11 research outputs found
Variability in the Alignment of Number and Space Across Languages and Tasks
While the domains of space and number appear to be linked in human brains and minds, their conceptualization still differs across languages and cultures. For instance, frames of reference for spatial descriptions vary according to task, context, and cultural background, and the features of the mental number line depend on formal education and writing direction. To shed more light on the influence of culture/language and task on such conceptualizations, we conducted a large-scale survey with speakers of five languages that differ in writing systems, preferences for spatial and temporal representations, and/or composition of number words. Here, we report data obtained from tasks on ordered arrangements, including numbers, letters, and written text. Comparing these data across tasks, domains, and languages indicates that, even within a single domain, representations may differ depending on task characteristics, and that the degree of cross-domain alignment varies with domains and culture
Keys and seats: Spatial response coding underlying the joint spatial compatibility effect
Recommended from our members
God sides with us: Reconstructing domain boundaries of causal concepts in Tonga
Variability in the Alignment of Number and Space Across Languages and Tasks
While the domains of space and number appear to be linked in human brains and minds, their conceptualization still differs across languages and cultures. For instance, frames of reference for spatial descriptions vary according to task, context, and cultural background, and the features of the mental number line depend on formal education and writing direction. To shedmore light on the influence of culture/language and task on such conceptualizations, we conducted a large-scale survey with speakers of five languages that differ in writing systems, preferences for spatial and temporal representations, and/or composition of number words. Here, we report data obtained from tasks on ordered arrangements, including numbers, letters, and written text. Comparing these data across tasks, domains, and languages indicates that, even within a single domain, representations may differ depending on task characteristics, and that the degree of cross-domain alignment varies with domains and culture.publishedVersio
Variability in the alignment of number and space across languages and tasks
While the domains of space and number appear to be linked in human brains and minds, their conceptualization still differs across languages and cultures. For instance, frames of reference for spatial descriptions vary according to task, context, and cultural background, and the features of the mental number line depend on formal education and writing direction. To shedmore light on the influence of culture/language and task on such conceptualizations, we conducted a large-scale survey with speakers of five languages that differ in writing systems, preferences for spatial and temporal representations, and/or composition of number words. Here, we report data obtained from tasks on ordered arrangements, including numbers, letters, and written text. Comparing these data across tasks, domains, and languages indicates that, even within a single domain, representations may differ depending on task characteristics, and that the degree of cross-domain alignment varies with domains and culture
Recommended from our members
God sides with us: Reconstructing domain boundaries of causal concepts in Tonga
Recommended from our members
Representing time in terms of space: Directions of mental timelines in Norwegian
People often use spatial vocabulary to describe temporal rela-tions, and this has increasingly motivated attempts to mapspatial frames of reference (FoRs) onto time. How people as-sign FRONT to time and to temporal entities depends on cul-tural conventions, and is crucial for diagnosing which tem-poral FoR a person actually adopts. Here, we report findingsfrom a survey with speakers of Norwegian that aimed at as-sessing the cultural conventions involved in FRONT assign-ment. Data on temporal movements of events, on the temporalorder of events, and on explicit FRONT assignments to events,time units, and âtime itselfâ suggest that participants use dif-ferent principles for describing fixed relations (static time)versus moving events (dynamic time)
Recommended from our members
Relative Evaluation of Location:How Spatial Frames of Reference Affect What We Value
How we mentally represent spatial relations is known to haveeffects on cognitive processes such as inferences, co-speechgesture, or memorizing. In addition, spatial positions oftenserve as metaphors that carry valence. For instance, âmovingup the social ladder, âgetting it rightâ, or being âin frontâ feelscertainly better than âmoving downâ, âhaving two left feetâ,or âlagging behindâ. Spatial position, however, depends onperspective, more concretely on which frame of reference(FoR) one adoptsâand hence on cross-linguisticallydiverging preferences. What is conceptualized as âin frontâ inone variant of the relative FoR (e.g., translation) is âbehindâunder another variant (reflection), and vice versa. Do suchdiverging conceptualizations of an objectâs location also leadto diverging evaluations? We tested this with speakers ofGerman, Chinese, and Japanese using an Implicit AssociationTest (IAT). Data from two studies suggest that acrosslanguages the object âin front ofâ another object is evaluatedmore positively than the one âbehindâ, and that both locationand evaluation depend on the adopted FoR. In other words:linguistically imparted FoR preferences appear to impact onevaluative processes
Recommended from our members
Shifting backward to say whatâs front? Spatial referencing of dorsal objectarrangements
When referring to spatial arrangements of two objects in the visual field, German native speakers prefer reflectionas a subtype of the relative frame of reference. Whether this preference transfers to objects in oneâs back and whether a mentalturn has to precede such dorsal references (turn hypothesis), has recently been explored in studies implementing questionnaires.However, the results hardly supported the turn hypothesis and rather suggested backward projection as an alternative strategy fordorsal references. To test the two assumptions more rigorously, a series of experiments implemented dorsal object arrangementsin interview situations and induced dorsal perspectives via turning, shifting or reflecting the actual view of participants. Acrossexperiments and conditions, backward projection consistently emerged as the preferred referencing strategy and only a smallproportion of dorsal references accorded with the turn hypothesis. Participantsâ retrospective descriptions supported this patternand suggested backward projection to be involved in dorsal referencing