The Representations Underlying Infants' Choice of More: Object Files Versus Analog Magnitudes

By Lisa Feigenson, Susan Carey, Marc D. Hauser. Psychology Science, 2002

594 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Automotive Engineering, Developmental and Educational Psychology, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0c9e420f64237f33d93da664a625e9934c0ef7b7

How researchers see this paper

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

In Automotive Engineering

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

Natural Number and Natural Geometry (2011, background): “Although six-month-old infants can discriminate arrays of 4 vs 8 dots or sounds, even older infants tend to fail this discrimination when presented with objects that appear individually and move sequentially out of view ([19], Feigenson, Chapter 2 of this volume).”
One, two, three, four, nothing more: an investigation of the conceptual sources of the verbal counting principles. (2007, unknown): “Many experiments suggest that the infant system cannot hold any more than 3 individuals in parallel (Feigenson & Carey, 2003, 2005; Feigenson et al., 2002), though one group of researcher has found that it too can hold up to 4 (Ross-Sheehy, Oakes, & Luck, 2003).”
How many objects can you track? Evidence for a resource-limited attentive tracking mechanism. (2007, background): “…shifts may not have been appropriate (e.g., it is unclear that attention can be described as having a set “speed” for switching between objects, see Egeth & Yantis, 1997), and the distinction between serial and parallel processing is notoriously difficult to make empirically (Townsend, 1990).”
The Innate Mind: Structure and Contents (2005, background): “…al., 1995a); that objects will fall if unsupported (Needham & Baillargeon, 1993); that one plus one yields two, and other simple arithmetical facts (Feigenson et al., 2002; Wynn, 1992); that objects cannot pass through one another (Baillargeon et al., 1985; Spelke et al., 1992); that the…”
Development of Mathematical Understanding. (2007, methodology): “Feigenson, Carey, and Hauser (2002) adopted a procedure used to study rhesus monkeys' (Macaca mulatta) sensitivity to ordinality (Hauser, Carey, & Hauser, 2000).”
Evolutionary and developmental foundations of human knowledge: A case study of mathematics (2004, background): “The y-axis plots the proportion of subjects choosing the box with the greater number of cookies, and the x-axis plots the conditions by age of subject. Redrawn from Feigenson et al. [2002] .”
Arithmetic and the brain. (2004, unknown): “Second, many tasks are now known to depend on a special object-file system limited to representing up to three objects [52,53].”
Acquisition of English Number Marking: The Singular-Plural Distinction (2006, background): “When provided with a choice between four crackers placed into a container one at a time and a single cracker, infants between 10 and 12 months choose randomly, even though they succeed if the choice is three versus two ( Feigenson, Carey, & Hauser, 2002 ).”
Tracking individuals via object-files: evidence from infants' manual search (2003, background): “Here, infants should expect the box to contain more on the basis of number, but be empty on the basis of volume (number expected to contain more, volume expected empty).”
Consciousness and cognitive access (2008, unknown): “Infant humans show similar results, although typically with a limit more in the vicinity of three rather than four (Feigenson, Carey and Hauser 2002).”
Object Persistence in Philosophy and Psychology (2007, background): “Accordingly, a tremendous amount of research has explored the principles by which the visual system segments images into units.”