The space–time interaction suggests a left-to-right directionality in the mind’s representation of elapsing time. However, studies showing a possible vertical time representation are scarce and contradictory. In Experiment 1, 32 participants had to judge the duration (200, 300, 500, or 600 ms) of the target stimulus that appeared at the top, centre, or bottom of the screen, compared with a reference stimulus (400 ms) that always appeared in the centre of the screen. In Experiment 2, 32 participants were administered the same procedure, but the reference stimulus appeared at the top, centre, or bottom of the screen and the target stimulus was fixed in the centre location. In both experiments, a space–time interaction was found with an association between short durations and bottom response key as well as between long durations and top key. The evidence of a vertical mental timeline was further confirmed by the distance effect with a lower level of performance for durations close to that of the reference stimulus. The results suggest a bottom-to-top mapping of time representation, more in line with the metaphor “more is up.”
AnsorgeU.WührP. (2004). A response-discrimination account of the Simon effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 30, 365–377. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.30.2.365
BergenB. K.Chan LauT. T. (2012). Writing direction affects how people map space onto time. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, Article 109. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00109
BottiniR.CasasantoD. (2013). Space and time in the child’s mind: Metaphoric or ATOMic?Frontiers in Psychology, 4, Article 803. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00803
BuetiD.WalshV. (2009). The parietal cortex and the representation of time, space, number and other magnitudes. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B: Biological Sciences, 364, 1831–1840. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0028
8.
CappellettiM.FreemanE. D.CipolottiL. (2007). The middle house or the middle floor: Bisecting horizontal and vertical mental number lines in neglect. Neuropsychologia, 45, 2989–3000. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurospychologia.2007.05.014
9.
CasasantoD.BottiniR. (2014a). Mirror reading can reverse the flow of time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 473–479. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033297
10.
CasasantoD.BottiniR. (2014b). Spatial language and abstract concepts. WIREs Cognitive Science, 115, 139–149. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1271
11.
ChangS.ChoY. S. (2015). Polarity correspondence effect between loudness and lateralized response set. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, Article 683. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00683
12.
ChenJ. Y. (2007). Do Chinese and English speakers think about time differently? Failure of replicating Boroditsky (2001). Cognition, 104, 427–436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2006.09.012
13.
Cohen KadoshR.Cohen KadoshK.SchuhmannT.KaasA.GoebelR.HenikA.SackA. T. (2007). Virtual dyscalculia induced by parietal-lobe TMS impairs automatic magnitude processing. Current Biology, 17, 689–693. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2007.02.056
14.
Cohen KadoshR.HenikA. (2006). A common representation for semantic and physical properties: A cognitive-anatomical approach. Experimental Psychology, 53, 87–94. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169.53.2.87
15.
Cohen KadoshR.LammertynJ.IzardV. (2008). Are numbers special? An overview of chronometric, neuroimaging, developmental, and comparative studies of magnitude representation. Progress in Neurobiology, 84, 132–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pneurobio.2007.11.001
16.
DalmasoM.VicovaroM. (2019). Evidence of SQUARC and distance effects in a weight comparison task. Cognitive Processing, 20, 163–173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-019-00905-2
17.
DehaeneS.BossiniS.GirauxP. (1993). The mental representation of parity and numerical magnitude. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122, 371–396. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.122.3.371
18.
Di BonoM. G.CasarottiM.GavaL.UmiltàC.ZorziM. (2012). Priming the mental time line. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38, 838–842. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028346
FabbriM. (2011). Spatial congruency between stimulus presentation and response key arrangements in arithmetic fact retrieval. American Journal of Psychology, 124, 325–340. https://doi.org/10.5406/amerjpsyc.124.3.0325
21.
FabbriM. (2013). Finger counting habits and spatial-numerical association in horizontal and vertical orientation. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 13, 95–110. https://doi.org/10.1163/15685373-12342086
22.
FabbriM.CancellieriJ.NataleV. (2012). The A Theory of Magnitude (ATOM) model in temporal perception and reproduction tasks. Acta Psychologica, 139, 111–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.09.006
23.
FabbriM.CelliniN.MartoniM.TonettiL.NataleV. (2013a). The mechanisms of space-time association: Comparing motor and perceptual contributions in time reproduction. Cognitive Science, 37, 1228–1250. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12038
24.
FabbriM.CelliniN.MartoniM.TonettiL.NataleV. (2013b). Perceptual and motor congruency effects in time-space association. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 75, 1840–1851. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-013-0519-9
25.
FabbriM.GuariniA. (2016). Finger counting habit and spatial-numerical association in children and adults. Consciousness and Cognition, 40, 45–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2015.12.012
26.
FiasW.LammertynJ.ReynvoetB.DupontP.OrbanG. A. (2003). Parietal representation of symbolic and nonsymbolic magnitude. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 15, 47–56. https://doi.org/10.1162/089892903321107819
27.
FischerM. H. (2012). A hierarchical view of grounded, embodied, and situated numerical cognition. Cognitive Processing, 13, 161–164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-012-0477-5
28.
FuhrmanO.BoroditskyL. (2010). Cross-cultural differences in mental representation of time: Evidence from an implicit nonlinguistic task. Cognitive Science, 34, 1430–1451. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2010.01105.x
29.
FulbrightR. K.MansonS. C.SkudlarskiP.LacadieC. M.GoreJ. C. (2003). Quantity determination and the distance effect with letters, numbers, and shapes: A functional MR imaging study of number processing. American Journal of Neuroradiology, 23, 193–200.
30.
FumarolaA.PrpicV.Da PosO.MurgiaM.UmiltàC.AgostiniT. (2014). Automatic spatial association for luminance. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 76, 759–765. https://doi.org/10.3758/s163414-013-0614-y
31.
GeversW.CaessensB.FiasW. (2005). Towards a common processing architecture underlying Simon and SNARC effects. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 17, 659–673. https://doi.org/10.1080/09541440540000112
32.
GeversW.LammertynJ.NotebaertW.VergutsT.FiasW. (2006). Automatic response activation of implicit spatial information: Evidence from the SNARC effect. Acta Psychologica, 122, 221–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2005.11.004
GeversW.ReynvoetB.FiasW. (2004). The mental representation of ordinal sequences is spatially organised: Evidence from days of the week. Cortex, 40, 171–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0010-9452(08)70938-9
35.
GöbelS. M. (2015). Up or down? Reading direction influences vertical counting direction in the horizontal plane—A cross-cultural comparison. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, Article 228. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00228
36.
GöbelS. M.ShakiS.FischerM. H. (2011). The cultural number line: A review of cultural and linguistic influences on the development of number processing. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 42, 543–565. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022111406251
37.
HartmannM.GashajV.StahnkeA.MastF. W. (2014). There is more than “more is up”: Hand and foot responses reverse the vertical association of number magnitudes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40, 1401–1414. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036686
38.
HartmannM.GrabherrL.MastF. W. (2012). Moving along the mental number line: Interactions between whole-body motion and numerical cognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38, 1416–1427. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026706
39.
HartmannM.MartarelliC. S.MastF. W.StockerK. (2014). Eye movements during mental time travel follow a diagonal line. Consciousness and Cognition, 30, 201–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2014.09.007
40.
HartmannM.MastF. W. (2012). Moving along the mental time line influences the processing of future related words. Consciousness and Cognition, 21, 1558–1562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2012.06.015
41.
IshiharaM.KellerP. E.RossettiY.PrinzW. (2008). Horizontal spatial representations of time: Evidence for the STEARC effect. Cortex, 44, 454–461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2007.08.010
42.
ItoY.HattaT. (2004). Spatial structure of quantitative representation of numbers: Evidence from the SNARC effect. Memory & Cognition, 32, 662–673. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195857
43.
KeusI. M.SchwarzW. (2005). Searching for the functional locus of the SNARC effect: Evidence for a response-related origin. Memory & Cognition, 33, 681–695. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195335
44.
KieselA.VierckE. (2009). SNARC-like congruency based on number magnitude and response duration. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 275–279. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013737
45.
KrajcsiA. (2017). Numerical distance and size effects dissociate in Indo-Arabic number comparison. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 24, 927–934. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-016-1175-6
46.
LakoffG. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous thing: What categories reveal about the mind. University of Chicago Press.
47.
LakoffG.JohnsonM. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.
48.
LakoffG.JohnsonM. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. Basic Books.
49.
LeoneM. J.SallesA.PulverA.GolombekD. A.SigmanM. (2018). Time drawings: Spatial representation of temporal concepts. Consciousness and Cognition, 59, 10–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2018.01.005
MacnamaraA.KeageH. A. D.LoetscherT. (2018). Mapping of non-numerical domains on space: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Experimental Brain Research, 236, 335–346. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-017-5154-6
52.
MilesL. K.TanL.NobleG. D.LumsdenJ.MacraeC. N. (2011). Can a mind have two time lines? Exploring space-time mapping in Mandarin and English speakers. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 598–604. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-011-0068-y
53.
MoyerR. S.LandauerT. K. (1967). Time required for judgment of numerical inequality. Nature, 215, 1519–1520. https://doi.org/10.1038/2151519a0
54.
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, 1151–1161. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193485
55.
MyachykovA.ScheepersC.FischerM. H.KesslerK. (2014). TEST: A tropic, embodied, and situated theory of cognition. Topics in Cognitive Science, 6, 442–460. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12024
OuelletM.SantiagoJ.FunesM. J.LupiañezJ. (2010). Thinking about the future moves attention to the right. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36, 17–24. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017176
PinelP.PiazzaM.Le BihanD.DehaeneS. (2004). Distributed and overlapping cerebral representations of number, size, and luminance during comparative judgments. Neuron, 41, 983–993. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0896-6273(04)00107-2
61.
ProctorR. W.ChoY. S. (2006). Polarity correspondence: A general principle for performance of speeded binary classification tasks. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 416–442. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.3.416
62.
Ruiz FernandézS.LachmairM.RahonaJ. J. (2014, September16–19). Human mental representation of time in the vertical space [Conference session]. Proceedings of the 6th International Congress of Medicine in Space and Extreme Environments, Berlin, Germany.
SantiagoJ.LakensD. (2015). Can conceptual congruency effects between number, time, and space be accounted for by polarity correspondence?Acta Psychologica, 156, 179–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2014.09.016
65.
SantiagoJ.LupiáñezJ.PerezE.FunesM. J. (2007). Time (also) flies from left to right. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 512–516. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194099
66.
SantiagoJ.RománA.OuelletM. (2011). Flexible foundations of abstract thought: A review and a theory. In MaassA.SchubertT. W. (Eds.), Spatial dimensions of social thought (pp. 41–110). Mouton de Gruyter.
67.
SantiagoJ.RománA.OuelletM.RodríguezN.Pérez-AzorP. (2010). In hindsight, life flows from left to right. Psychological Research, 74, 59–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-008-0220-0
68.
SchneiderW.EschmanA.ZuccolottoA. (2002). E-prime user’s guide. Psychology Software Tools Inc.
69.
SchwarzW.KeusI. (2004). Moving the eyes along the mental number line: Comparing SNARC effects with manual and saccadic responses. Perception & Psychophysics, 66, 651–664. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194909
70.
SellaroR.TreccaniB.JobR.CubelliR. (2015). Spatial coding of object typical size: Evidence for a SNARC-like effect. Psychological Research, 79, 950–962. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-014-0636-7
71.
ShakiS.FischerM. H. (2012). Multiple spatial mappings in numerical cognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38, 804–809. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027562
SimonJ. R. (1990). The effect of an irrelevant directional cue on human information processing. In ProctorR. W.ReeveT. G. (Eds.), Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective (pp. 31–88). Elsevier.
74.
StockerK.HartmannM.MartarelliC. S.MastF. W. (2016). Eye movements reveal mental looking through time. Cognitive Science, 40, 1648–1670. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12301
75.
TorralboA.SantiagoJ.LupiáñezJ. (2006). Flexible conceptual projection of time onto spatial frames of reference. Cognitive Science, 30, 745–757. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0000_67
76.
TverskyB.KugelmassS.WinterA. (1991). Cross-cultural and developmental trends in graphic productions. Cognitive Psychology, 23, 515–557. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(91)90005-9
77.
VallesiA.BinnsM. A.ShalliceT. (2008). An effect of spatial–temporal association of response codes: Understanding the cognitive representations of time. Cognition, 107, 501–527. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.10.011
78.
VallesiA.MapelliD.SchiffS.AmodioP.UmiltàC. (2005). Horizontal and vertical Simon effect: Different underlying mechanisms?Cognition, 96, B33–B43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2004.11.009
VallesiA.WeisblattY.SemenzaC.ShakiS. (2014). Cultural modulations of space-time compatibility effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21, 666–669. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-013-0540-y
81.
Van den NoortgateW.OnghenaP. (2006). Analysing repeated measures data in cognitive research: A comment on regression coefficient analyses. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 18, 937–952. https://doi.org/10.1080/09541440500451526
VergutsT.Van OpstalF. (2005). Dissociation of the distance effect and size effect in one-digit numbers. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 925–930. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03196787
84.
VicarioC. M.PecoraroP.TurrizianiP.KochG.CaltagironeC.OliveriM. (2008). Relativistic compression and expansion of experimental time in the left and right space. PLOS ONE, 3, Article e1716. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0001716
85.
VuK.-P. L.ProctorR. W.PickD. F. (2000). Vertical versus horizontal spatial compatibility: Right–left prevalence with bimanual responses. Psychological Research, 64, 25–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004260000035
86.
WalshV. (2003). A theory of magnitude: Common cortical metrics of time, space and quantity. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 483–488. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2003.09.002
87.
WalshV. (2015). A theory of magnitude: The parts that sum of numbers. In Cohen-KadoshR.DowkerA. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of numerical cognition (pp. 552–565). Oxford University Press.
88.
WegerU.PrattJ. (2008). Time flies like an arrow: Shifting spatial attention in response to adverbs of time. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 426–430. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.15.2.426
89.
WinterB.MarghetisT.MatlockT. (2015). Of magnitudes and metaphors: Explaining cognitive interactions between space, time, and number. Cortex, 64, 209–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2014.10.015
90.
WinterB.MatlockT. (2013, July31–August3). More is up. . .and right: Random number generation along two axes [Paper presentation]. Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Berlin, Germany.
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, 489–525. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169.52.3.187
93.
WoodinG.WinterB. (2018). Placing abstract concepts in space: Quantity, time and emotional valence. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 2169. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02169
94.
XuanB.ZhangD.HeS.ChenX. (2007). Larger stimuli are judged to last longer. Journal of Vision, 7, 21–25. https://doi.org/10.1167/7.10.2
95.
YangW.SunY. (2016). A monolingual mind can have two time lines: Exploring space-time mappings in Mandarin monolinguals. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23, 857–864. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0964-7
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
