title: Predicting sights from sounds: 6-month-olds' intermodal numerical abilities.
abstract: Although the psychophysics of infants' nonsymbolic number representations have been well studied, less is known about other characteristics of the approximate number system (ANS) in young children. Here three experiments explored the extent to which the ANS yields abstract representations by testing infants' ability to transfer approximate number representations across sensory modalities. These experiments showed that 6-month-olds matched the approximate number of sounds they heard to the approximate number of sights they saw, looking longer at visual arrays that numerically mismatched a previously heard auditory sequence. This looking preference was observed when sights and sounds mismatched by 1:3 and 1:2 ratios but not by a 2:3 ratio. These findings suggest that infants can compare numerical information obtained in different modalities using representations stored in memory. Furthermore, the acuity of 6-month-olds' comparisons of intermodal numerical sequences appears to parallel that of their comparisons of unimodal sequences.
authors: Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA. feigenson@jhu.edu
authors: Lisa
authors: L
authors: Feigenson
references: Dev Psychol. 2008 Sep;44(5):1457-65
references: 18793076
references: Infancy. 2010 Jan;15(1):61-82
references: 21479154
references: Trends Cogn Sci. 2004 Jul;8(7):307-14
references: 15242690
references: Cognition. 2010 Jul;116(1):33-41
references: 20381023
references: Cognition. 2004 Sep;93(2):B59-68
references: 15147939
references: Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2009 Mar;1156:232-59
references: 19338511
references: J Exp Child Psychol. 2003 Jan;84(1):63-76
references: 12553918
references: Cognition. 2000 Jan 10;74(1):B1-B11
references: 10594312
references: Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2009 Dec 1;18(6):346-351
references: 20419075
references: Cognition. 2003 Jan;86(3):201-21
references: 12485738
references: Child Dev. 2008 Mar-Apr;79(2):476-89
references: 18366435
references: PLoS Biol. 2008 Feb;6(2):e11
references: 18254657
references: J Exp Child Psychol. 2008 Jul;100(3):225-33
references: 18022633
references: Psychol Sci. 2010 Jun;21(6):873-81
references: 20431048
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Feb 28;103(9):3486-9
references: 16492785
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Jun 23;106(25):10382-5
references: 19520833
references: Cognition. 2010 Jun;115(3):394-406
references: 20347435
references: Dev Sci. 2005 Jan;8(1):88-101
references: 15647069
references: Psychol Sci. 2003 Sep;14(5):396-401
references: 12930467
references: Cognition. 2003 Aug;89(1):B15-25
references: 12893126
references: Cogn Psychol. 2002 Feb;44(1):33-66
references: 11814309
references: Cognition. 2004 Mar;91(2):B23-34
references: 14738775
references: Cognition. 2008 Jul;108(1):210-21
references: 18226807
references: Dev Sci. 2011 Mar;14(2):205-13
references: 22213895
references: Dev Sci. 2009 Apr;12(3):453-63
references: 19371370
references: Science. 1983 Oct 14;222(4620):179-81
references: 6623069
references: Dev Psychol. 1997 May;33(3):423-8
references: 9149921
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Sep 27;102(39):14116-21
references: 16172388
references: Child Dev. 1981 Sep;52(3):827-32
references: 7285654
references: Psychol Sci. 2002 Mar;13(2):150-6
references: 11933999
references: Psychon Bull Rev. 2001 Dec;8(4):698-707
references: 11848588
references: Child Dev. 1982 Aug;53(4):1022-7
references: 7128253
references: Dev Sci. 2005 Sep;8(5):409-19
references: 16048513
references: Nature. 2007 May 31;447(7144):589-91
references: 17538620
references: J Exp Child Psychol. 2006 Nov;95(3):215-29
references: 16808924
references: Dev Psychol. 2009 Nov;45(6):1583-94
references: 19899916
references: Dev Sci. 2006 Nov;9(6):F59-64
references: 17059447
references: Trends Cogn Sci. 2009 Feb;13(2):83-91
references: 19131268
references: Dev Sci. 2010 Nov;13(6):900-6
references: 20977560