Abstract
In this study, subjects were asked to judge which of two digits (e.g., 3 5) was larger either in physical or in numerical size. Reaction times were facilitated when the irrelevant dimension was congruent with the relevant dimension and were inhibited when the two were incongruent (size congruity effect). Although judgments based on physical size were faster, their speed was affected by the numerical distance between the members of the digit pair, indicating that numerical distance is automatically computed even when it is irrelevant to the comparative judgment being required by the task. This finding argues for parallel processing of physical and semantic information in this task.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Reference Notes
Hinrichs, J. V.Physical and numerical size in number comparisons. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Psychonomic Society, November 1976.
Yurko, D. S., & Hinrichs, J. V.Judgment of numerical inequality: Size-value congruity. Paper presented at the meeting of the Midwestern Psychological Association, Chicago, May 1978.
References
Banks, W. P. Encoding and processing of symbolic information in comparative judgments. In G. H. Bower (Ed.),The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 11). New York: Academic Press, 1977.
Banks, W. P., &Floka, J. Semantic and perceptual processes in symbolic comparisons.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1977,3, 278–290.
Besnek, D., &Coltheart, M. Ideographic and alphabetic processing in skilled reading of English.Neuropsychologia, 1979,17, 467–472.
Dixon, P., &Just, M. A. Normalization of irrelevant dimensions in stimulus comparisons.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1978,4, 36–46.
Hécean, H. Aphasias. In M. S. Gazzaniga (Ed.),Handbook of behavioral neurobiology (Vol. 2). New York: Plenum, 1979.
Hécaen, H., &Kremin, H. Neurolinguistic research on reading disorders resulting from left hemisphere lesions. In H. Whitaker & H. A. Whitaker (Eds.),Studies in neurolinguistics (Vol. 2). New York: Academic Press, 1976.
Holyoak, K. J. The form of analog size information in memory.Cognitive Psychology, 1977,9, 31–51.
Moyer, R. S. Comparing objects in memory: Evidence suggesting an internal psychophysics.Perception & Psychophysics, 1973,13, 180–184.
Moyer, R. S., Bradley, D. R., Sorensen, M. H., Whiting, J. C., &Mansfield, D. P. Psychophysical functions for perceived and remembered size.Science, 1978,200, 330–332.
Paivio, A. Perceptual comparisons through the mind’s eye.Memory & Cognition, 1975,3, 635–647.
Sternberg, S. The discovery of processing stages: Extension of Donder’s method.Acta Psychologia, 1969,30, 276–315.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
The order of authorship was determined randomly.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Henik, A., Tzelgov, J. Is three greater than five: The relation between physical and semantic size in comparison tasks. Mem Cogn 10, 389–395 (1982). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202431
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202431