University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Centre for Mathematical Cognition, School of Science, Loughborough University, United Kingdom; Leibniz-Institut für Wissensmedien, Tübingen, Germany; LEAD Graduate School and Research Network, University of Tübingen, Germany; Individual Development and Adaptive Education Center for Children at Risk, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2021 Sep;219:103366. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2021.103366. Epub 2021 Jul 30.
In 2011, Cohen and Blanc-Goldhammer introduced a new unbounded version of the number line estimation task which they argued to overcome limitations of its 'traditional' bounded counterpart. In line with this proposition, there is increasing evidence that the unbounded number line estimation task may indeed reflect a purer measure of the underlying representation of number magnitude. However, only few studies used this task version yet. In the present literature review, we aimed at evaluating all studies employing the unbounded task version so far to provide an overview of the current state of research. To identify all relevant articles and to evaluate the validity of the task, we conducted a systematic literature search in different databases following the PRISMA guidelines in May 2021. Methodological differences and commonalities of the 16 studies that met the inclusion criteria are discussed here. Our evaluation indicated considerable differences between studies with respect to the number range covered or methodological features such as display size. Additionally, five studies observed evidence for estimation biases in the unbounded task as well. Nevertheless, this review also substantiated the claim that the unbounded task version might indeed be a more valid and purer measure of the mental representation of number magnitude as the results of 14 studies confirmed this hypothesis.
2011 年,Cohen 和 Blanc-Goldhammer 引入了一种新的无界数字线估计任务版本,他们认为这可以克服其“传统”有界版本的局限性。根据这一命题,越来越多的证据表明,无界数字线估计任务确实可能反映了数量大小的基本表示的更纯粹的衡量标准。然而,目前只有少数研究使用了这个任务版本。在本文献综述中,我们旨在评估迄今为止使用无界任务版本的所有研究,以提供当前研究状况的概述。为了确定所有相关文章并评估任务的有效性,我们按照 PRISMA 指南于 2021 年 5 月在不同的数据库中进行了系统的文献搜索。这里讨论了符合纳入标准的 16 项研究的方法学差异和共同点。我们的评估表明,在涵盖的数字范围或显示大小等方法学特征方面,研究之间存在相当大的差异。此外,五项研究还观察到无界任务中存在估计偏差的证据。然而,本综述也证实了无界任务版本确实可能是数量大小的心理表示的更有效和更纯粹的衡量标准的说法,因为 14 项研究证实了这一假设。