↓ Skip to main content

The Approximate Number System Acuity Redefined: A Diffusion Model Approach

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, December 2015
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
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 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
The Approximate Number System Acuity Redefined: A Diffusion Model Approach
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, December 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01955
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joonkoo Park, Jeffrey J. Starns

Abstract

While all humans are capable of non-verbally representing numerical quantity using so-called the approximate number system (ANS), there exist considerable individual differences in its acuity. For example, in a non-symbolic number comparison task, some people find it easy to discriminate brief presentations of 14 dots from 16 dots while others do not. Quantifying individual ANS acuity from such a task has become an essential practice in the field, as individual differences in such a primitive number sense is thought to provide insights into individual differences in learned symbolic math abilities. However, the dominant method of characterizing ANS acuity-computing the Weber fraction (w)-only utilizes the accuracy data while ignoring response times (RT). Here, we offer a novel approach of quantifying ANS acuity by using the diffusion model, which accounts both accuracy and RT distributions. Specifically, the drift rate in the diffusion model, which indexes the quality of the stimulus information, is used to capture the precision of the internal quantity representation. Analysis of behavioral data shows that w is contaminated by speed-accuracy tradeoff, making it problematic as a measure of ANS acuity, while drift rate provides a measure more independent from speed-accuracy criterion settings. Furthermore, drift rate is a better predictor of symbolic math ability than w, suggesting a practical utility of the measure. These findings demonstrate critical limitations of the use of w and suggest clear advantages of using drift rate as a measure of primitive numerical competence.

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 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
France 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
South Africa 1 1%
Unknown 70 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 26%
Student > Master 10 14%
Researcher 9 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 5%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 16 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 33 45%
Neuroscience 7 9%
Mathematics 5 7%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Linguistics 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 17 23%
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 24 December 2015.
All research outputs
#14,386,422
of 24,272,486 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#14,013
of 32,655 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#195,786
of 399,372 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#220
of 417 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,272,486 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,655 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 399,372 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 417 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.