Abstract

Prominent theories suggest that time and number are processed by a single neural locus or a common magnitude system (e.g., Meck and Church, 1983; Walsh, 2003). However, a growing body of literature has identified numerous inconsistencies between temporal and numerical processing, casting doubt on the presence of such a singular system. Findings of distinct temporal and numerical biases in the presence of emotional content (Baker et al., 2013; Young and Cordes, 2013) are particularly relevant to this debate. Specifically, emotional stimuli lead to temporal overestimation, yet identical stimuli result in numerical underestimation. In the current study, we tested adults’ temporal and numerical processing under cognitive load, a task that compromises attention. Under the premise of a common magnitude system, one would predict cognitive load to have an identical impact on temporal and numerical judgments. Inconsistent with the common magnitude account, results revealed baseline performance on the temporal and numerical task was not correlated and importantly, cognitive load resulted in distinct and opposing quantity biases: numerical underestimation and marginal temporal overestimation. Together, our data call into question the common magnitude account, while also providing support for the role of attentional processes involved in numerical underestimation.

Highlights

  • Throughout our daily lives, we constantly track temporal and numerical information

  • We investigate the effect of cognitive load on temporal and numerical judgments

  • We confirmed that the order in which participants completed the bisection task and/or the block order did not interact with our variables of interest (Relative PSE, Relative Difference Limen (DL))

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Throughout our daily lives, we constantly track temporal and numerical information. this process is never void of context; it is often coupled with distractions. Research has most frequently tested quantity processing in controlled laboratory settings, recent work has revealed quantity processing biases in the presence of external stimuli These studies have revealed durations to be overestimated and numerosities to be underestimated in the presence of emotional content, namely angry faces (see Gil et al, 2007; Baker et al, 2013; Young and Cordes, 2013). These findings have led many researchers to re-think prominent theories of quantity processing, while unveiling questions regarding the cognitive mechanism(s) involved in quantity processes. This manipulation mimics real-world quantity processing, but allows us to directly test theories of quantity processing

Objectives
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call