Abstract
The spatial-numerical association of response codes (SNARC) effect is the tendency for humans to respond faster to relatively larger numbers on the left or right (or with the left or right hand) and faster to relatively smaller numbers on the other side. This effect seems to occur due to a spatial representation of magnitude either in occurrence with a number line (wherein participants respond to relatively larger numbers faster on the right), other representations such as clock faces (responses are reversed from number lines), or culturally specific reading directions, begging the question as to whether the effect may be limited to humans. Given that a SNARC effect has emerged via a quantity judgement task in Western lowland gorillas and orangutans (Gazes et al., Cog 168:312–319, 2017), we examined patterns of response on a quantity discrimination task in American black bears, Western lowland gorillas, and humans for evidence of a SNARC effect. We found limited evidence for SNARC effect in American black bears and Western lowland gorillas. Furthermore, humans were inconsistent in direction and strength of effects, emphasizing the importance of standardizing methodology and analyses when comparing SNARC effects between species. These data reveal the importance of collecting data with humans in analogous procedures when testing nonhumans for effects assumed to bepresent in humans.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adachi I (2014) Spontaneous spatial mapping of learned sequence in chimpanzees: evidence for a SNARC-like effect. PLoS One 9:1–4. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0090373
Agrillo C, Dadda M, Serena G, Bisazza A (2008) Do fish count? Spontaneous discrimination of quantity in female mosquito fish. Anim Cog 11:495–503. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-008-0140-9
Anderson US, Stoinski TS, Marr MJ, Smith AD, Bloomsmith MA, Maple TL (2005) Relative numerousness judgment and summation in young and old Western lowland gorillas. J Comp Psych 119:285–295. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7036.119.3.285
Bächtold D, Baumüller M, Brugger P (1998) Stimulus-response compatibility in representational space. Neuropsych 36:731–735
Baker JM, Shivik J, Jordan KE (2011) Tracking of food quantity by coyotes (Canis latrans). Behav Proc 88:72–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2011.08.006
Bánszegi O, Urrutia A, Szenczi P, Hudson R (2016) More or less: spontaneous quantity discrimination in the domestic cat. Anim Cog 19:879–888. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-016-0985-2
Benson-Amram S, Heinen VK, Dryer SL, Holekamp KE (2011) Numerical assessment and individual call discrimination by wild spotted hyaenas, Crocuta crocuta. Anim Behav 82:743–752. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2011.07.004
Beran MJ (2008) Monkeys (Macaca mulatta and Cebus apella) track, enumerate, and compare multiple sets of moving items. J Exp Psych Anim Behav Proc 34:63–74. https://doi.org/10.1037/0097-7403.34.1.63
Bonanni R, Natoli E, Cafazzo S, Salsecchi P (2011) Free-ranging dogs assess the quantity of opponents in intergroup conflicts. Anim Cog 14:103–115. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-010-0348-3
Buckingham JN, Wong BBM, Rosenthal GG (2007) Shoaling decisions in female swordtails: How do fish gauge group size? Behav 144:1333–1346
Clutton-Brock TH, Harvey PH (1980) Primates, brains and ecology. J Zool 190:309–323. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
Dahl CD, Adachi I (2013) Conceptual metaphorical mapping in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). eLife 2013(2):1–7. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.00932
de Hevia MD, Vallar G, Girelli L (2008) Visualizing numbers in the mind’s eye: the role of visuo-spatial processes in numerical abilities. Neuro Biobehav Rev 32:1361–1372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2008.05.015
Dehaene S (1992) Varieties of numerical abilities. Cog 44:1–42
Dehaene S, Bossini S, Giraux P (1993) The mental representation of parity and number magnitude. J Exp Psych Gen 122:371–396
Di Luca S, Granà A, Semenza C, Seron X, Pesenti M (2006) Finger-digit compatibility in Arabic numeral processing. Q J Exp Psych 59:1648–1663. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210500256839
Doran DM, McNeilage A 1998 Gorilla ecology and behavior. Evo Anth 6:120–131. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6505(1998)6:4<120::AID-EVAN2>3.0.CO;2-H
Doran DM, McNeilage A, Greer D, Bocian C, Mehlman P, Shah N (2002) Western lowland gorilla diet and resource availability: new evidence, cross-site comparisons, and reflections on indirect sampling methods. Am J Prim 58:91–116. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajp.10053
Drucker CB, Brannon EM (2014) Rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) map number onto space. Cog 132: 57–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2014.03.011
Emmerton J (1998) Numerosity differences and effects of stimulus density on pigeons’ discrimination performance. Anim Learn Behav 26:243–256. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03199218
Evans TA, Beran MJ, Harris EH, Rice DF (2009) Quantity judgments of sequentially presented food items by capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). Anim Cog 12:97–105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-008-0174-z
Fias W (2001) Two routes for the processing of verbal numbers: evidence from the SNARC effect. Psych Res 65:250–259
Fias W, Brysbaert M, Geypens F, D’Ydewalle G (1996) The importance of magnitude in numerical processing: evidence from the SNARC effect. Math Cog 2:95–110
Fischer MH (2003a) Cognitive representation of negative numbers. Psych Sci 14:278–282. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.03435
Fischer M (2003b) Spatial representations in number processing—evidence from a pointing task. Vis Cog 10:493–508
Garshelis D, Pelton M (1980) Activity of black bears in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. J Mamm 61:8–19
Gazes RP, Diamond RFL, Hope JM, Caillaud D, Stoinski TS, Hampton RR (2017) Spatial representation of magnitude in gorillas and orangutans. Cog 168:312–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2017.07.010
Gevers W, Reynvoet B, Fias W (2003) The mental representation of ordinal sequences is spatially organized. Cog 87:87–95
Goldsmith ML (1999) Ecological constraints in the foraging effort of Western gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) at Bai Hokou, Central African Republic. Int J Prim 20:1–23. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020528115829
Gómez-Laplaza LM, Gerlai R (2011) Can angelfish (Pterophyllum scalare) count? Discrimination between different shoal sizes follows Weber’s law. Anim Cog 14:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-010-0337-6
Graber D, White M (1983) Black bear food habits in Yosemite National Park. Bears Biol Manag 5:1–10
Hager MC, Helfman GS (1991) Safety in numbers: shoal size choice by minnows under predator threat. Behav Ecol Soc 29:271–276
Hanus D, Call J (2007) Discrete quantity judgments in the great apes (Pan paniscus, Pan troglodytes. Gorilla gorilla, Pongo pygmaeus): the effect of presenting whole sets versus item-by-item. J Comp Psych 121:241–249. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7036.121.3.241
Herrero S (1983) Social behaviour of black bears at a garbage dump in Jasper National Park. Bears Biol Manag 5:54–70
Heward BJ, Heward JD, Auger J, Black HL (2004) Food habits of Utah bears: three studies and 1787 scats later. In Black HA, Auger J (eds) Black bears of Utah’s East Tavaputs Plateau. Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, Rexburg, pp 75–83
Hung Y, Hung DL, Tzeng OJL, Wu DH (2008) Flexible spatial mapping of different notations of numbers in Chinese readers. Cog 106:1441–1450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.04.017
Jordan R (1976) Threat behavior of the black bear (Ursus americanus). Bears Biol Manag 3(40):57–63
Krusche P, Uller C, Dicke U (2010) Quantity discrimination in salamanders. J Exp Biol 213:1822–1828. https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.039297
McComb K, Packer C, Pusey AE (1994) Roaring and numerical assessment in contests between groups of female lions, Panthera leo. Anim Behav 47:379–387. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1994.1052
Milton K (1981) Distribution patterns of tropical plant foods as an evolutionary stimulus to primate mental development. Am Anth 85:534–548
Nuerk HC, Iversen W, Willmes K (2004) Notational modulation of the SNARC and the MARC (linguistic markedness of response codes) effect. Quart J Exp Psych A Hum Exp Psych 57:835–863. https://doi.org/10.1080/02724980343000512
Nuerk HC, Wood G, Willmes K (2005) The universal SNARC effect. Exp Psych 52:187–194. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169.52.3.187
Panteleeva S, Reznikova Z, Vygonyailova O (2013) Quantity judgments in the context of risk/reward decision making in striped field mice: First “count,” then hunt. Front Psych 4:1–8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00053
Patro K, Haman M (2012) The spatial–numerical congruity effect in preschoolers. J Exp Child Psych 111:534–542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2011.09.006
Patro K, Shaki S (2016) SNARC for numerosities is modulated by comparative instruction (and resembles some non-numerical effects). Cog Proc 17(2):127–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-015-0745-2
Perdue BM, Talbot CF, Stone AM, Beran MJ (2012) Putting the elephant back in the herd: elephant relative quantity judgments match those of other species. Anim Cog 15:955–961. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-012-0521-y
Previtali P, De Hevia MD, Girelli L (2010) Placing order in space: the SNARC effect in serial learning. Exp Brain Res 201:599–605. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-009-2063-3
Remis MJ, Dierenfeld ES, Mowry CB, Carroll RW (2001) Nutritional aspects of western lowland gorilla (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) diet during seasons of fruit scarcity at Bai Hokou. Cent Afr Repub 22:807–836
Rogers L (1987) Effects of food supply and kinship on social behavior, movements, and population growth of black bears in northeastern Minnesota. Wild Mono 97:3–73
Rugani R, Regolin L, Vallortigara G (2007) Rudimental numerical competence in 5-day-old domestic chicks (Gallus gallus): identification of ordinal position. J Exp Psych Anim Behav Proc 33:21–31. https://doi.org/10.1037/0097-7403.33.1.21
Rugani R, Vallortigara G, Regolin L (2015) At the root of left-right asymmetries in spatial-numerical processing: from domestic chicks to human subjects. J Cog Psych 27:388–399. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2014.941846
Shaki S, Petrusic WM (2005) On the mental representation of negative numbers: context-dependent SNARC effects with comparative judgments. Psych Bul Rev 12:931–937. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196788
Shaki S, Petrusic WM, Leth-steensen C (2012) SNARC effects with numerical and non-numerical symbolic comparative judgments: instructional and cultural dependencies. J Exp Psych Hum Per Per 38:515–530. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026729
Uller C, Jaeger R, Guidry G, Martin C (2003) Salamanders (Plethodon cinereus) go for more: rudiments of number in an amphibian. Anim Cog 6:105–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-003-0167-x
Vonk J, Beran MJ (2012) Bears “count” too: quantity estimation and comparison in black bears (Ursus americanus). Anim Behav 84:231–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2012.05.001
Vonk J, Torgerson-White L, McGuire M, Thueme M, Thomas J, Beran MJ (2014) Quantity estimation and comparison in western lowland gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla). Anim Cog 17:755–765. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-013-0707-y
Vuilleumier P, Ortigue S, Brugger P (2004) The number space and neglect. Cortex 40:399–410. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-9452(08)70134-5
Ward C, Smuts BB (2007) Quantity-based judgments in the domestic dog (Canis lupus familiaris). Anim Cog 10:71–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-006-0042-7
Wilson ML, Hauser MD, Wrangham RW (2001) Does participation in intergroup conflict depend on numerical assessment, range location, or rank for wild chimpanzees? Anim Behav 61:1203–1216. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.2000.1706
Zhang M, Gao X, Li B, Yu S, Gong T, Jiang T, Hu Q, Chen Y (2016) Spatial representation of ordinal information. Front Psych 7:1–6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00505
Acknowledgements
We thank Amanda George for her assistance in testing human participants. We also thank the zoos and the animal caretakers for facilitating access to their animals.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. All applicable international, national, and institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed. All procedures performed in studies involving animals were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institution or practice at which the studies were conducted.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Johnson-Ulrich, Z., Vonk, J. Spatial representation of magnitude in humans (Homo sapiens), Western lowland gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla), and American black bears (Ursus americanus). Anim Cogn 21, 531–550 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-018-1186-y
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-018-1186-y