Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-rbxfs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-07T15:56:51.531Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Common mistakes about numerical representations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 August 2009

Mauro Pesenti
Affiliation:
Unité de Neurosciences Cognitives, Département de Psychologie, Université Catholique de Louvain, 1348 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium. mauro.pesenti@uclouvain.behttp://www.nesc.ucl.ac.be/mp/pesentiHomepage.htmmichael.andres@uclouvain.behttp://www.nesc.ucl.ac.be/recherche/projects/number.htm
Michael Andres
Affiliation:
Unité de Neurosciences Cognitives, Département de Psychologie, Université Catholique de Louvain, 1348 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium. mauro.pesenti@uclouvain.behttp://www.nesc.ucl.ac.be/mp/pesentiHomepage.htmmichael.andres@uclouvain.behttp://www.nesc.ucl.ac.be/recherche/projects/number.htm

Abstract

Cohen Kadosh & Walsh (CK&W) argue that recent findings challenge the hypothesis of abstract numerical representations. Here we show that because, like many other authors in the field, they rely on inaccurate definitions of abstract and non-abstract representations, CK&W fail to provide compelling evidence against the abstract view.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable