Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (3-4):351-352 (2009)

Abstract
We challenge the arguments of Cohen Kadosh & Walsh (CK&W) on two grounds. First, interactions between number form (e.g., notation, format, modality) and an experimental factor do not show that the notations/formats/modalities are processed separately. Second, we discuss evidence that numbers are coded abstractly, also when not required by task demands and processed unintentionally, thus challenging the authors' dual-code account
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1017/S0140525X09990872
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 71,512
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Localist but Distributed Representations.Stephen Grossberg - 2000 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (4):478-479.
Priming Effects and Free Will.Ezio Di Nucci - 2012 - International Journal of Philosophical Studies 20 (5):725-734.
On the Cofinality of Ultrapowers.Andreas Blass & Heike Mildenberger - 1999 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 64 (2):727-736.
The Hanf Number of Second Order Logic.K. Jon Barwise - 1972 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 37 (3):588-594.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2013-10-27

Total views
10 ( #903,856 of 2,520,896 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #405,457 of 2,520,896 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes