Heuristics and biases in mental arithmetic: revisiting and reversing operational momentum

2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 138-156 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel Shaki ◽  
Michal Pinhas ◽  
Martin H. Fischer
2020 ◽  
pp. 174702182096766
Author(s):  
Giovanna Mioni ◽  
Martin H Fischer ◽  
Samuel Shaki

There is a debate about whether and why we overestimate addition and underestimate subtraction results (Operational Momentum or OM effect). Spatial-attentional accounts of OM compete with a model which postulates that OM reflects a weighted combination of multiple arithmetic heuristics and biases (AHAB). This study addressed this debate with the theoretically diagnostic distinction between zero problems (e.g., 3 + 0, 3 − 0) and non-zero problems (e.g., 2 + 1, 4 − 1) because AHAB, in contrast to all other accounts, uniquely predicts reverse OM for the latter problem type. In two tests (line-length production and time production), participants indeed produced shorter lines and under-estimated time intervals in non-zero additions compared with subtractions. This predicted interaction between operation and problem type extends OM to non-spatial magnitudes and highlights the strength of AHAB regarding different problem types and modalities during the mental manipulation of magnitudes. They also suggest that OM reflects methodological details, whereas reverse OM is the more representative behavioural signature of mental arithmetic.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maciej Haman ◽  
Hubert Młodzianowski ◽  
Michał Gołȩbiowski

Operational momentum was originally defined as a bias toward underestimating outcomes of subtraction and overestimating outcomes of addition. It was suggested that these estimation biases are due to leftward attentional shift along the mental number-line (spatially organized internal representation of number) in subtraction and rightward shift in addition. This assumes the use of “recycled” mechanisms of spatial attention, including “representational momentum” – a tendency to overestimate future position of a moving object, which compensates for the moving object’s shift during preparation of a reaction. We tested a strong version of this assumption directly, priming two-digit addition and subtraction problems with leftward and rightward motion of varied velocity, as velocity of the tracked object was found to be a factor in determining representational momentum effect size. Operands were subsequently moving across the computer screen, and the participants’ task was to validate an outcome proposed at the end of the event, which was either too low, correct, or too high. We found improved accuracy in detecting too-high outcomes of addition, as well as complex patterns of interactions involving arithmetic operation, outcome option, speed, and direction of motion, in the analysis of reaction times. These results significantly extend previous evidence for the involvement of spatial attention in mental arithmetic, showing movement of the external attention focus as a factor directing internal attention in processing numerical information. As a whole, however, the results are incompatible with expectations derived from the strong analogy between operational and representational momenta. We suggest that the full model may be more complex than simply “moving attention along the mental number-line” as a direct counterpart of attention directed at a moving object.


2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 480-480
Author(s):  
Cuong Pham ◽  
◽  
Bo Pang ◽  
Julia Carins ◽  
Sharyn Rundle-thiele

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document