Advanced search
Add to list

Abstract representations of number: what interactions with number form do not prove and priming effects do

Seppe Santens (UGent) , Wim Fias (UGent) and Tom Verguts (UGent)
(2009) BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES. 32(3-4). p.351-352
Author
Organization
Abstract
We challenge the arguments of Cohen Kadosh & Walsh (CK&W) on two grounds. First, interactions between number form (e.g., notation, format, modality) and an experimental factor do not show that the notations/formats/modalities are processed separately. Second, we discuss evidence that numbers are coded abstractly, also when riot required by task demands and processed unintentionally, thus challenging the authors' dual-code account
Keywords
KUNDE, MODEL

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

MLA
Santens, Seppe, Wim Fias, and Tom Verguts. “Abstract Representations of Number: What Interactions with Number Form Do Not Prove and Priming Effects Do.” BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES 2009 : 351–352. Print.
APA
Santens, S., Fias, W., & Verguts, T. (2009). Abstract representations of number: what interactions with number form do not prove and priming effects do. BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES.
Chicago author-date
Santens, Seppe, Wim Fias, and Tom Verguts. 2009. “Abstract Representations of Number: What Interactions with Number Form Do Not Prove and Priming Effects Do.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences.
Chicago author-date (all authors)
Santens, Seppe, Wim Fias, and Tom Verguts. 2009. “Abstract Representations of Number: What Interactions with Number Form Do Not Prove and Priming Effects Do.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences.
Vancouver
1.
Santens S, Fias W, Verguts T. Abstract representations of number: what interactions with number form do not prove and priming effects do. BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES. 2009. p. 351–2.
IEEE
[1]
S. Santens, W. Fias, and T. Verguts, “Abstract representations of number: what interactions with number form do not prove and priming effects do,” BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES, vol. 32, no. 3–4. pp. 351–352, 2009.
@misc{791130,
  abstract     = {We challenge the arguments of Cohen Kadosh & Walsh (CK&W) on two grounds. First, interactions between number form (e.g., notation, format, modality) and an experimental factor do not show that the notations/formats/modalities are processed separately. Second, we discuss evidence that numbers are coded abstractly, also when riot required by task demands and processed unintentionally, thus challenging the authors' dual-code account},
  author       = {Santens, Seppe and Fias, Wim and Verguts, Tom},
  issn         = {0140-525X},
  keywords     = {KUNDE,MODEL},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {3-4},
  pages        = {351--352},
  series       = {BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES},
  title        = {Abstract representations of number: what interactions with number form do not prove and priming effects do},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X09990872},
  volume       = {32},
  year         = {2009},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: