Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorNúñez, Rafael
dc.contributor.authord'Errico, Francesco
dc.contributor.authorGray, Russell D.
dc.contributor.authorBender, Andrea
dc.date.accessioned2023-04-20T06:23:33Z
dc.date.available2023-04-20T06:23:33Z
dc.date.created2022-01-05T12:56:04Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.issn0140-525X
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/3063915
dc.description.abstractClarke and Beck's defense of the theoretical construct “approximate number system” (ANS) is flawed in serious ways – from biological misconceptions to mathematical naïveté. The authors misunderstand behavioral/psychological technical concepts, such as numerosity and quantical cognition, which they disdain as “exotic.” Additionally, their characterization of rational numbers is blind to the essential role of symbolic reference in the emergence of number.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleThe perception of quantity ain’t number: Missing the primacy of symbolic referenceen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.description.versionacceptedVersionen_US
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2021 The Author(s)en_US
dc.source.articlenumbere199en_US
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextpostprint
cristin.qualitycode2
dc.identifier.doi10.1017/S0140525X21001023
dc.identifier.cristin1975117
dc.source.journalBehavioral and Brain Sciencesen_US
dc.relation.projectERC-European Research Council: 951388en_US
dc.relation.projectNorges forskningsråd: 262618en_US
dc.identifier.citationBehavioral and Brain Sciences. 2021, 44, e199.en_US
dc.source.volume44en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internasjonal
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internasjonal