Spatial-numerical and spatial-positional associations have been well documented in the domains of numerical cognition and working memory, respectively. However, such associations are typically calculated by directly comparing (e.g., subtracting) left- versus right-hand responses; it remains an open question whether such associations reside in each hand individually, or are exclusively localised in one of the two hands. We conducted six experiments to investigate the hand-lateralization of both spatial-numerical and spatial-positional associations. All experiments revealed that the spatial associations stemmed from left-hand responses, irrespective of the handedness of the subjects, but with the exception of the magnitude comparison task (Experiments 5 and 6). We propose that the hemispheric lateralization of the tasks in combination with the task-relevance of spatial associations can explain this pattern. More generally, we suggest that the contributions of left and right hands require more attention in spatial-numerical and spatial-positional research.
AbrahamseE. L.van DijckJ.-P.FiasW. (2017). Grounding verbal working memory: The case of serial order. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(5), 429–433. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721417704404
2.
AbrahamseE. L.van DijckJ.-P.MajerusS.FiasW. (2014). Finding the answer in space: The mental whiteboard hypothesis on serial order in working memory. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, Article 932. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00932
BaddeleyA. D.HitchG. (1974). Working memory. In: BowerG. H.(Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (pp. 47–90). New York: Academic Press.
5.
BaeG. Y.ChoiJ. M.ChoY. S.ProctorR. W. (2009). Transfer of magnitude and spatial mappings to the SNARC effect for parity judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35(6), 1506–1521. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017257
6.
Basso MoroS.Dell’AcquaR.CutiniS. (2018). The SNARC effect is not a unitary phenomenon. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25(2), 688–695.
7.
CaiQ.BrysbaertM. (2010). SUBTLEX-CH: Chinese word and character frequencies based on film subtitles. PLOS ONE, 5(6), Article e10729. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0010729
8.
CaiQ.Van der HaegenL.BrysbaertM. (2013). Complementary hemispheric specialization for language production and visuospatial attention. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110(4), E322–E330. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1212956110
9.
ChenQ.MirmanD. (2012). Competition and cooperation among similar representations: Toward a unified account of facilitative and inhibitory effects of lexical neighbors. Psychological Review, 119(2), 417–430. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027175
10.
ChenQ.MirmanD. (2015). Interaction between phonological and semantic representations: Time matters. Cognitive Science, 39(3), 538–558. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12156
11.
ChenQ.VergutsT. (2010). Beyond the mental number line: A neural network model of number–space interactions. Cognitive Psychology, 60(3), 218–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2010.01.001
12.
CiporaK.SoltanlouM.ReipsU. D.NuerkH. C. (2019). The SNARC and MARC effects measured online: Large-scale assessment methods in flexible cognitive effects. Behavior Research Methods, 51(4), 1676–1692.
13.
CiporaK.WoodG. (2017). Finding the SNARC instead of hunting it: A 20*20 Monte Carlo investigation. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article 1194. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01194
14.
CutiniS.ScarpaF.ScatturinP.Dell’AcquaR.ZorziM. (2014). Number–space interactions in the human parietal cortex: Enlightening the SNARC effect with functional near-infrared spectroscopy. Cerebral Cortex, 24(2), 444–451. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhs321
15.
DehaeneS.BossiniS.GirauxP. (1993). The mental representation of parity and number magnitude. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122(3), 371–396.
16.
Di RosaE.BardiL.UmiltàC.MasinaF.ForgioneM.MapelliD. (2017). Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) reveals a dissociation between SNARC and MARC effects: Implication for the polarity correspondence account. Cortex, 93, 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2017.05.002
17.
DoddM. D.Van der StigchelS.Adil LeghariM.FungG.KingstoneA. (2008). Attentional SNARC: There’s something special about numbers (let us count the ways). Cognition, 108(3), 810–818. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.04.006
18.
FattoriniE.PintoM.RotondaroF.DoricchiF. (2015). Perceiving numbers does not cause automatic shifts of spatial attention. Cortex, 73, 298–316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2015.09.007
19.
FiasW. (1996). The importance of magnitude information in numerical processing: Evidence from the SNARC effect. Mathematical Cognition, 2(1), 95–110.
FischerM. H.ShakiS. (2014). Spatial associations in numerical cognition—From single digits to arithmetic. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67(8), 1461–1483. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2014.927515
22.
FischerM. H.WarlopN.HillR. L.FiasW. (2004). Oculomotor bias induced by number perception. Experimental Psychology, 51(2), 91–97. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169.51.2.91
23.
GeversW.RatinckxE.De BaeneW.FiasW. (2006). Further evidence that the SNARC effect is processed along a dual-route architectures: Evidence from the lateralized readiness potential. Experimental Psychology, 53(1), 58–68. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169.53.1.58
24.
GeversW.SantensS.DhoogeE.ChenQ.Van den BosscheL.FiasW.VergutsT. (2010). Verbal-spatial and visuospatial coding of number-space interactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 139(1), 180–190. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017688
25.
GeversW.VergutsT.ReynvoetB.CaessensB.FiasW. (2006). Numbers and space: A computational model of the SNARC effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32(1), 32–44. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.32.1.32
26.
GinsburgV.ArchambeauK.van DijckJ.-P.ChetailF.GeversW. (2017). Coding of serial order in verbal, visual and spatial working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 146(5), 632–650. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000278
27.
GinsburgV.GeversW. (2015). Spatial coding of ordinal information in short-and long-term memory. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9, Article 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00008
28.
GinsburgV.van DijckJ.-P.PrevitaliP.FiasW.GeversW. (2014). The impact of verbal working memory on number–space associations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40(4), 976–986. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036378
29.
GuidaA.MegreyaA. M.Lavielle-GuidaM.NoëlY.MathyF.van DijckJ.-P.AbrahamseE. (2018). Spatialization in working memory is related to literacy and reading direction: Culture “literarily” directs our thoughts. Cognition, 175, 96–100. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S001002771830043X
30.
HervéP.-Y.ZagoL.PetitL.MazoyerB.Tzourio-MazoyerN. (2013). Revisiting human hemispheric specialization with neuroimaging. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17(2), 69–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2012.12.004
31.
HuberS.KleinE.GrafM.NuerkH. C.MoellerK.WillmesK. (2015). Embodied markedness of parity? Examining handedness effects on parity judgments. Psychological Research, 79(6), 963–977.
32.
HungY. H.HungD. L.TzengO. J. L.WuD. H. (2008). Flexible spatial mapping of different notations of numbers in Chinese readers. Cognition, 106(3), 1441–1450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.04.017
33.
ItoY.HattaT. (2004). Spatial structure of quantitative representation of numbers: Evidence from the SNARC effect. Memory & Cognition, 32(4), 662–673. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195857
34.
KeusI. M.JenksK. M.SchwarzW. (2005). Psychophysiological evidence that the SNARC effect has its functional locus in a response selection stage. Cognitive Brain Research, 24, 48–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2004.12.005
35.
KeusI. M.SchwarzW. (2005). Searching for the functional locus of the SNARC effect: Evidence for a response-related origin. Memory & Cognition, 33(4), 681–695.
36.
Leth-SteensenC.CittaR. (2016). Bad-good constraints on a polarity correspondence account for the spatial-numerical association of response codes (SNARC) and markedness association of response codes (MARC) effects. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69(3), 482–494.
MiddletonE. L.ChenQ.VerkuilenJ. (2015). Friends and foes in the lexicon: Homophone naming in aphasia. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41(1), 77–94. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037778
39.
MillerE. K. (2000). The prefrontal cortex and cognitive control. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 1(1), 59–65.
40.
MoyerR. S.LandauerT. K. (1967). Time required for judgements of numerical inequality. Nature, 215(5109), 1519–1520. https://doi.org/10.1038/2151519a0
41.
MüllerD.SchwarzW. (2007). Is there an internal association of numbers to hands? The task set influences the nature of the SNARC effect. Memory & Cognition, 35(5), 1151–1161.
42.
NathanM. B.ShakiS.SaltiM.AlgomD. (2009). Numbers and space: Associations and dissociations. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16(3), 578–582.
43.
NuerkH. C.IversenW.WillmesK. (2004). Notational modulation of the SNARC and the MARC (linguistic markedness of response codes) effect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 57(5), 835–863. https://doi.org/10.1080/02724980343000512
44.
NuerkH. C.WoodG.WillmesK. (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
45.
PintoM.PellegrinoM.MarsonF.LasaponaraS.DoricchiF. (2019). Reconstructing the origins of the space-number association: Spatial and number-magnitude codes must be used jointly to elicit spatially organised mental number lines. Cognition, 190, 143–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2019.04.032
46.
PriceC. J. (2012). A review and synthesis of the first 20 years of PET and fMRI studies of heard speech, spoken language and reading. NeuroImage, 62(2), 816–847. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.04.062
47.
ProctorR. W.ChoY. S. (2006). Polarity correspondence: A general principle for performance of speeded binary classification tasks. Psychological Bulletin, 132(3), 416–442. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.3.416
48.
RaaijmakersJ. G.JakabE. (2012). Retrieval-induced forgetting without competition: Testing the retrieval specificity assumption of the inhibition theory. Memory & Cognition, 40(1), 19–27. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-011-0131-y
49.
ReynvoetB.BrysbaertM.FiasW. (2002). Semantic priming in number naming. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 55(4), 1127–1139. https://doi.org/10.1080/02724980244000116
50.
ReynvoetB.CaessensB.BrysbaertM. (2002). Automatic stimulus-response associations may be semantically mediated. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(1), 107–112.
51.
SchwarzW.MüllerD. (2006). Spatial associations in number-related tasks: A comparison of manual and pedal responses. Experimental Psychology, 53(1), 4–15. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169.53.1.4
ShakiS.FischerM. H. (2012). Multiple spatial mappings in numerical cognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38(3), 804–809. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027562
ShakiS.FischerM. H.PetrusicW. M. (2009). Reading habits for both words and numbers contribute to the SNARC effect. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16(2), 328–331. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.16.2.328
56.
ShakiS.PetrusicW. M. (2005). On the mental representation of negative numbers: Context-dependent SNARC effects with comparative judgments. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 12(5), 931–937. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196788
57.
ToomarianE. Y.HubbardE. M. (2018a). A SNARC in the mind or in the hand? A response to Shaki & Fischer. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2018.11.018
58.
ToomarianE. Y.HubbardE. M. (2018b). 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
59.
TzelgovJ.Ganor-SternD.Maymon-SchreiberK. (2009). The representation of negative numbers: Exploring the effects of mode of processing and notation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(3), 605–624. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210802034751
van DijckJ.-P.GeversW.FiasW. (2009). Numbers are associated with different types of spatial information depending on the task. Cognition, 113(2), 248–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2009.08.005
62.
VellanJ. E.Leth-SteensenC. (2019). Intermediate coding versus direct mapping accounts for the SNARC effect: Santens and Gevers (2008) revisited. Cognition, 186, 15–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2019.01.017
63.
VergutsT.ChenQ. (2017). Numerical cognition: Learning binds biology to culture. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 21(12), 913–914. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2017.09.004
64.
VergutsT.FiasW.StevensM. (2005). A model of exact small number representation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12(1), 66–80.
65.
ViarougeA.HubbardE. M.DehaeneS. (2014). The organization of spatial reference frames involved in the SNARC effect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67(8), 1484–1499. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2014.897358
66.
VigneauM.BeaucousinV.HervéP. Y.DuffauH.CrivelloF.HoudéO.. . .Tzourio-MazoyerN. (2006). Meta-analyzing left hemisphere language areas: Phonology, semantics, and sentence processing. NeuroImage, 30(4), 1414–1432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.11.002
67.
WoodG.NuerkH.-C.WilltnesK. (2006). Crossed hands and the SNARC effect: A failure to replicate Dehaene, Bossini and Giraux 1993. Cortex, 42, 1069–1079. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-9452(08)70219-3
68.
WoodG.WillmesK.NuerkH.-C.FischerM. H. (2008). On the cognitive link between space and number: A meta-analysis of the SNARC effect. Psychology Science Quarterly, 50(4), 489–525.
69.
ZhouD.ZhongH.DongW.LiM.VergutsT.ChenQ. (2019). The metaphoric nature of the ordinal position effect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 72(8), 2121–2129. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747021819832860
70.
Zohar-ShaiB.TzelgovJ.KarniA.RubinstenO. (2017). It does exist! A left-to-right spatial–numerical association of response codes (SNARC) effect among native Hebrew speakers. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 43(4), 719–728. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000336
