↓ Skip to main content

Magnitude processing of symbolic and non-symbolic proportions: an fMRI study

Overview of attention for article published in Behavioral and Brain Functions, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 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
Magnitude processing of symbolic and non-symbolic proportions: an fMRI study
Published in
Behavioral and Brain Functions, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12993-018-0141-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julia Mock, Stefan Huber, Johannes Bloechle, Julia F. Dietrich, Julia Bahnmueller, Johannes Rennig, Elise Klein, Korbinian Moeller

Abstract

Recent research indicates that processing proportion magnitude is associated with activation in the intraparietal sulcus. Thus, brain areas associated with the processing of numbers (i.e., absolute magnitude) were activated during processing symbolic fractions as well as non-symbolic proportions. Here, we investigated systematically the cognitive processing of symbolic (e.g., fractions and decimals) and non-symbolic proportions (e.g., dot patterns and pie charts) in a two-stage procedure. First, we investigated relative magnitude-related activations of proportion processing. Second, we evaluated whether symbolic and non-symbolic proportions share common neural substrates. We conducted an fMRI study using magnitude comparison tasks with symbolic and non-symbolic proportions, respectively. As an indicator for magnitude-related processing of proportions, the distance effect was evaluated. A conjunction analysis indicated joint activation of specific occipito-parietal areas including right intraparietal sulcus (IPS) during proportion magnitude processing. More specifically, results indicate that the IPS, which is commonly associated with absolute magnitude processing, is involved in processing relative magnitude information as well, irrespective of symbolic or non-symbolic presentation format. However, we also found distinct activation patterns for the magnitude processing of the different presentation formats. Our findings suggest that processing for the separate presentation formats is not only associated with magnitude manipulations in the IPS, but also increasing demands on executive functions and strategy use associated with frontal brain regions as well as visual attention and encoding in occipital regions. Thus, the magnitude processing of proportions may not exclusively reflect processing of number magnitude information but also rather domain-general processes.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 48 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 23%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 17%
Researcher 7 15%
Student > Master 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 9 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 33%
Neuroscience 5 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Philosophy 2 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 4%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 15 31%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 12 May 2018.
All research outputs
#9,894,519
of 12,926,183 outputs
Outputs from Behavioral and Brain Functions
#252
of 359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,707
of 269,954 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavioral and Brain Functions
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,926,183 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 359 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 269,954 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.