Abstract
Although the SNARC effects in symbolic numerals and non-symbolic numerosity have been observed in different studies, little is known about their developmental trajectory and potential relationship. The present study aims to explore the development of the symbolic and non-symbolic SNARC effects across different age groups, and further examine the relationship between these two SNARC effects. Experiment 1 measured 36 6-to-7-year-old children, 59 7-to-8-year-old children, 69 8-to-9-year-old children, and 31 adults from China using parity judgment tasks. The results showed that the non-symbolic SNARC effect emerged in all age groups. While, the symbolic SNARC effect only emerged in 8-to-9-year-old children as well as adults. Experiment 2 measured 53 6-to-7-year-old children, 83 7-to-8-year-old children, 85 8-to-9-year-old children, as well as 31 adults from China with the magnitude comparison tasks. We found that both the symbolic and non-symbolic SNARC effects emerged in 7-to-8-year-old children, 8-to-9-year-old children as well as adults. Both experiments showed that for children and adults with significant symbolic SNARC effects and non-symbolic SNARC effects, the size of these two SNARC effects did not show significant differences. In addition, these two SNARC effects were both dissociated in two types of tasks. These findings are important for clarifying how symbolic and non-symbolic spatial-numerical associations develop.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
Please contact the corresponding author.
References
Aleotti, S., Di Girolamo, F., Massaccesi, S., & Priftis, K. (2020). Numbers around Descartes: A preregistered study on the three-dimensional SNARC effect. Cognition, 195, 104111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2019.104111
Aulet, L. S., & Lourenco, S. F. (2018). The developing mental number line: Does its directionality relate to 5- to 7-year-old children’s mathematical abilities? Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 1142. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01142
Berch, D. B., Foley, E. J., Hill, R. J., & Ryan, P. M. (1999). Extracting parity and magnitude from Arabic numerals: Developmental changes in number processing and mental representation. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 74(4), 286–308. https://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.1999.2518
Bulf, H., de Hevia, M. D., & Macchi Cassia, V. (2016). Small on the left, large on the right: Numbers orient visual attention onto space in preverbal infants. Developmental Science, 19(3), 394–401. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12315
Chan, W. W. L., & Wong, T. T. (2016). The underlying number–space mapping among kindergarteners and its relation with early numerical abilities. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 148, 35–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2016.03.010
Cheng, C., & Kibbe, M. M. (2023). Is nonsymbolic arithmetic truly “arithmetic”? Examining the computational capacity of the approximate number system in young children. Cognitive Science, 47(6), e13299. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.13299
Cipora, K., Haman, M., Domahs, F., & Nuerk, H. (2020). Editorial: On the development of space-number relations: linguistic and cognitive determinants, influences, and associations. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 182. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00182
Cooney, S. M., Holmes, C. A., & Newell, F. N. (2021). Children’s spatial–numerical associations on horizontal, vertical, and sagittal axes. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 209, 105169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2021.105169
Dehaene, S. (1992). Varieties of numerical abilities. Cognition, 44(1–2), 1–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(92)90049-N
Dehaene, S., Bossini, S., & Giraux, P. (1993). The mental representation of parity and number magnitude. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122(3), 371–396. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.122.3.371
Deng, Z., Chen, Y., Zhang, M., Li, Y., & Zhu, X. (2018). The association of number and space under different tasks: Insight from a process perspective. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 957. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00957
Di Giorgio, E., Lunghi, M., Rugani, R., Regolin, L., Dalla Barba, B., Vallortigara, G., & Simion, F. (2019). A mental number line in human newborns. Developmental Science, 22(6), e12801. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12801
Ebersbach, M., Luwel, K., & Verschaffel, L. (2014). Further evidence for a spatial-numerical association in children before formal schooling. Experimental Psychology, 61(4), 323–329. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000250
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
Fias, W., & Fischer, M. H. (2005). Spatial representation of numbers. In J. I. D. Campbell (Ed.), Handbook of Mathematical Cognition (pp. 43–54). Psychology Press.
Fias, W., Brysbaert, M., Geypens, F., & Ydewalle, G. D. (1996). The importance of magnitude information in numerical processing: Evidence from the SNARC effect. Mathematical Cognition, 2(1), 95–110. https://doi.org/10.1080/135467996387552
Gebuis, T., Cohen Kadosh, R., De Haan, E., & Henik, A. (2009). Automatic quantity processing in 5-year olds and adults. Cognitive Processing, 10, 133–142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-008-0219-x
Georges, C., Hoffmann, D., & Schiltz, C. (2018). Implicit and explicit number-space associations differentially relate to interference control in young adults with ADHD. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 775. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00775
Gibson, L. C., & Maurer, D. (2016). Development of SNARC and distance effects and their relation to mathematical and visuospatial abilities. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 150, 301–313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2016.05.009
Girelli, L., Lucangeli, D., & Butterworth, B. (2000). The development of automaticity in accessing number magnitude. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 76(2), 104–122. https://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.2000.2564
He, X., Guo, P., Li, S., Shen, X., & Zhou, X. (2021). Non-symbolic and symbolic number lines are dissociated. Cognitive Processing, 22(3), 475–486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-021-01019-4
Hoffmann, D., Hornung, C., Martin, R., & Schiltz, C. (2013). Developing number–space associations: SNARC effects using a color discrimination task in 5-year-olds. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 116(4), 775–791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2013.07.013
Hoffmann, D., Pigat, D., & Schiltz, C. (2014). The impact of inhibition capacities and age on number–space associations. Cognitive Processing, 15(3), 329–342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-014-0601-9
Jordan, N. C., Resnick, I., Rodrigues, J., Hansen, N., & Dyson, N. (2017). Delaware longitudinal study of fraction learning: Implications for helping children with mathematics difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 50(6), 621–630. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219416662033
Knoch, D., Brugger, P., & Regard, M. (2004). Suppressing versus releasing a habit: Frequency-dependent effects of prefrontal transcranial magnetic stimulation. Cerebral Cortex, 15(7), 885–887. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhh196
Krajcsi, A., Lengyel, G., & Kojouharova, P. (2018). Symbolic number comparison is not processed by the analog number system: Different symbolic and non-symbolic numerical distance and size effects. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 124. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00124
Leibovich, T., & Ansari, D. (2017). Accumulation of non-numerical evidence during nonsymbolic number processing in the brain: An fMRI study. Human Brain Mapping, 38(10), 4908–4921. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.23703
Lourenco, S. F., & Longo, M. R. (2010). General magnitude representation in human infants. Psychological Science, 21(6), 873–881. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610370158
McCrink, K., Caldera, C., & Shaki, S. (2018). The early construction of spatial attention: Culture, space, and gesture in parent–child interactions. Child Development, 89(4), 1141–1156. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12781
Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China. (2018). Opinions of the State Council of the CPC Central Committee on the deepening reform and standardized development of preschool education. Bulletin of the Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China, 11, 2–8.
Nemeh, F., Humberstone, J., Yates, M. J., & Reeve, R. A. (2018). Non-symbolic magnitudes are represented spatially: Evidence from a non-symbolic SNARC task. PLoS ONE, 13(8), e203019. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0203019
Ninaus, M., Moeller, K., Kaufmann, L., Fischer, M. H., Nuerk, H., & Wood, G. (2017). Cognitive mechanisms underlying directional and non-directional spatial-numerical associations across the lifespan. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article 1421. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01421
Nuerk, H., Wood, G., & Willmes, K. (2005). The universal SNARC effect: The association between number magnitude and space is amodal. Experimental Psychology, 52(3), 187–194. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169.52.3.187
Núñez-Peña, M. I., Colomé, À., & González-Gómez, B. (2021). The spatial-numerical association of response codes (SNARC) effect in highly math-anxious individuals: An ERP study. Biological Psychology, 161, 108062. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2021.108062
Ouyang, X., Yang, Y., Zhang, X., & Zhang, Q. (2021). Longitudinal relations between the approximate number system and symbolic number skills in preschool children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 212, 105254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2021.105254
Pan, Y., Han, X., Mei, G., Bai, X., & Chen, Y. (2019). Development of number-space associations: SNARC effects and spatial attention in 7- to 11-year-olds. PLoS ONE, 14(3), e212204. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0212204
Patro, K., & Haman, M. (2012). The spatial–numerical congruity effect in preschoolers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 111(3), 534–542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2011.09.006
Peters, L., Polspoel, B., de Beeck, H. O., & De Smedt, B. (2016). Brain activity during arithmetic in symbolic and non-symbolic formats in 9–12 year old children. Neuropsychologia, 86(C), 19–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2016.04.001
Prpic, V., Soranzo, A., Santoro, I., Fantoni, C., Galmonte, A., Agostini, T., & Murgia, M. (2020). SNARC-like compatibility effects for physical and phenomenal magnitudes: A study on visual illusions. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 84(4), 950–965. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-018-1125-1
Prpic, V., Basamh, Y. A., Goodridge, C. M., Agostini, T., & Murgia, M. (2023). Contrasting symbolic and non-symbolic numerical representations in a joint classification task. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-023-02246-w
Rugani, R., & de Hevia, M. (2017). Number-space associations without language: Evidence from preverbal human infants and non-human animal species. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 24(2), 352–369. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-016-1126-2
Sasanguie, D., De Smedt, B., & Reynvoet, B. (2017). Evidence for distinct magnitude systems for symbolic and non-symbolic number. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 81(1), 231–242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-015-0734-1
Shaki, S., & Fischer, M. H. (2018). Deconstructing spatial-numerical associations. Cognition, 175, 109–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.02.022
Toomarian, E. Y., & Hubbard, E. M. (2018). On the genesis of spatial-numerical associations: Evolutionary and cultural factors co-construct the mental number line. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 90, 184–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2018.04.010
van Galen, M. S., & Reitsma, P. (2008). Developing access to number magnitude: A study of the SNARC effect in 7- to 9-year-olds. Journal of Experimental Child PsycholOgy, 101(2), 99–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2008.05.001
White, S. L. J., Dénes, S., & Fruzsina, S. (2012). Symbolic number: The integration of magnitude and spatial representations in children aged 6 to 8 years. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, Article 392. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00392
Wood, G., Willmes, K., Nuerk, H., & Fischer, M. H. (2008). On the cognitive link between space and number: A meta-analysis of the SNARC effect. Psychology Science Quarterly, 50(4), 489–525.
Wright, I., Waterman, M., Prescott, H., & Murdoch-Eaton, D. (2003). A new Stroop-like measure of inhibitory function development: Typical developmental trends. Journal of Child Psychology Psychiatry, 44(4), 561–575. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-7610.00145
Wu, H., Yang, X., Geng, L., Zhu, X., & Chen, Y. (2020). How do working memory and inhibition contribute to the SNARC effect in Chinese school-aged children? Cognitive Development, 56, 100959. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2020.100959
Xu, X., Chen, C., Pan, M., & Li, N. (2013). Development of numerical estimation in Chinese preschool children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 116(2), 351–366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2013.06.009
Yan, L. Z., Chen, Y. X., Liu, X., Fu, S. M., & Nan, W. Z. (2022). The flexibility of spatial-numerical associations and its internal mechanism. Advances in Psychological Science, 30(1), 51–64. https://journal.psych.ac.cn/adps/EN/10.3724/SP.J.1042.2022.00051
Yang, T., Chen, C., Zhou, X., Xu, J., Dong, Q., & Chen, C. (2014). Development of spatial representation of numbers: A study of the SNARC effect in Chinese children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 117, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2013.08.011
Zhou, X., Chen, Y., Chen, C., Jiang, T., Zhang, H., & Dong, Q. (2007). Chinese kindergartners’ automatic processing of numerical magnitude in Stroop-like tasks. Memory & Cognition, 35(3), 464–470. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193286
Funding
This research was supported by the Fund of Key Laboratory of Modern Teaching Technology, Ministry of Education, P. R. China to Xiao Yu, the Humanities and Social Sciences Fund of the Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China (22YJC190025) to Xiao Yu, the National Natural Science Foundation of China [32171061] and the MOE Project of Key Research Institutes of Humanities and Social Science at Universities (22JJD190001).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Jiali Jiang: Data curation, Interpretation of data, Drafting and editing the manuscript; Xiujie Yang: Investigation, Writing-Review; Yue Qi, Wei Shao and Xiuya Lei: Data collection;
Xiao Yu: Conceptualization, Methodology, Editing of manuscript.
Xinyi Yang and Jingshu Xing: Sourcing materials and editing the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interest
The authors declared that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Jiali Jiang and Xiujie Yang are co-first authors
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Jiang, J., Yang, X., Qi, Y. et al. How do symbolic and non-symbolic spatial-numerical associations develop? Evidence from the parity judgment task and the magnitude comparison task. Curr Psychol 43, 16572–16590 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-05571-4
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-05571-4