title: Sensitivity to number: Reply to Gebuis and Gevers.
abstract: Past research showing a bias towards the larger non-symbolic number by adults and children in line bisection tasks (de Hevia & Spelke, 2009) has been challenged by Gebuis and Gevers, suggesting that area subtended by the stimulus and not number is responsible for the biases. I review evidence supporting the idea that although sensitivity to number might be relatively affected by visual cues, number is a major, salient property of our environment. The influence of non-numerical cues might be seen as the concurrent processing of dimensions that entail information of magnitude, without implying that number is constructed out of those dimensions.
authors.affiliation: Harvard University, Cambridge, USA University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy.
authors.forename: Maria Dolores
authors.initials: MD
authors.lastname: de Hevia
keywords: line bisection; non-numerical cues; number; spatial biases
references.citation: Cognition. 2003 Jan;86(3):201-21
references.pmid: 12485738
references.citation: Dev Psychol. 2008 Sep;44(5):1457-65
references.pmid: 18793076
references.citation: Neuron. 2007 Jan 18;53(2):293-305
references.pmid: 17224409
references.citation: Cognition. 2008 May;107(2):460-78
references.pmid: 18082157
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2004 Jul;8(7):307-14
references.pmid: 15242690
references.citation: Neurology. 2001 Sep 11;57(5):822-6
references.pmid: 11552011
references.citation: Infancy. 2008 Jul;13(4):308-337
references.pmid: 20703362
references.citation: Cognition. 2004 Sep;93(2):B59-68
references.pmid: 15147939
references.citation: Curr Biol. 2008 Sep 23;18(18):R855-6; author reply R857-8
references.pmid: 18812077
references.citation: Behav Brain Funct. 2010 Feb 18;6:13
references.pmid: 20167066
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2010 Jun;21(6):873-81
references.pmid: 20431048
references.citation: Exp Brain Res. 2006 Jan;168(1-2):254-64
references.pmid: 16044296
references.citation: Neuron. 2004 Oct 28;44(3):547-55
references.pmid: 15504333
references.citation: Dev Sci. 2009 Apr;12(3):453-63
references.pmid: 19371370
references.citation: Curr Biol. 2008 Mar 25;18(6):425-8
references.pmid: 18342507
references.citation: Cognition. 2009 Feb;110(2):198-207
references.pmid: 19095223
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2010 May;21(5):653-60
references.pmid: 20483843
references.citation: Cognition. 2000 Jan 10;74(1):B1-B11
references.pmid: 10594312
references.citation: PLoS Biol. 2006 May;4(5):e125
references.pmid: 16594732
references.citation: J Cogn Neurosci. 2009 Jun;21(6):1039-53
references.pmid: 18752403
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 2007 Jan;33(1):32-41
references.pmid: 17227193
references.citation: J Exp Child Psychol. 2000 Jun;76(2):104-22
references.pmid: 10788305
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2010 Dec;14(12):542-51
references.pmid: 21055996
references.citation: Dev Sci. 2006 Nov;9(6):F59-64
references.pmid: 17059447
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2009 Feb;13(2):83-91
references.pmid: 19131268