Abstract
The current study examined whether discrete numerical estimation is based on the same cognitive process as estimation of continuous magnitudes such as weight and time. While the verbal estimation of numerical quantities has a contingent unit of measurement (e.g., how many cookies fit in a cookie jar? _X_ cookies), estimation of time and weight does not (e.g., how much time does it take to fill a bath with water? _X_ minutes/hours/seconds). Therefore, estimation of the latter categories has another level of difficulty, requiring extensive involvement of cognitive control. During a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scan, 18 students performed estimations with three estimation categories: number, time, and weight. Estimations elicited activity in multiple brain regions, mainly: (1) visual regions including bilateral lingual gyrus), (2) parietal regions including the left angular gyrus and right supramarginal gyrus, and (3) the frontal regions (cingulate gyrus and the inferior frontal cortex). Continuous magnitude estimations (mostly time) produced different frontal activity than discrete numerical estimations did, demonstrating different profiles of brain activations between discrete numerical estimations and estimations of continuous magnitudes. The activity level in the right middle and inferior frontal gyrus correlated with the tendency to give extreme responses, signifying the importance of the right prefrontal lobe in estimations.
Highlights
How do we estimate magnitudes? Do we use different mechanisms and different neural regions to estimate different domains such as weight, time, or numerical quantities?The current study suggests a new cognitive estimation task (CET) to examine this issue.One of the accepted views in the field of numerical cognition suggested an innate mechanism in charge of estimation, that is, the approximate number system (ANS) [1,2,3]
We describe the response frequencies according to category and the analysis of variance (ANOVA) with category as a within-subject variable—performed once with the number of extreme responses as the dependent variable and once with response time (RT)
Activity level in the right middle and inferior frontal gyrus correlated with the tendency to give extreme responses, demonstrating the importance of the right prefrontal lobe in CET
Summary
How do we estimate magnitudes? Do we use different mechanisms and different neural regions to estimate different domains such as weight, time, or numerical quantities?The current study suggests a new cognitive estimation task (CET) to examine this issue.One of the accepted views in the field of numerical cognition suggested an innate mechanism in charge of estimation, that is, the approximate number system (ANS) [1,2,3]. Converging evidence from infants, preschool children and adults, as well as non-human primates, suggests that the representation of approximate discrete quantities is a foundational ability that is supported by the intraparietal sulcus (IPS) in the posterior parietal cortex [4,5,6,7]. This system is devoted to approximating how many non-symbolic stimuli are presented and comparing between arrays of non-symbolic stimuli.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
