Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

Information compression trumps accuracy when viewing groups of faces.

Consciousness and cognition·2026

Same author

Numerical precision or inhibitory control? Exploring latent profiles in preschoolers' numerosity judgments.

Acta psychologica·2026

Same author

Citizen science in psychology: Challenges, opportunities, and recommendations.

Behavior research methods·2026

Same author

The role of verbal working memory load on number order processing: Evidence from an articulatory suppression paradigm.

Acta psychologica·2026

Same author

The nature of order processing deficits in developmental dyscalculia: The influences of familiarity and the count-list.

Journal of experimental child psychology·2025

Same author

Sharpening the number sense: Developmental trends in numerosity perception.

Journal of experimental child psychology·2025

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Mar 25, 2026

Development of a Gaze-Contingent Display Framework Designed for Perceptual and Oculomotor Research with Simulated Central Vision Loss

Development of a Gaze-Contingent Display Framework Designed for Perceptual and Oculomotor Research with Simulated Central Vision Loss

Published on: April 11, 2025

Effects of Presentation Type and Visual Control in Numerosity Discrimination: Implications for Number Processing?

Karolien Smets¹, Pieter Moors¹, Bert Reynvoet²

¹Brain and Cognition, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, KU Leuven Leuven, Belgium.

Frontiers in Psychology

|February 13, 2016

Summary

The Approximate Number System (ANS) supports non-symbolic number comparison. Visual cue control influences performance, even with sequential stimulus presentation, challenging assumptions of interchangeability.

Keywords:

ANS comparison methodology presentation format sequential simultaneous visual cue control

More Related Videos

New Variations for Strategy Set-shifting in the Rat

New Variations for Strategy Set-shifting in the Rat

Published on: January 23, 2017

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons

Published on: November 9, 2018

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Mar 25, 2026

Development of a Gaze-Contingent Display Framework Designed for Perceptual and Oculomotor Research with Simulated Central Vision Loss

Development of a Gaze-Contingent Display Framework Designed for Perceptual and Oculomotor Research with Simulated Central Vision Loss

Published on: April 11, 2025

New Variations for Strategy Set-shifting in the Rat

New Variations for Strategy Set-shifting in the Rat

Published on: January 23, 2017

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons

Published on: November 9, 2018

Area of Science:

Cognitive psychology
Neuroscience
Psychophysics

Background:

The Approximate Number System (ANS) is theorized to underpin non-symbolic number comparison tasks.
Previous research suggests numerosity processing is independent of visual cues when controlled.
Distinct visual cue control methods are often assumed to be interchangeable in numerosity studies.

Purpose of the Study:

To investigate if sequential stimulus presentation eliminates the influence of visual cue control type on numerosity comparison performance.
To determine if the presentation format (simultaneous vs. sequential) affects the impact of visual cue control on ANS performance.

Main Methods:

Participants performed a non-symbolic numerosity comparison task (indicating the larger of two dot arrays).
Visual cue control methods were varied.
Stimuli were presented both simultaneously and sequentially across different conditions.

Main Results:

The influence of visual cue control type was significantly more pronounced in the simultaneous presentation condition.
Sequential presentation did not entirely eliminate the effect of different visual cue control types on performance.
Performance differences related to visual cue control persisted regardless of presentation format, albeit to a lesser extent in the sequential condition.

Conclusions:

The assumption that performances are comparable across studies with different visual cue controls is not fully supported.
The impact of visual cue control on numerosity comparison is partly dependent on the stimulus presentation format (simultaneous vs. sequential).
Researchers should carefully consider the choice of visual cue control and presentation method when comparing findings across studies on the Approximate Number System.