A theory of magnitude: common cortical metrics of time, space and quantity.

By Vincent Walsh. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2003

1,925 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/042079f31623ba8d16ce27cc322347f1788d3a8a

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

Differential Ineffability and the Senses (2014, background): “More recently, Walsh (2003) has proposed a single magnitude estimation system, apprehended across senses, that works across space, time and number.”
Analogue Magnitude Representations: A Philosophical Introduction (2015, background): “Evidence from both brain deficits and brain imaging point to overlapping loci for magnitude representations of various modes in the inferior parietal cortex of humans and other primates (Walsh [2003]; Jacob et al.”
Decision by sampling. (2006, background): “There is evidence that the processing of number and time may rely upon a common cortical resource (Walsh, 2003).”
Are Spatial-Numerical Associations a Cornerstone for Arithmetic Learning? The Lack of Genuine Correlations Suggests No (2015, background): “Another influential neurocognitive model in numerical cognition – ATOM theory (A Theory of Magnitude; Walsh, 2003) – assumes that numbers and space are jointly processed in the brain because they are both supported by the generalized magnitude system, presumably localized in the inferior parietal…”
Cognitive neuroscience: acting on numbers. (2004, neutral): “For example, it may be concerned with the representation of magnitudes such as physical sizes [6].”
Representation of number in the brain. (2009, background): “Together, the data from human and nonhuman primates suggest that partly overlapping populations of neurons within this area may give rise to what appears functionally as a general-purpose parietal magnitude representation system (Walsh 2003).”
Using Relational Reasoning to Learn About Scientific Phenomena at Unfamiliar Scales (2016, background): “…and comparative evidence that suggest reasoning about any type of scale (e.g., temporal, spatial, abstract) uses the same neural and conceptual resources (e.g., Bueti and Walsh 2009; Cantlon et al. 2009; Lourenco and Longo 2011; Walsh 2003; for a review, see Cohen Kadosh et al. 2008).”
The Latent Structure of Spatial Skills and Mathematics: A Replication of the Two-Factor Model (2017, background): “Neural and behavioral studies have indicated these correlations are based on shared processing (Hubbard, Piazza, Pine, & Dehaene, 2005; McKenzie, Bull, & Gray, 2003; Walsh, 2003); however, the nature of this shared processing and its developmental course are largely unknown.”
No Innate Number Line in the Human Brain (2011, background): “And more generally, Walsh (2003) have argued that the SNARC effect, in fact, proves to be a SQUARC effect (spatial quantity association of response codes) in which any spatially or action-coded magnitude, numerical or not, will yield a relationship with space.”
Interactive specialization: a domain-general framework for human functional brain development? (2011, neutral): “A likely reason for this might be a shared magnitude mechanism for non-numerical dimensions such as size, density, time, that precedes neurons that are specialized for numerical magnitude (Walsh, 2003).”
Symbols and quantities in parietal cortex: elements of a mathematical theory of number representation and manipulation (2007, background): “Indeed, the coding and manipulation of spatial, temporal and numerical magnitudes might constitute an overarching function of the parietal lobes (Walsh, 2003).”