existence of some functionally dissociated neural substrates, but requires an update that accounts for interactions with attentional processes. Parametric contrasts corresponding to differences in task difficulty revealed specific neural correlates of the distance effect, where closely spaced numbers become more difficult to discriminate than numbers spaced further apart. A conjunction analysis illustrated overlapping neural correlates across all tasks, in line with recent proposals for a fronto-parietal network of number processing. We additionally provide tentative results suggesting the involvement of format-independent numerosity-sensitive retinotopic maps in the early visual stream, extending previous findings of nonsymbolic stimulus selectivity. We discuss the functional roles of the components associated with the model, as well as the purported fronto-parietal network, and offer arguments in favor of revising the TCM.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 98 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 22%
Student > Bachelor 19 19%
Researcher 11 11%
Student > Master 9 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 21 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 38 39%
Neuroscience 14 14%
Arts and Humanities 4 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Linguistics 3 3%
Other 8 8%
Unknown 27 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 30 June 2018.
All research outputs
#14,228,510
of 24,503,376 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#119,916
of 211,566 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,195
of 334,112 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,668
of 3,258 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,503,376 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 211,566 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 334,112 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,258 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.