Abstract
To date, numerosity judgments have been studied only under conditions of unimodal stimulus presentation. It is therefore unclear whether the same limitations on correctly reporting the number of unimodal visual or tactile stimuli presented in a display might be expected under conditions in which participants have to count stimuli presented simultaneously in two or more different sensory modalities. In Experiment 1, we investigated numerosity judgments using both unimodal and bimodal displays consisting of one to six vibrotactile stimuli (presented over the body surface) and one to six visual stimuli (seen on the body via mirror reflection). Participants had to count the number of stimuli regardless of their modality of presentation. Bimodal numerosity judgments were significantly less accurate than predicted on the basis of an independent modality-specific resources account, thus showing that numerosity judgments might rely on a unitary amodal system instead. The results of a second experiment demonstrated that divided attention costs could not account for the poor performance in the bimodal conditions of Experiment 1. We discuss these results in relation to current theories of cross-modal integration and to the cognitive resources and/or common higher order spatial representations possibly accessed by both visual and tactile stimuli.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alluisi, E. A., Morgan, B. B., Jr., &Hawkes, G. R. (1965). Masking of cutaneous sensations in multiple stimulus presentations.Perceptual & Motor Skills,20, 39–45.
Atkinson, J., Campbell, F. W., &Francis, M. R. (1976). The magic number 4±0: A new look at visual numerosity judgements.Perception,5, 327–334.
Atkinson, J., Francis, M. R., &Campbell, F. W. (1976). The dependence of the visual numerosity limit on orientation, colour, and grouping in the stimulus.Perception,5, 335–342.
Balakrishnan, J. D., &Ashby, F. G. (1991). Is subitizing a unique numerical ability?Perception & Psychophysics,50, 555–564.
Balakrishnan, J. D., &Ashby, F. G. (1992). Subitizing: Magical numbers or mere superstition?Psychological Research,54, 80–90.
Bedford, F. L. (2004). Analysis of a constraint on perception, cognition, and development: One object, one place, one time.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,30, 907–912.
Bertelson, P., &de Gelder, B. (2004). The psychology of multimodal perception. In C. Spence & J. Driver (Eds.),Crossmodal space and crossmodal attention (pp. 151–177). New York: Oxford University Press.
Cantlon, J. F., &Brannon, E. M. (2006). Shared system for ordering small and large numbers in monkeys and humans.Psychological Science,17, 401–406.
Chan, J. S., & Spence, C. (2006).Change deafness: An auditory analogue of visual change blindness? Manuscript submitted for publication.
Cheatham, P. G., &White, C. T. (1952). Temporal numerosity: I. Perceived number as a function of flash number and rate.Journal of Experimental Psychology,44, 447–451.
Cheatham, P. G., &White, C. T. (1954). Temporal numerosity: III. Auditory perception of number.Journal of Experimental Psychology,47, 425–428.
Chen, L. M., Friedman, R. M., &Roe, A. W. (2003). Optical imaging of a tactile illusion in area 3b of the primary somatosensory cortex.Science,302, 881–885.
Church, R. M., &Meck, W. H. (1984). The numerical attribute of stimuli. In H. L. Roitblat, T. G. Bever, & H. S. Terrace (Eds.),Animal cognition (pp. 445–464). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Colavita, F. B. (1974). Human sensory dominance.Perception & Psychophysics,16, 409–412.
Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity.Behavioral & Brain Sciences,24, 87–114.
Dehaene, S., &Changeux, J.-P. (1993). Development of elementary numerical abilities: A neuronal model.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,5, 390–407.
Desimone, R., &Duncan, J. (1995). Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention.Annual Review of Neuroscience,18, 193–222.
di Pellegrino, G., Làdavas, E., &Farnè, A. (1997). Seeing where your hands are.Nature,388, 730.
Driver, J., &Spence, C. (1998). Attention and the crossmodal construction of space.Trends in Cognitive Sciences,2, 254–262.
Driver, J., &Spence, C. (2004). Crossmodal spatial attention: Evidence from human performance. In C. Spence & J. Driver (Eds.),Crossmodal space and crossmodal attention (pp. 179–220). New York: Oxford University Press.
Duncan, J., Martens, S., &Ward, R. (1997). Restricted attentional capacity within but not between sensory modalities.Nature,387, 808–810.
Eger, E., Sterzer, P., Russ, M. O., Giraud, A.-L., &Kleinschmidt, A. (2003). A supramodal number representation in human intraparietal cortex.Neuron,37, 719–725.
Farnè, A., Rossetti, Y., Toniolo, S., &Làdavas, E. (2002). Ameliorating neglect with prism adaptation: Visuo—manual and visuo—verbal measures.Neuropsychologia,40, 718–729.
Fisher, D. L. (1984). Central capacity limits in consistent mapping, visual search tasks: Four channels or more?Cognitive Psychology,16, 449–484.
Fodor, J. (1983).The modularity of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Gallace, A., Auvray, M., Tan, H. Z., &Spence, C. (2006). When visual transients impair tactile change detection: A novel case of crossmodal change blindness?Neuroscience Letters,398, 280–285.
Gallace, A., &Spence, C. (2005). Visual capture of apparent limb position influences tactile temporal order judgments.Neuroscience Letters,379, 63–68.
Gallace, A., Tan, H. Z., &Spence, C. (2005). Tactile change detection.Proceedings of the First World Haptic Conference,1, 12–16.
Gallace, A., Tan, H. Z., & Spence, C. (2006a).The body surface as a communication system: The state of the art after 50 years of research. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Gallace, A., Tan, H. Z., &Spence, C. (2006b). The failure to detect tactile change: A tactile analogue of visual change blindness.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,13, 300–303.
Gallace, A., Tan, H. Z., &Spence, C. (2006c). Numerosity judgments for tactile stimuli distributed over the body surface.Perception,35, 247–266.
Gallace, A., Tan, H. Z., & Spence, C. (2006d).Subitizing in touch: Myth or reality? Manuscript submitted for publication.
Gardner, E. P., &Spencer, W. A. (1972). Sensory funneling: II. Cortical neuronal representation of patterned cutaneous stimuli.Journal of Neurophysiology,35, 954–977.
Garner, W. R. (1951). The accuracy of counting repeated short tones.Journal of Experimental Psychology,41, 310–316.
Geldard, F. A., &Sherrick, C. E., Jr. (1965). Multiple cutaneous stimulation: The discrimination of vibratory patterns.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,37, 797–801.
Harter, M. R., &White, C. T. (1967). Perceived number and evoked cortical potentials.Science,156, 179–186.
Hein, G., Parr, A., &Duncan, J. (2006). Within-modality and crossmodality attentional blinks in a simple discrimination task.Perception & Psychophysics,68, 54–61.
Hennessy, J. R. (1966). Cutaneous sensitivity communications.Human Factors,8, 463–469.
Hill, J. W. (1971). Processing of tactual and visual point stimuli sequentially presented at high rates.Journal of Experimental Psychology,88, 340–348.
Hillstrom, A. P., Shapiro, K. L., &Spence, C. (2002). Attention in processing sequentially presented vibrotactile targets.Perception & Psychophysics,64, 1068–1082.
Ho, C., Tan, H. Z., &Spence, C. (2005). Using spatial vibrotactile cues to direct a driver’s visual attention.Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology & Behaviour,8, 397–412.
Hubbard, E. M., Piazza, M., Pinel, P., &Dehaene, S. (2005). Interactions between number and space in parietal cortex.Nature Reviews Neuroscience,6, 435–448.
Jensen, E. M., Reese, E. P., &Reese, T. W. (1950). The subitizing and counting of visually presented fields of dots.Journal of Psychology,30, 363–392.
Jevons, W. S. (1871). The power of numerical discrimination.Nature,3, 281–282.
Jordan, K. E., &Brannon, E. M. (2006). The multisensory representation of number in infancy.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,103, 3486–3489.
Jordan, K. E., Brannon, E. M., Logothetis, N. K., &Ghazanfar, A. A. (2005). Monkeys match the number of voices they hear to the number of faces they see.Current Biology,15, 1034–1038.
Kashino, M., &Hirahara, T. (1996). One, two, many—Judging the number of concurrent talkers.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,99, 2596–2603.
Kaufman, E., Lord, M., Reese, T., &Volkmann, J. (1949). The discrimination of visual number.American Journal of Psychology,62, 498–525.
Kobayashi, T., Hiraki, K., &Hasegawa, T. (2005). Auditory— visual intermodal matching of small numerosities in 6-month-old infants.Developmental Science,8, 409–419.
Kubovy, M. (1981). Concurrent-pitch segregation and the theory of indispensable attributes. In M. Kubovy & J. R. Pomerantz (Eds.),Perceptual organization (pp. 55–96). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Làdavas, E., di Pellegrino, G., Farnè, A., &Zeloni, G. (1998). Neuropsychological evidence of an integrated visuotactile representation of peripersonal space in humans.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,10, 581–589.
Lakatos, S., &Shepard, R. N. (1997). Time—distance relations in shifting attention between locations on one’s body.Perception & Psychophysics,59, 557–566.
Lechelt, E. C. (1971). Spatial numerosity discrimination as contingent upon sensory and extrinsic factors.Perception & Psychophysics,10, 180–184.
Lechelt, E. C. (1974). Pulse number discrimination in tactile spatiotemporal patterns.Perceptual & Motor Skills,39, 815–822.
Lechelt, E. C. (1975). Temporal numerosity discrimination: Intermodal comparisons revisited.British Journal of Psychology,66, 101–108.
Macaluso, E., &Driver, J. (2001). Spatial attention and crossmodal interactions between vision and touch.Neuropsychologia,39, 1304–1316.
Macaluso, E., &Driver, J. (2004a). Functional imaging of crossmodal spatial representations and crossmodal spatial attention. In C. Spence & J. Driver (Eds.),Crossmodal space and crossmodal attention (pp. 247–276). New York: Oxford University Press.
Macaluso, E., &Driver, J. (2004b). Spatial representations and crossmodal interactions in the human brain. In G. A. Calvert, C. Spence, & B. E. Stein (Eds.),Handbook of multisensory processing (pp. 529–548). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Mandler, G., &Shebo, B. J. (1982). Subitizing: An analysis of its component processes.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,111, 1–22.
Maravita, A., Spence, C., Sergent, C., &Driver, J. (2002). Seeing your own touched hands in a mirror modulates cross-modal interactions.Psychological Science,13, 350–355.
Martin, M. (1980). Attention to words in different modalities: Fourchannel presentation with physical and semantic selection.Acta Psychologica,44, 99–115.
Mattingley, J. B., Driver, J., Beschin, N., &Robertson, I. H. (1997). Attentional competition between modalities: Extinction between touch and vision after right hemisphere damage.Neuropsychologia,35, 867–880.
McComb, K. E., Packer, C., &Pusey, A. E. (1994). Roaring and numerical assessment in contests between groups of female lions, Panthera leo.Animal Behaviour,47, 379–387.
Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information.Psychological Review,63, 81–97.
Navon, D., &Gopher, D. (1979). On the economy of the human-processing system.Psychological Review,86, 214–255.
Nieder, A. (2004). The number domain—Can we count on parietal cortex?Neuron,44, 407–409.
Nieder, A., &Miller, E. K. (2004a). Analog numerical representations in rhesus monkeys: Evidence for parallel processing.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,16, 889–901.
Nieder, A., &Miller, E. K. (2004b). A parieto-frontal network for visual numerical information in the monkey.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,101, 7457–7462.
Peterson, S., &Simon, T. J. (2000). Computational evidence for the subitizing phenomenon as an emergent property of the human cognitive architecture.Cognitive Science,24, 93–122.
Piazza, M., Mechelli, A., Butterworth, B., &Price, C. J. (2002). Are subitizing and counting implemented as separate or functionally overlapping processes?NeuroImage,15, 435–446.
Posey, T. B., &James, M. R. (1976). Numerosity discrimination of tactile stimuli.Perceptual & Motor Skills,42, 671–674.
Posner, M. I. (1980). Orienting of attention.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,32, 3–25.
Pylyshyn, Z. W., &Storm, R. W. (1988). Tracking multiple independent targets: Evidence for a parallel tracking mechanism.Spatial Vision,3, 179–197.
Reese, E. P., Reese, T. W., Volkman, J., & Corbin, H. H. (1953).Psychophysical research, summary report. 1946–1952. Technical Report: SPECDEVCEN (131-1-5).
Reese, E. P., Robinson, H. B., Stevenson, J. G., & Volkman, J. (1960).Relative effectiveness of presenting information to selected sense modalities. Technical Report: NAVTRADEVCEN (512-1).
Rensink, R. A. (2002). Change detection.Annual Review of Psychology,53, 245–277.
Riggs, K. J., Ferrand, L., Lancelin, D., Fryziel, L., Dumur, G., &Simpson, A. (2006). Subitizing in tactile perception.Psychological Science,17, 271–275.
Rizzolatti, G., Scandolara, C., Matelli, M., &Gentilucci, M. (1981). Afferent properties of periarcuate neurons in macaque monkeys: I. Somatosensory responses.Behavioural Brain Research,2, 125–146.
Rochlis, J. L., &Newman, D. J. (2000). A tactile display for international space station (ISS) extravehicular activity (EVA).Aviation, Space, & Environmental Medicine,71, 571–578.
Sathian, K., Greenspan, A. I., &Wolf, S. L. (2000). Doing it with mirrors: A case study of a novel approach to neurohabilitation.Neurohabilitation & Neural Repair,14, 73–76.
Sinnett, S., Spence, C., & Soto-Faraco, S. (in press). Visual dominance and attention: The Colavita effect revisited.Perception & Psychophysics.
Sorkin, R. D. (1987). Design of auditory and tactile displays. In G. Salvendy (Ed.),Handbook of human factors (pp. 549–576). New York: Wiley.
Soto-Faraco, S., &Spence, C. (2002). Modality-specific auditory and visual temporal processing deficits.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,55A, 23–40.
Spence, C., &Driver, J. (1999). Multiple resources and multimodal interface design. In D. Harris (Ed.),Engineering psychology and cognitive ergonomics. Vol. 3: Transportation systems, medical ergonomics and training (pp. 305–312). Hampshire, U.K.: Ashgate.
Spence, C., &Driver, J. (Eds.) (2004).Crossmodal space and crossmodal attention. New York: Oxford University Press.
Spence, C., McDonald, J., &Driver, J. (2004). Exogenous spatialcuing studies of human crossmodal attention and multisensory integration. In C. Spence & J. Driver (Eds.),Crossmodal space and crossmodal attention (pp. 277–320). New York: Oxford University Press.
Spence, C., Nicholls, M. E. R., &Driver, J. (2001). The cost of expecting events in the wrong sensory modality.Perception & Psychophysics,63, 330–336.
Spence, C., Pavani, F., &Driver, J. (2004). Spatial constraints on visual— tactile crossmodal distractor congruency effects.Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience,4, 148–169.
Spence, C., Shore, D. I., &Klein, R. M. (2001). Multisensory prior entry.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,130, 799–832.
Starkey, P., Spelke, E. S., &Gelman, R. (1990). Numerical abstraction by human infants.Cognition,36, 97–128.
Tan, H. Z., Gray, R., Young, J. J., & Traylor, R. (2003). A haptic back display for attentional and directional cueing. Haptics-e:The Electronic Journal of Haptics Research,3, MS 2002-07. Retrieved from www.haptics-e.org/vol_03/index.html.
Taubman, R. E. (1950). Studies in judged number: I. The judgment of auditory number.Journal of General Psychology,43, 167–194.
ten Hoopen, J., &Vos, J. (1979). Effect on numerosity judgment of grouping of tones by auditory channels.Perception & Psychophysics,26, 374–380.
Trick, L. M., &Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1993). What enumeration studies can show us about spatial attention: Evidence for limited capacity preattentive processing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,12, 331–351.
Trick, L. M., &Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1994). Why are small and large numbers enumerated differently?A limited-capacity preattentive stage in vision. Psychological Review,101, 80–102.
Vallar, G., Rusconi, M. L., Bignamini, L., Geminiani, G., &Perani, D. (1994). Anatomical correlates of visual and tactile extinction in humans: A clinical CT scan study.Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, & Psychiatry,57, 464–470.
van Erp, J. B. F., &van Veen, H. A. H. C. (2003). A multi-purpose tactile vest for astronauts in the international space station. InProceedings of Eurohaptics 2003 (pp. 405–408). Dublin: Trinity College.
van Erp, J. B. F., &van Veen, H. A. H. C. (2004). Vibrotactile invehicle navigation system.Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology & Behaviour,7, 247–256.
VanRullen, R., &Koch, C. (2003). Competition and selection during visual processing of natural scenes and objects.Journal of Vision,3, 75–85.
van Veen, H. A. H. C., &van Erp, J. B. F. (2001). Tactile information presentation in the cockpit. In S. Brewster & R. Murray-Smith (Eds.),Haptic human—computer interaction (pp. 174–181). Berlin: Springer.
Vitevitch, M. S. (2003). Change deafness: The inability to detect changes between two voices.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,29, 333–342.
Viviani, P. (1979). Choice reaction times for temporal numerosity.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,5, 157–167.
von Békésy, G. (1959). Neural funneling along the skin and between the inner and outer hair cells of the cochlea.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,31, 1236–1249.
Vuilleumier, P. O., &Rafal, R. D. (2000). A systematic study of visual extinction: Between- and within-field deficits of attention in hemispatial neglect.Brain,123, 1263–1279.
Weiss, W. (1965). Influence of an irrelevant stimulus attribute on numerosity judgments.Perceptual & Motor Skills,21, 404.
Wender, K. F., &Rothkegel, R. (2000). Subitizing and its subprocesses.Psychological Research,64, 81–92.
White, C. T. (1963). Temporal numerosity and the psychological unit of duration.Psychological Monographs,77, 1–37.
White, C. T., &Cheatham, P. G. (1959). Temporal numerosity: IV. A comparison of the major senses.Journal of Experimental Psychology,58, 441–444.
White, C. T., Cheatham, P. G., &Armington, J. C. (1953). Temporal numerosity: II. Evidence for central factors influencing perceived number.Journal of Experimental Psychology,46, 283–287.
Whiteley, L., Kennett, S., Taylor-Clarke, M., &Haggard, P. (2004). Facilitated processing of visual stimuli associated with the body.Perception,33, 307–314.
Wickens, C. D. (1980). The structure of attentional resources. In R. S. Nickerson (Ed.),Attention and performance VIII (pp. 239–257). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Wickens, C. D. (1992).Engineering psychology and human performance. New York: HarperCollins.
Wickens, C. D. (2002). Multiple resources and performance prediction.Theoretical Issues in Ergonomic Science,3, 159–177.
Wickens, C. D., &Liu, Y. (1988). Codes and modalities in multiple resources: A success and a qualification.Human Factors,30, 599–616.
Wright, M., Green, A., &Baker, S. (2000). Limitations for change detection in multiple Gabor targets.Visual Cognition,7, 237–252.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
A.G. was supported by a grant from the Università degli Studi di Milano—Bicocca, Italy. H.Z.T. and C.S. were supported by a network grant from the Oxford McDonnell—Pew Centre for Cognitive Neuroscience.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gallace, A., Tan, H.Z. & Spence, C. Multisensory numerosity judgments for visual and tactile stimuli. Perception & Psychophysics 69, 487–501 (2007). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193906
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193906