Past research suggested that negative numbers are represented in terms of their components—the polarity marker and the number (e.g., Fischer & Rottmann, 2005; Ganor-Stern & Tzelgov, 2008). The present study shows that a holistic representation is formed when needed for the task requirement. Specifically, performing the numerical comparison task on positive and negative numbers presented sequentially required participants to hold both the polarity and the number magnitude in memory. Such a condition resulted in a holistic representation of negative numbers, as indicated by the distance and semantic congruity effects. This holistic representation was added to the initial components representation, thus producing a hybrid holistic-components representation.
BanksW. P.FujiiM. S.Kayra-StuartF. (1976). Semantic congruity effects in comparative judgments of magnitudes of digits.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance2, 435–447.
2.
BonatoM.FabbriS.UmiltaU.ZorziM. (2007). The mental representation of numerical fractions: Real or integer?.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance33, 1410–1419.
3.
BrysbaertM. (1995). Arabic number reading: On the nature of the number scale and the origin of the phonological recoding.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General124, 434–452.
4.
DehaeneS.BossiniS.GirauxP. (1993). The mental representation of parity and number magnitude.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General122, 371–396.
5.
DehaeneS.DupouxE.MehlerJ. (1990). Is numerical comparison digital? Analogical and symbolic effects in two digit number comparison.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance16, 626–641.
6.
FischerM. (2003). Cognitive representation of negative numbers.Psychological Science14, 3278–282.
7.
FischerM.RottmannJ. (2005). Do negative numbers have a place on the mental number line?.Psychology Science47, 122–32.
8.
Ganor-SternD.PinhasM.TzelgovJ. (2009). Comparing two-digit numbers: The importance of being presented together.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology62, 3444–452.
9.
Ganor-SternD.TzelgovJ. (2008). Negative numbers are generated in the mind.Experimental Psychology55, 3157–163.
10.
Ganor-SternD.TzelgovJ.EllenbogenR. (2007). Automaticity and two-digit numbers.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance33, 2483–496.
11.
KallaiA.TzelgovJ. (2009). A generalized fraction: An entity smaller than one on the mental number line.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance35, 61845–1864.
12.
LoftusG. R.MassonM. (1994). Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review1, 476–490.
13.
LorchR. E. J.MyersJ. L. (1990). Regression analyses of repeated measures data in cognitive research.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition16, 1149–157.
14.
MeertG.GregoireJ.NoelM. P. (2009). Rational numbers: Componential versus holistic representation of fractions in a magnitude comparison task.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology62, 81598–1616.
15.
MoyerR. S.LandauerT. K. (1967). Time required for judgments of numerical inequality.Nature215, 1519–1520.
16.
NuerkH.-C.IversenW.WillmesK. (2004a). Notational modulation of the SNARC and the MARC (linguistic markedness of response codes) effect.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology57A, 835–863.
17.
NuerkH.-C.WegerU.WillmesK. (2001). Decade breaks in the mental number line? Putting the tens and units back in different bins.Cognition82, B25–B33.
18.
NuerkH.-C.WegerU.WillmesK. (2004b). On the perceptual generality of the unit–decade compatibility effect.Experimental Psychology51, 72–79.
19.
Petrusic, B., Shaki, S., & Leth-Steensen, C. (2008). Remembered instructions with symbolic and perceptual comparisons.Perception & Psychophysics70, 179–189.
SekularR.RubinE.ArmstrongR. (1971). Processing numerical information: A choice time analysis.Journal of Experimental Psychology90, 175–80.
22.
ShakiS.FischerM. H.PetrusicW. M. (2009). Reading habits for both words and numbers contribute to the SNARC effect.Psychonomic Bulletin and Review16, 328–331.
23.
ShakiS.PetrusicW. M. (2005). On the mental representation of negative numbers: Context-dependent SNARC effects with comparative judgments.Psychonomic Bulletin and Review12, 5931–937.
24.
TzelgovJ.Ganor-SternD.Maymon-SchreiberK. (2009). The representation of negative numbers: Exploring the effects of mode of processing and notation.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology62, 3605–624.
