Groupitizing Improves Estimation of Numerosity of Auditory Sequences

The interplay of motor adaptation and groupitizing in numerosity perception: Insights from visual motion adaptation and proprioceptive motor adaptation

Groupitizing is a well-established strategy in numerosity perception that enhances speed and sensory precision. Building on the ATOM theory, Anobile proposed the sensorimotor numerosity system, which posits a strong link between number and action. Previous studies using motor adaptation technology have shown that high-frequency motor adaptation leads to underestimation of numerosity perception, while low-frequency adaptation leads to overestimation. However, the impact of motor adaptation on groupitizing, and whether visual motion adaptation produces similar effects, remain unclear. In this study, we investigate the persistence of the advantage of groupitizing after motor adaptation and explore the effects of visual motion adaptation. Surprisingly, our findings reveal that proprioceptive motor adaptation weakens the advantage of groupitizing, indicating a robust effect of motor adaptation even when groupitizing is employed. Moreover, we observe a bidirectional relationship, as groupitizing also weakens the adaptation effect. These results highlight the complex interplay between motor adaptation and groupitizing in numerosity perception. Furthermore, our study provides evidence that visual motion adaptation also has an adaptation effect, but does not fully replicate the effects of proprioceptive motor adaptation on groupitizing. In conclusion, our research underscores the importance of groupitizing as a valuable strategy in numerosity perception, and sheds light on the influence of motion adaptation on this strategy.

The role of non-numerical information in the perception of temporal numerosity

Numerosity perception refers to the ability to make rapid but approximate estimates of the quantity of elements in a set (spatial numerosity) or presented sequentially (temporal numerosity). Whether numerosity is directly perceived or indirectly recomputed from non-numerical features is a highly debated issue. In the spatial domain, area and density have been suggested as the main parameters through which numerosity would be recomputed. In the temporal domain, stimuli duration and temporal frequency could be similarly exploited to retrieve numerosity. By adapting a psychophysical technique previously exploited in the spatial domain, we investigated whether temporal visual numerosity is directly perceived. Adult participants observed sequences of visual impulses sampled from a stimulus space spanning several levels of temporal frequency and duration (and hence numerosity), and then reproduced the sequence as accurately as possible via a series of keypresses. Crucially, participants were not asked to reproduce any particular property (such as number of impulses) but were free to choose any available cue (such as total duration, or temporal frequency). The results indicate that while the overall sequence duration was barely considered, numerosity and temporal frequency were both spontaneously used as the main cues to reproduce the sequences, with a slight but significant dominance of numerosity. Overall, the results are in line with previous literature suggesting that numerosity is directly encoded, even for temporal sequences, but a non-numerical feature (temporal frequency) is also used in reproducing sequences.

EEG signature of grouping strategies in numerosity perception

The moment we see a group of objects, we can appreciate its numerosity. Our numerical estimates can be imprecise for large sets (>4 items), but they become much faster and more accurate if items are clustered into groups compared to when they are randomly displaced. This phenomenon, termed groupitizing, is thought to leverage on the capacity to quickly identify groups from 1 to 4 items (subitizing) within larger sets, however evidence in support for this hypothesis is scarce. The present study searched for an electrophysiological signature of subitizing while participants estimated grouped numerosities exceeding this range by measuring event-related potential (ERP) responses to visual arrays of different numerosities and spatial configurations. The EEG signal was recorded while 22 participants performed a numerosity estimation task on arrays with numerosities in the subitizing (3 or 4) or estimation (6 or 8) ranges. In the latter case, items could be spatially arranged into subgroups (3 or 4) or randomly scattered. In both ranges, we observed a decrease in N1 peak latency as the number of items increased. Importantly, when items were arranged to form subgroups, we showed that the N1 peak latency reflected both changes in total numerosity and changes in the number of subgroups. However, this result was mainly driven by the number of subgroups to suggest that clustered elements might trigger the recruitment of the subitizing system at a relatively early stage. At a later stage, we found that P2p was mostly modulated by the total numerosity in the set, with much less sensitivity for the number of subgroups these might be segregated in. Overall, this experiment suggests that the N1 component is sensitive to both local and global parcelling of elements in a scene suggesting that it could be crucially involved in the emergence of the groupitizing advantage. On the other hand, the later P2p component seems to be much more bounded to the global aspects of the scene coding the total number of elements while being mostly blind to the number of subgroups in which elements are parsed.

Groupitizing reflects conceptual developments in math cognition and inequities in math achievement from childhood through adolescence

Understanding the cognitive processes central to mathematical development is crucial to addressing systemic inequities in math achievement. We investigate the "Groupitizing" ability in 1209 third to eighth graders (mean age at first timepoint = 10.48, 586 girls, 39.16% Asian, 28.88% Hispanic/Latino, 18.51% White), a process that captures the ability to use grouping cues to access the exact value of a set. Groupitizing improves each year from late childhood to early adolescence (d = 3.29), is a central predictor of math achievement (beta weight = .30), is linked to conceptual processes in mathematics (minimum d = 0.69), and helps explain the dynamic between the ongoing development of non-symbolic number concepts, systemic educational inequities in school associated with SES, and mathematics achievement (minimum beta weight = .11) in ways that explicit symbolic measures may miss.

Spatial number estimation has a higher linear range than temporal number estimation; differential affordances for subdivision might help to explain why

Estimation of visuospatial number typically has a limited linear range that goes well beyond the subitizing range but typically not beyond 20 items without calibration procedures. Three experiments involving a total of 104 undergraduate students, each tested once, sought to determine if the limit on the linear range represented a capacity limitation of a linear accumulator or might be the result of a strategy based on subdividing spatial displays into potentially subitizable subsets. For visual and auditory temporal numbers for a large range of numbers (2–58; Experiment 1), the (unbiased) linear range was found to be quite restricted (three or four items). Using matched linear spatial number stimuli (Experiment 2), the linear range observed extended to about nine or 10 items. Experiment 3 compared estimates when simultaneous two-dimensional spatial number displays were presented briefly, with estimates for identical displays that accumulated over time. The linear range of estimates for accumulating spatial displays reached only 11 items, whereas that for briefly presented displays extended to about 20 items. These results suggest that the limit on the linear range is not simply a capacity limitation in a linear accumulator. Rather, they support the idea that linear spatial number estimation for the range from five to 20 may be based on subdividing the display into a subitizable number of (potentially) subitizable groups, even if those groups are not outwardly marked.

Numerosity perception is tuned to salient environmental features

Numerosity perception is a key ability to guide behavior. However, current models propose that number units encode an abstract representation of numerosity regardless of the non-numerical attributes of the stimuli, suggesting rather coarse environmental tuning. Here we investigated whether numerosity systems spontaneously adapt to all visible items, or to subsets segregated by salient attributes such as color or pitch. We measured perceived numerosity after participants adapted to highly numerous stimuli with color either matched to or different from the test. Matched colors caused a 25% underestimation of numerosity, while different colors had virtually no effect. This was true both for physically different colors, and for the same colors perceived as different, via a color-assimilation illusion. A similar result occurred in the acoustic domain, where adaptation magnitude was halved when the adaptor and test differed in pitch. Taken together, our results support the idea that numerosity perception is selectively tuned to salient environmental attributes.

Unimpaired groupitizing in children and adolescents with dyscalculia

When asked to estimate the number of items in the visual field, neurotypical adults are more precise and rapid if the items are clustered into subgroups compared to when they are randomly distributed. It has been suggested that this phenomenon, termed "groupitizing", relies on the recruitment of arithmetical calculation strategies and subitizing. Here the role of arithmetical skills in groupitizing was investigated by measuring the groupitizing effect (or advantage) in a sample of children and adolescents with and without math learning disability (dyscalculia). The results showed that when items were grouped, both groups of participants showed a similar advantage on sensory precision and response time in numerosity estimates. Correlational analyses confirmed a lack of covariation between groupitizing advantage and math scores. Bayesian statistics on sensory precision sustained the frequentist analyses providing decisive evidence in favor of no groups difference on groupitizing advantage magnitude (LBF = - 0.44) and no correlation with math scores (LBF = - 0.57). The results on response times, although less decisive, were again in favor of the null hypothesis. Overall, the results suggest that the link between groupitizing and mathematical abilities cannot be taken for granted, calling for further investigations on the factors underlying this perceptual phenomenon.

Electrophysiological Signatures of Numerosity Encoding in a Delayed Match-to-Sample Task

The number of elements in a small set of items is appraised in a fast and exact manner, a phenomenon called subitizing. In contrast, humans provide imprecise responses when comparing larger numerosities, with decreasing precision as the number of elements increases. Estimation is thought to rely on a dedicated system for the approximate representation of numerosity. While previous behavioral and neuroimaging studies associate subitizing to a domain-general system related to object tracking and identification, the nature of small numerosity processing is still debated. We investigated the neural processing of numerosity across subitizing and estimation ranges by examining electrophysiological activity during the memory retention period in a delayed numerical match-to-sample task. We also assessed potential differences in the neural signature of numerical magnitude in a fully non-symbolic or cross-format comparison. In line with behavioral performance, we observed modulation of parietal-occipital neural activity as a function of numerosity that differed in two ranges, with distinctive neural signatures of small numerosities showing clear similarities with those observed in visuospatial working memory tasks. We also found differences in neural activity related to numerical information in anticipation of single vs. cross-format comparison, suggesting a top-down modulation of numerical processing. Finally, behavioral results revealed enhanced performance in the mixed-format conditions and a significant correlation between task performance and symbolic mathematical skills. Overall, we provide evidence for distinct mechanisms related to small and large numerosity and differences in numerical encoding based on task demands.

Groupitizing modifies neural coding of numerosity

Numerical estimation of arrays of objects is faster and more accurate when items can be clustered into groups, a phenomenon termed “groupitizing.” Grouping can facilitate segregation into subitizable “chunks,” each easily estimated, then summed. The current study investigates whether spatial grouping of arrays drives specific neural responses during numerical estimation, reflecting strategies such as exact calculation and fact retrieval. Fourteen adults were scanned with fMRI while estimating either the numerosity or shape of arrays of items, either randomly distributed or spatially grouped. Numerosity estimation of both classes of stimuli elicited common activation of a right lateralized frontoparietal network. Grouped stimuli additionally recruited regions in the left hemisphere and bilaterally in the angular gyrus. Multivariate pattern analysis showed that classifiers trained with the pattern of neural activations read out from parietal regions, but not from the primary visual areas, can decode different numerosities both within and across spatial arrangements. The behavioral numerical acuity correlated with the decoding performance of the parietal but not with occipital regions. Overall, this experiment suggests that the estimation of grouped stimuli relies on the approximate number system for numerosity estimation, but additionally recruits regions involved in calculation.