刘炜¹, 郑鹏², 谷淇³, 王春辉¹, 赵亚军⁴()

¹云南民族大学教育学院, 昆明 650031
²昭通学院职业技术教育学院, 云南 昭通 657000
³大理大学教师教育学院, 云南 大理 67100
⁴西南民族大学教育学与心理学学院, 成都 610225

收稿日期:2020-12-28发布日期:2021-07-22


基金资助:国家自然科学基金项目(32060192);云南省哲学社会科学规划教育学项目(AC20014);西南民族大学中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金(2019NQN40);云南省应用基础研究计划项目(2017FB046)

Three number processing systems: Different features and parallel activation

LIU Wei¹, ZHENG Peng², GU Qi³, WANG Chunhui¹, ZHAO Yajun⁴()

¹School of Education, Yunnan Minzu University, Kunming 650031, China
²College of Vocational and Technical Education, Zhaotong University, Zhaotong 657000, China
³School of Teacher Education, Dali University, Dali 671003, China
⁴School of Education and Psychology, Southwest Minzu University, Chengdu 610225, China

Received:2020-12-28Published:2021-07-22

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 数值加工的机制是数量认知领域的核心科学问题之一。三数值加工系统假说从新的角度阐释了各种数值加工机制的关系, 它认为认知系统通过三种不同的机制来快速分析非符号刺激的数值：感数(subitizing)机制精确地分析1~4个刺激的数值; 数量(numerosity)机制分析密度适中的刺激点阵的数量, 加工误差正比于被分析的数量, 符合韦伯定律; 当刺激的密度超出一定范围时, 密度(density)机制通过分析刺激密度来推断刺激的数量关系, 加工误差正比于被加工数值的平方根。一系列研究证实, 这三种数值加工机制具有不同的行为规律和脑电特征。未来研究需要探讨数量机制是否分别与感数机制、密度机制存在平行激活, 从而阐明三种数值加工机制的作用关系。

参考文献 53

[1]	刘炜, 王苗, 张智君, 赵亚军. (2016). 数量认知和密度认知的关系. 心理科学进展, 24(6), 885-891.
[2]	刘炜, 张智君, 赵亚军. (2012). 基于数量感知的数量适应. 心理学报, 44(10), 1297-1308.
[3]	罗跃嘉, 南云, 李红. (2004). ERP研究反映感数与计数的不同脑机制. 心理学报, 36(4), 434-441.
[4]	Agrillo C., & Bisazza A. (2017). The contribution of fish studies to the “number sense” debate. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 40, e165. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X16002053URL
[5]	Anobile G., Arrighi R., & Burr D. C. (2019). Simultaneous and sequential subitizing are separate systems, and neither predicts math abilities. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 178, 86-103. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2018.09.017URL
[6]	Anobile G., Castaldi E., Turi M., TinelliF. & Burr D. C. (2016). Numerosity but not texture-density discrimination correlates with math ability in children. Developmental Psychology, 52(8), 1206-1216. doi: 10.1037/dev0000155URL
[7]	Anobile G., Cicchini G. M., & Burr D. C. (2014). Separate mechanisms for perception of numerosity and density. Psychological Science, 25(1), 265-270. doi: 10.1177/0956797613501520URL
[8]	Anobile G., Cicchini G. M., & Burr D. C. (2015a). Number as a primary perceptual attribute: A review. Perception, 45(1-2), 5-31. doi: 10.1177/0301006616671273URL
[9]	Anobile G., Cicchini G. M., Pomè A., & Burr D. C. (2017). Connecting visual objects reduces perceived numerosity and density for sparse but not dense patterns. Journal of Numerical Cognition, 3(2), 133-146. doi: 10.5964/jnc.v3i2.38URL
[10]	Anobile G., Tomaiuolo F., Campana S., & Cicchini G. M. (2020). Three-systems for visual numerosity: A single case study. Neuropsychologia, 136, 107259. doi: S0028-3932(19)30301-Xpmid: 31726066
[11]	Anobile G., Turi M., Cicchini G. M., & Burr D. C. (2015b). Mechanisms for perception of numerosity or texture-density are governed by crowding-like effects. Journal of Vision, 15(5), 4, 5-31.
[12]	Arrighi R., Togoli I., & Burr D. C. (2014). A generalized sense of number. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 281(1797), 20141791.
[13]	Beran M. J., & Parrish A. E. (2017). The number sense is neither last resort nor of primary import. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 40, e164. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X16000960URL
[14]	Burr D. C. (2008). Response: Visual number. Current Biology, 18(18), 857-858.
[15]	Burr D. C. (2017). Evidence for a number sense. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 40, e164. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X16000960URL
[16]	Burr D. C., & Ross J. (2008). A visual sense of number. Current Biology, 18(6), 425-428. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2008.02.052URL
[17]	Burr D. C., Turi M., & Anobile G. (2010). Subitizing but not estimation of numerosity requires attentional resources. Journal of Vision, 10, 1-10.
[18]	Castaldi E., Piazza M., Dehaene S., Vignaud A., & Eger E. (2019). Attentional amplification of neural codes for number independent of other quantities along the dorsal visual stream. Elife Science, 8.
[19]	Cicchini G. M., Anobile G., & Burr D. C. (2016). Spontaneous perception of numerosity in humans. Nature Communications, 7, 12536. doi: 10.1038/ncomms12536pmid: 27555562
[20]	Cicchini G. M., Anobile G., & Burr D. C. (2019). Spontaneous representation of numerosity in typical and dyscalculic development. Cortex, 114, 151-163. doi: S0010-9452(18)30398-8pmid: 30683323
[21]	Clayton S., Gilmore C., & Inglis M. (2015). Dot comparison stimuli are not all alike: The effect of different visual controls on ANS measurement. Acta Psychologica, 161, 177-184. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2015.09.007pmid: 26408864
[22]	Dakin S. C., Tibber M. S., Greenwood J. A., Kingdom F. A. A., & Morgan M. J. (2011). A common visual metric for approximate number and density. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 108(49), 19552-19557.
[23]	de Hevia, M.D. (2011). Sensitivity to number: Reply to Gebuis and Gevers. Cognition, 121, 253-255. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2011.04.002URL
[24]	de Hevia, M.D., Castaldi, E., Streri, A., Eger, E., & Izard, V. (2017). Perceiving numerosity from birth. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 40, e169. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X16002090URL
[25]	Dehaene S. (1996). The organization of brain activations in number comparison: Event-related potentials and the additive-factors method. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 8(1), 47-68. doi: 10.1162/jocn.1996.8.1.47pmid: 23972235
[26]	Durgin F. H. (1995). Texture density adaptation and the perceived numerosity and distribution of texture. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 21(1), 149-169.
[27]	Durgin F. H. (2008). Texture density adaptation and visual number revisited. Current Biology, 18(18), R855-R856.
[28]	Durgin F. H. (2017). Multitudes are adaptable magnitudes in the estimation of number. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 40, e164. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X16000960URL
[29]	Feigenson L., Dehaene S., & Spelke E. (2004). Core systems of number. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(7), 307-314. pmid: 15242690
[30]	Fornaciai M., & Park J. (2017). Distinct neural signatures for very small and very large numerosities. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 11, 21. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2017.00021pmid: 28197086
[31]	Franconeri S. L., Bemis D. K., & Alvarez G. A. (2009). Number estimation relies on a set of segmented objects. Cognition, 113(1), 1-13. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2009.07.002pmid: 19647817
[32]	Gebuis T., Cohen Kadosh R., & Gevers W. (2016). Sensory-integration system rather than approximate number system underlies numerosity processing: A critical review. Acta Psychologica, 171, 17-35. doi: S0001-6918(16)30211-6pmid: 27640140
[33]	Gebuis T., & Reynvoet B. (2012). Continuous visual properties explain neural responses to nonsymbolic number. Psychophysiology, 49(11), 1649-1659. doi: 10.1111/psyp.2012.49.issue-11URL
[34]	Halberda J., Mazzocco M., & Feigenson L. (2008). Individual differences in nonverbal number acuity correlate with maths achievement. Nature, 455, 665-668. doi: 10.1038/nature07246URL
[35]	Halberda J., Sires S. F., & Feigenson L. (2006). Multiple spatially overlapping sets can be enumerated in parallel. Psychological Science, 17(7), 572-576. pmid: 16866741
[36]	He L., Zhang J., Zhou T., & Chen L. (2009). Connectedness affects dot numerosity judgment: Implications for configural processing. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 509-517. doi: 10.3758/PBR.16.3.509URL
[37]	Hyde D. C., & Mou Y. (2017). Magnitude rather than number: More evidence needed. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 40, e173. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X16002119URL
[38]	Jevons W. S. (1871). The power of numerical discrimination. Nature, 3, 281-282. doi: 10.1038/003281a0URL
[39]	Kastner S., de Weerd P., & Ungerleider L. G(2001). Texture segregation in the human visual cortex: A functional MRI study. Journal of Neurophysiology, 83(4), 2453-2457. doi: 10.1152/jn.2000.83.4.2453URL
[40]	Kaufman E. L., & Lord M. W. (1949). The discrimination of visual number. The American Journal of Psychology, 62(4), 498-525. doi: 10.2307/1418556URL
[41]	Leibovich T., Katzin N., Harel M., & Henik A. (2017). From “sense of number” to “sense of magnitude”: The role of continuous magnitudes in numerical cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 40, e164. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X16000960URL
[42]	Liu W., Zhang Z., Zhao Y., Li B., & Wang M. (2017). Distinct mechanisms in the numerosity processing of random and regular dots. Acta Psychologica, 174, 17-30. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2017.01.006URL
[43]	Liu W., Zhao Y., Wang M., & Zhang Z. (2018). Regular distribution inhibits generic numerosity processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2080. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02080URL
[44]	Liu W., Zheng P., Huang S., & Cicchini G. M. (2020). Subitizing, unlike estimation, does not process sets in parallel. Scientific Reports, 10, 15689. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-72860-4URL
[45]	Melcher D., Huber-Huber C., & Wutz A. (2020). Enumerating the forest before the trees: The time courses of estimation-based and individuation-based numerical processing. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 9, 1215-1229. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-020-02137-5
[46]	Park J., Dewind N. K., Woldorff M. G., & Brannon E. M. (2016). Rapid and direct encoding of numerosity in the visual stream. Cerebral Cortex, 26(2), 748-763.
[47]	Pomè A., Anobile G., Cicchini G. M., & Burr D. C. (2019a). Different reaction-times for subitizing, estimation, and texture. Journal of Vision, 19(6), 14, 1-9.
[48]	Pomè A., Anobile G., Cicchini G. M., Scabia A., & Burr D. C. (2019b). Higher attentional costs for numerosity estimation at high densities. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 81, 2604-2611. doi: 10.3758/s13414-019-01831-3URL
[49]	Ross J., & Burr D. C. (2010). Vision senses number directly. Journal of Vision, 10(2), 10.1.
[50]	Tokita M., & Ishiguchi A. (2010). How might the discrepancy in the effects of perceptual variables on numerosity judgment be reconciled? Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 72(7), 1839-1853. doi: 10.3758/APP.72.7.1839URL
[51]	van Rinsveld, A., Guillaume, M., Kohler, P.J., Schiltz, C., Gevers, W., & Content, A. (2020). The neural signature of numerosity by separating numerical and continuous magnitude extraction in visual cortex with frequency- tagged EEG. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(11), 5726-5732. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1917849117URL
[52]	Yousif S. R., & Keil F. C. (2020). Area, not number, dominates estimates of visual quantities. Scientific Reports, 10, 13407. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-68593-zpmid: 32770093
[53]	Zimmermann E. (2018). Small numbers are sensed directly, high numbers constructed from size and density. Cognition, 173, 1-7. doi: S0010-0277(17)30305-0pmid: 29275123

相关文章 15

[1]	马敏璇, 李文婕, 秦梦玲, 韦耀鸿, 谭倩宝, 沈路, 陈骐, 韩彪. 大脑电刺激在听觉语言加工研究中的应用[J]. 心理科学进展, 2021, 29(10): 1740-1754.
[2]	那宇亭, 赵宇雯, 关丽丽. 自我面孔识别的神经机制：基于fMRI研究的ALE元分析[J]. 心理科学进展, 2021, 29(10): 1783-1795.
[3]	张璇, 周晓林. 神经美学视角的审美愉悦加工机制[J]. 心理科学进展, 2021, 29(10): 1847-1854.
[4]	齐星亮, 蔡厚德. 镜像等效或守恒及其打破: 从行为到认知神经机制的研究证据[J]. 心理科学进展, 2021, 29(10): 1855-1865.
[5]	朱麟 刘瑾茹 李静 刘聪慧. 道德外语效应及其调节变量：来自元分析的证据[J]. 心理科学进展, 0, (): 0-0.
[6]	曲佳晨 贡喆. 信任水平存在性别差异吗？[J]. 心理科学进展, 0, (): 0-0.
[7]	吴梦慧 谢久书 邓铸. 视觉观点采择中自我中心性偏差的抑制和归因之争[J]. 心理科学进展, 0, (): 0-0.
[8]	王春地, 王大辉. 振动触觉频率信息的工作记忆容量及存储机制[J]. 心理科学进展, 2021, 29(7): 1141-1148.
[9]	曾宪卿, 许冰, 孙博, 叶健彤, 傅世敏. EMMN受偏差-标准刺激对类型和情绪类型影响: 来自元分析的证据[J]. 心理科学进展, 2021, 29(7): 1163-1178.
[10]	侯文霞, 田欣然, 刘立志, 易冰, 欧玉晓, 陈文锋, 尚俊辰. 面孔吸引力同化的连续性效应[J]. 心理科学进展, 2021, 29(7): 1210-1215.
[11]	荆伟, 张婕, 付锦霞, 田琳, 赵微. 婴幼儿面孔注意偏向：先天倾向与发展轨迹——来自正常和孤独症婴幼儿的证据[J]. 心理科学进展, 2021, 29(7): 1216-1230.
[12]	王润洲, 毕鸿燕. 发展性阅读障碍的听觉时间加工缺陷[J]. 心理科学进展, 2021, 29(7): 1231-1238.
[13]	王正雨, 胡金生. 睡眠对创造性问题解决的影响: 基于记忆重组的解释[J]. 心理科学进展, 2021, 29(7): 1251-1263.
[14]	殷融, 赵嘉. 语法的进化连续性及进化起源解释[J]. 心理科学进展, 2021, 29(7): 1264-1278.
[15]	李雅宁, 田杨阳, 吴琦, 冷海州, 蒋重清, 杨伊生. 面孔社会知觉中的表情效应[J]. 心理科学进展, 2021, 29(6): 1022-1029.

PDF全文下载地址:

http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlkxjz/CN/article/downloadArticleFile.do?attachType=PDF&id=5570