People also looked at人们也查看了

The Attentional Spatial Numerical Association of Response Codes (Att-SNARC) effect has shown that number perception induces shifts in spatial attention (Fischer et al., 2003; Dodd et al., 2008). However, many replications were attempted and they often failed. In the present study, we investigated whether the Att-SNARC effect can be found for numbers in different notations: months in Arabic form, Simplified Chinese form, Traditional Chinese form (includes numerical ordinal information) and in Chinese non-numerical form (an ordinal sequence). By varying the cognitive task, we also examined whether the effect is a consequence of automatic perceptual processing. In Experiment 1, an Att-SNARC effect was observed for numbers regardless of notation. In Experiment 2 (order-irrelevant task) and Experiment 3 (order-relevant task), the effect was also found consistently for months in Arabic form, Simplified Chinese form, and Traditional Chinese form. This effect was not observed for months in Chinese non-numerical form in Experiment 3. These results show that number and numerical sequence perception automatically causes a spatial shift of attention. Our study provides positive evidence for the Att-SNARC effect and indicates that the effect can generalize to other numerical ordinal sequences that contain numeric information.
注意空间数字反应码关联（Att-SNARC）效应表明，数字感知会诱导空间注意力的转移（Fischer 等，2003；Dodd 等，2008）。然而，许多重复实验尝试往往失败了。在本研究中，我们探讨了不同表示法的数字是否能产生 Att-SNARC 效应：阿拉伯形式的月份、简体中文形式的月份、繁体中文形式的月份（包含数字序数信息）和中文非数字形式（一个序数序列）。通过改变认知任务，我们还考察了该效应是否是自动感知处理的结果。在实验 1 中，无论表示法如何，都观察到了 Att-SNARC 效应。在实验 2（顺序无关任务）和实验 3（顺序相关任务）中，对于阿拉伯形式、简体中文形式和繁体中文形式的月份，该效应也是一致地被发现。而在实验 3 中，对于中文非数字形式的月份，没有观察到这种效应。这些结果表明，数字和数字序列的感知自动导致了空间注意力的转移。 我们的研究为 Att-SNARC 效应提供了积极的证据，并表明该效应可以推广到包含数字信息的其他数值序数序列。

Introduction 绪论

There is a strong association between number and space. The spatial-numerical association of response codes (SNARC, Dehaene et al., 1993) effect has been found in a range of studies, showing that when participants make judgments of number magnitude or parity, left-sided response are faster for low-magnitude numbers, whereas right-sided responses are faster for high-magnitude numbers (Fias and Fischer, 2005; Van Dijck et al., 2012). The spatial coding of numbers seems to be automatic (Mapelli et al., 2003; Casarotti et al., 2007). Some researchers believe that these effects can be explained by the putative Mental Number Line (MNL; Restle, 1970; Dehaene et al., 1993; Fischer et al., 2003), a mental representation of number magnitude ordered from left to right in space in which relatively small numbers are associated with left and relatively large numbers with right. According to this view, the effect arises because of the spatial correspondence between the inherent position of the number on the MNL and the position of response keys (Fattorini et al., 2015; Pellegrino et al., 2019). Other researchers claim that reading habits (Dehaene et al., 1993; Shaki et al., 2009; Fischer et al., 2010; Fischer and Brugger, 2011; Göbel et al., 2011) and finger counting (Fischer, 2008; Eerland et al., 2011; Fischer and Brugger, 2011; Lindemann et al., 2011) also contribute to the effect.
数字和空间之间存在强烈的关联。空间-数字反应代码关联效应（SNARC，Dehaene 等，1993）在一系列研究中被发现，显示当参与者对数字大小或奇偶性进行判断时，左侧反应对于小数值更快，而右侧反应对于大数值更快（Fias 和 Fischer，2005；Van Dijck 等，2012）。数字的空间编码似乎是自动的（Mapelli 等，2003；Casarotti 等，2007）。一些研究人员认为这些效应可以通过假设的心理数字线（MNL；Restle，1970；Dehaene 等，1993；Fischer 等，2003）来解释，这是一种从左到右排列的数字大小的心理表征，在这种表征中小数与左侧相关，大数与右侧相关。根据这一观点，效应是由于数字在 MNL 上的固有位置与反应键位置之间的空间对应关系（Fattorini 等，2015；Pellegrino 等，2019）。其他研究人员声称阅读习惯（Dehaene 等，1993；Shaki 等，（2009；Fischer 等，2010；Fischer 和 Brugger，2011；Göbel 等，2011）以及手指计数（Fischer，2008；Eerland 等，2011；Fischer 和 Brugger，2011；Lindemann 等，2011）也对这一效应有所贡献。

Numerous studies regarding space-number associations have been conducted after the classic SNARC effect was found. Fischer et al. (2003) demonstrated that mere observation of numbers causes a shift in covert attention to the left or right side. Perceiving small numbers automatically shifts attention to the left side of space whereas perceiving large numbers automatically shifts attention to the right side of space. This finding was called the Attentional SNARC (Att-SNARC; Fischer et al., 2003; Dodd et al., 2008; Van Dijck et al., 2014) effect. In Table 1, we provide a review of the classic studies on SNARC and Att-SNARC effects.
许多关于空间-数字关联的研究在经典的 SNARC 效应被发现后进行。Fischer 等（2003）证明，仅仅观察数字就会导致注意力向左或向右的偏移。感知小数会自动将注意力转移到空间的左侧，而感知大数则会自动将注意力转移到空间的右侧。这一发现被称为注意 SNARC（Att-SNARC；Fischer 等，2003；Dodd 等，2008；Van Dijck 等，2014）效应。在表 1 中，我们回顾了关于 SNARC 和 Att-SNARC 效应的经典研究。

TABLE 1 表 1

Table 1. A review of the classic studies on SNARC and Att-SNARC.
表 1. 对 SNARC 和 Att-SNARC 的经典研究的回顾。

Many studies have attempted to replicate Fischer et al.’s (2003) finding, but they have had mixed success (Galfano et al., 2006; Ristic et al., 2006; Dodd et al., 2008; Bonato et al., 2009; Van Dijck et al., 2014; Zanolie and Pecher, 2014; Fattorini et al., 2015; Pellegrino et al., 2019). Dodd et al. (2008) extended the Att-SNARC effect and investigated whether it generalizes to other ordinal sequences such as letters, days, and months. They observed an Att-SNARC effect for number stimuli, indicating that numbers can automatically cause spatial shifts of attention. However, the effect was found in ordinal sequences only when participants made an ordinally relevant decision about the stimuli after target detection. Based on these results they concluded that (1) the SNARC effect is sensitive to numerical and non-numeral ordinal stimulus information, whereas the Att-SNARC effect is number-specific; and (2) the SNARC effect reflects response code activation, whereas the Att-SNARC effect reflects changes in visual processing effects due to the allocation of spatial attention.
许多研究试图复制 Fischer 等人（2003）的发现，但结果喜忧参半（Galfano 等人，2006；Ristic 等人，2006；Dodd 等人，2008；Bonato 等人，2009；Van Dijck 等人，2014；Zanolie 和 Pecher，2014；Fattorini 等人，2015；Pellegrino 等人，2019）。Dodd 等人（2008）扩展了 Att-SNARC 效应，并研究了其是否推广到其他序数序列，如字母、日期和月份。他们观察到数字刺激的 Att-SNARC 效应，表明数字可以自动引起注意力的空间偏移。然而，这种效应仅在参与者在目标检测后对刺激物做出序数相关的决策时出现。基于这些结果，他们得出结论：（1）SNARC 效应对数字和非数字序数刺激信息敏感，而 Att-SNARC 效应是特定于数字的；（2）SNARC 效应反映了响应编码激活，而 Att-SNARC 效应反映了由于空间注意力分配引起的视觉处理效果的变化。

In a study investigating whether Att-SNARC effects are modulated by the relevance of magnitude information, Zanolie and Pecher (2014) provided mixed results for the idea that perceiving a number induces a shift of visual spatial attention. Spatial representations associated with number meaning were activated and produced a corresponding shift in spatial attention only when participants actively processed number magnitude information. The authors suggested that activation of the MNL is not automatic and might be modulated by the relevance of magnitude information. The type of cognitive processing assigned to numerical cues can influence the presence of the Att-SNARC effect. Indeed, many studies have indicated that SNARC and SNARC-like effects are influenced by the type of cognitive task. Prpic et al. (2016) suggested that information about order and magnitude causing SNARC-like effects may depend on task demands. In their research, participants seemed more likely to process the order of the stimuli in direct tasks and to automatically process the magnitude of the stimuli in indirect tasks. Similarly, Macnamara et al.’s (2018) research showed that the SNARC-like effects were observed when participants performed a direct task, suggesting that the effect is not caused by an automatic process. The SNARC and SNARC-like effects that were observed in direct/relevant tasks were taken as evidence that spatial representations are not automatically activated. Some authors (Galfano et al., 2006; Ristic et al., 2006) have replicated the Att-SNARC effect but have also suggested that it is driven by strategic top-down factors. There is no consensus on whether the Att-SNARC effect can be produced automatically. Moreover, in a recent investigation to reassess the consistency and reliability of the Att-SNARC effect (Fattorini et al., 2015; Pellegrino et al., 2019), results showed no automatic link between the representation of space and the representation of number magnitude.
在一项研究中，Zanolie 和 Pecher (2014) 调查了 Att-SNARC 效应是否受数字信息相关性调节，结果对于感知数字是否会引发视觉空间注意力的转移提供了混合的结果。只有当参与者积极处理数字大小信息时，与数字意义相关的空间表征才会被激活，并产生相应的位置注意力转移。作者认为，MNL 的激活并非自动的，可能会受到数字信息相关性的影响。分配给数字线索的认知加工类型可以影响 Att-SNARC 效应的存在。实际上，许多研究表明 SNARC 和类似 SNARC 的效应会受到认知任务类型的影响。Prpic 等人 (2016) 认为引起 SNARC 类似效应的顺序和大小信息可能取决于任务需求。在他们的研究中，参与者在直接任务中似乎更倾向于处理刺激的顺序，在间接任务中则自动处理刺激的大小。同样地，Macnamara 等人。’s (2018) 的研究显示，当参与者执行直接任务时观察到了 SNARC 类效应，这表明该效应并非由自动过程引起。在直接/相关任务中观察到的 SNARC 和 SNARC 类效应被认为是空间表征不是自动激活的证据。一些作者（Galfano 等，2006；Ristic 等，2006）复制了 Att-SNARC 效应，但也提出该效应是由策略性的自上而下的因素驱动的。关于 Att-SNARC 效应是否可以自动产生，目前还没有共识。此外，在最近重新评估 Att-SNARC 效应一致性和可靠性的研究中（Fattorini 等，2015；Pellegrino 等，2019），结果表明空间表征和数字大小表征之间没有自动联系。

On the whole, it is unclear from previous studies whether numerical sequences and non-numerical ordinal sequences cause Att-SNARC effects. When effects are produced, is this a consequence of automatic perceptual processes or is this driven by strategic top-down factors?
总体而言，从前人的研究中尚不清楚数字序列和非数字序数序列是否会导致 Att-SNARC 效应。当产生效应时，这是自动感知过程的结果，还是由战略性的自上而下因素驱动的？

The SNARC effect is not limited to Arabic numbers, as a similar effect is also elicited by ordinal stimuli such as letters, days, months (Gevers et al., 2003, 2004); non-numerical magnitudes such as the physical size of pictorial surfaces (Prpic et al., 2018); and others such as negative numbers, auditory numbers, or dice patterns (Fischer, 2003; Nuerk et al., 2005). More recently, SNARC and SNARC-like effects have been observed with Chinese characters (Liu et al., 2004, 2011; Hung et al., 2008; Yang et al., 2014; Kopiske et al., 2016; Zhao et al., 2018). To our knowledge, however, there has been only one published report of an Att-SNARC effect for numbers in different notations (Kong et al., 2012), and research has not yet addressed the effect for Chinese months. Therefore, in the current study, we examine the Att-SNARC effect using different notations of numbers and Chinese months as materials.
SNARC 效应不仅限于阿拉伯数字，类似的效应也由序数刺激物（如字母、星期、月份）（Gevers 等，2003，2004）、非数字大小（如图像表面的物理尺寸）（Prpic 等，2018）和其他如负数、听觉数字或骰子图案（Fischer，2003；Nuerk 等，2005）所引发。最近，SNARC 和类似 SNARC 的效应已在汉字中观察到（Liu 等，2004，2011；Hung 等，2008；Yang 等，2014；Kopiske 等，2016；Zhao 等，2018）。然而，据我们所知，目前只有一份关于不同记数法数字的 Att-SNARC 效应的已发表报告（Kong 等，2012），并且研究尚未涉及中国月份的效应。因此，在本研究中，我们使用不同记数法的数字和中国月份作为材料来考察 Att-SNARC 效应。

The present study adopted the attention paradigm used by Dodd et al. (2008) to address two main issues. First, we investigated whether the Att-SNARC effect can be found for numbers, numerical Chinese months, and non-numerical Chinese months regardless of the notation. This should allow us to verify the reliability of the Att-SNARC effect and whether it can generalize to numerical and non-numerical ordinal sequences. Second, by varying the cognitive task, we investigated whether the Att-SNARC effect is a consequence of automatic perceptual processing, or driven by top-down processing. If the Att-SNARC is found in an order-irrelevant task, then it would indicate that the stimuli automatically cause spatial shifts of attention in the visual field. In contrast, if the Att-SNARC effect is observed only when participants are required to make an order-relevant decision, then it would indicate that the effect is influenced by top-down endogenous processes. Addressing these issues should help better understand the cognitive mechanism of the association between number magnitude and special attention.
本研究采用了 Dodd 等人（2008）使用的注意力范式来解决两个主要问题。首先，我们探讨了无论表示方式如何，Att-SNARC 效应是否能在数字、数值的中文月份和非数值的中文月份中被发现。这将使我们能够验证 Att-SNARC 效应的可靠性及其是否能推广到数值和非数值的序数序列。其次，通过改变认知任务，我们探讨了 Att-SNARC 效应是由自动感知处理引起的，还是由自上而下的加工驱动的。如果在与顺序无关的任务中发现了 Att-SNARC 效应，则表明刺激会在视域中自动引起注意的空间偏移。相反，如果仅当参与者需要做出与顺序相关的决策时才观察到 Att-SNARC 效应，则表明该效应受到自上而下的内源性过程的影响。解决这些问题将有助于更好地理解数字大小与空间注意关联的认知机制。

Experiment 1 实验 1

The purpose of Experiment 1 was to investigate whether perceiving numbers in Arabic form, in Simplified Chinese form, and in Traditional Chinese form automatically causes an Att-SNARC effect.
实验 1 的目的是研究以阿拉伯数字、简体中文数字和繁体中文数字形式感知数字是否自动导致 Att-SNARC 效应。

Methods 方法

Participants 参与者

Thirty undergraduate students were recruited at South China Normal University (22 females, 8 males, mean age = 20.80 ± 2.68 years) and volunteered to participate for an agreed pay of 15 RMB. All students were right-handed Chinese native speakers and naive to the purpose of the experiment. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of South China Normal University.
招募了三十名华南师范大学的本科生（22 名女性，8 名男性，平均年龄 = 20.80 ± 2.68 岁），他们自愿参与实验，并同意支付 15 元人民币。所有学生均为右利手的母语为中文的人，对实验目的不知情。该研究得到了华南师范大学伦理审查委员会的批准。

Materials 材料

The stimulus numbers (one, two, eight, nine) were presented in three forms (see Table 2), including Arabic form [1 (yī), 2 (èr), 8 (bā), 9 (jiǔ)], numbers in Simplified Chinese form [1 (yī), 2 (èr), 8 (bā), 9 (jiǔ)], numbers in Simplified Chinese form [一 (yī), 二 (èr), 八 (bā), 九 (jiǔ)] and numbers in Traditional Chinese form [(壹 (yī), 貳 (èr), 捌 (bā), 玖 (jiǔ)]. Character size was 24 points (Arabic) or 22 points (Chinese). Each numerical value was equally likely to occur in each of the three character types. A 17-inch color 1024 × 768 VGA computer monitor (at 100 Hz) connected to a Pentium IV PC system running E-prime 1.0 was used to present stimuli and record participant responses. A single white text stimulus was presented in the center of the monitor against a black background. The numbers subtended a visual angle of approximately 0.8° in height.
刺激数字（一、二、八、九）以三种形式呈现（见表 2），包括阿拉伯数字形式[1（yī）、2（èr）、8（bā）、9（jiǔ）]，简体中文数字形式[1（yī）、2（èr）、8（bā）、9（jiǔ）]，简体中文字符形式[一（yī）、二（èr）、八（bā）、九（jiǔ）]和繁体中文字符形式[壹（yī）、貳（èr）、捌（bā）、玖（jiǔ）]。字符大小为 24 号（阿拉伯数字）或 22 号（中文）。每种数值在三种字符类型中出现的概率相等。使用连接到运行 E-prime 1.0 的 Pentium IV PC 系统的 17 英寸彩色 1024×768 VGA 电脑显示器（100 Hz）来呈现刺激并记录参与者反应。单个白色文本刺激在黑色背景下的屏幕中心呈现。这些数字的高度大约占据 0.8°的视角。

TABLE 2 表 2

Table 2. The stimuli used in Experiment 1: numbers in different forms.
表 2. 实验 1 中使用的刺激：不同形式的数字。

Procedure 程序

The present study adopted the same procedure employed by Dodd et al. (2008), except that we used a fixed point “∙” instead of fixation cross “+” to avoid participants regarding the fixation cross “+” as the Simplified Chinese number “十” (which means “ten” in English). The procedure is illustrated in Figure 1. Participants were seated approximately 60 cm from the computer screen. First, a fixation point (white, 0.3° in diameter) was presented for 500 ms, followed by one of three cue types for 300 ms. Before the experiment, participants were told that the cues presented at the fixation were irrelevant and uninformative to target detection. Next, the cue was replaced by a fixation point with a variable stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) of 250, 500, and 750 ms before target presentation (a white circle subtending 0.8°) so that participants could not anticipate when and where the target would appear. Each type of SOA was equally likely to appear in each trial. Participants were asked to press the space bar as quickly as possible in response to the target appearing in one of two white unfilled squares (each 1° in diameter and 4° to the left and right side of the original fixation point). The probability of target occurrence was equally likely in each square in each trial, and it remained on the screen until the participant responded.
本研究采用了 Dodd 等人（2008）使用的方法，只是我们使用了一个固定点“∙”而不是固定十字“+”，以避免参与者将固定十字“+”视为中文数字“十”（英文意为“十”）。该程序在图 1 中说明。参与者坐在距离电脑屏幕约 60 厘米的位置。首先，一个固定点（白色，直径 0.3°）显示 500 毫秒，接着是三种提示之一，持续 300 毫秒。在实验前，参与者被告知出现在固定点的提示与目标检测无关且无信息量。接下来，提示被一个固定点取代，刺激呈现异步时间（SOA）分别为 250、500 和 750 毫秒，然后呈现目标（一个白色的圆圈，大小为 0.8°），使得参与者无法预测目标出现的时间和位置。每种类型的 SOA 在每个试验中出现的可能性相同。要求参与者在目标出现在两个白色空心方块中的一个时尽快按下空格键（每个方块直径 1°，分别位于原始固定点左侧和右侧 4°处）。 目标出现的概率在每次试验的每个方格中是相等的，并且它会一直留在屏幕上直到参与者做出反应。

FIGURE 1 图 1

Figure 1. Trial sequence used in Experiment 1.
图 1. 实验 1 中使用的试验序列。

The experiment consisted of three randomized blocks of 288 experimental trials (96 trials in each block). 20 practice trials were administered before three blocks. The only difference between block was the type of cue stimuli presented at the fixation (numbers in Arabic, Simplified Chinese, or Traditional Chinese form). Short breaks were allowed after every 96 trials. The entire task lasted approximately 10–15 minutes.
实验由三个随机区组组成，每个区组包含 288 个试验（每个区组 96 个试验）。在三个区组之前进行了 20 个练习试验。各区组之间的唯一差异是在固定点呈现的提示刺激的类型（阿拉伯数字、简体中文或繁体中文形式）。每 96 个试验后允许短暂休息。整个任务持续大约 10-15 分钟。

Results 结果

The analysis was performed according to Dodd et al. (2008). For every participant in each condition, the trials with mean reaction times (RTs) shorter than 100 ms or longer than 1,000 ms were considered errors, accounting for 1.6% of the trials. These data were discarded from subsequent analyses. In Table 3, mean RTs and standard deviations for targets appearing at each target location are presented as a function of cue condition are presented in Table 3. Figure 2 presents the mean RTs and standard deviations of target detection at each SOA under both congruent (i.e., targets appearing on the left when cues were small numbers: 1/一/壹; 2/二/贰) conditions.
分析按照 Dodd 等人（2008）的方法进行。在每个条件下的每个参与者中，平均反应时间（RTs）短于 100 毫秒或长于 1,000 毫秒的试次被视为错误，占试次的 1.6%。这些数据被排除在后续分析之外。表 3 展示了目标出现在每个目标位置时的平均 RTs 和标准差作为线索条件的函数。图 2 展示了在两个一致条件（即，当线索为小数字：1/一/壹；2/二/贰时，目标出现在左侧）下的每个 SOA 的目标检测平均 RTs 和标准差。

TABLE 3 表 3

Table 3. Experiment 1-mean RTs (in ms) and standard deviations for targets appearing at each possible location as a function of cue type and SOA.
表 3. 实验 1-每个可能位置上目标出现的平均反应时间（毫秒）和标准差，按线索类型和 SOA 划分。

FIGURE 2 图 2

Figure 2. Mean RTs and standard deviations of target detection at each SOA under both congruent and incongruent conditions. Panel (A) represents the result of numbers in Arabic form, panel (B) represents the result of numbers in Simplified Chinese form, and panel (C) represents the result of numbers in Traditional Chinese form.
图 2. 在一致和不一致条件下，每个 SOA 下的目标检测平均反应时间和标准差。面板（A）表示阿拉伯数字的结果，面板（B）表示简体中文数字的结果，面板（C）表示繁体中文数字的结果。

Numbers in Arabic Form
阿拉伯形式的数字

Mean RTs were analyzed with a 2 (Cue Type: small/large number) × 2 (Target Location: left/right target) × 3 (SOA: 250, 500, 750 ms) ANOVA. There was a significant main effect of SOA, F(2,58) = 92.62, p < 0.001, η²_p = 0.762, responses were faster at longer SOAs. There were no other significant main effects of Cue Type or Target Location, F(1,29) = 0.08, p = 0.786, η²_p = 0.003 and F(1,29) = 0.20, p = 0.659, η²_p = 0.007, respectively. The only other significant effect was the interaction between Cue Type and Target Location, F(1,29) = 5.42, p = 0.027, η²_p = 0.158. Post hoc t-tests were conducted to determine at which SOAs an effect was present. We found a Att-SNARC effect at the 500 ms SOA for both the left and right target locations: left targets were detected faster than right targets when a small number was presented, t(29) = −2.36, p < 0.05; right targets were detected faster than left targets when a large number was presented, t(29) = 1.75, p = 0.09. Results of post hoc t-test of Experiment 1 in different SOAs and forms please see Supplementary Table S1.
对平均反应时间（RTs）进行了 2（线索类型：小数/大数）× 2（目标位置：左侧/右侧目标）× 3（SOA：250、500、750 毫秒）的方差分析（ANOVA）。SOA 的主效应显著，F(2,58) = 92.62, p < 0.001, η ² _p = 0.762，表明在较长的 SOA 下反应更快。线索类型或目标位置的主效应均不显著，F(1,29) = 0.08, p = 0.786, η ² _p = 0.003 和 F(1,29) = 0.20, p = 0.659, η ² _p = 0.007。唯一显著的效应是线索类型和目标位置之间的交互作用，F(1,29) = 5.42, p = 0.027, η ² _p = 0.158。进行了事后 t 检验以确定在哪些 SOA 下存在效应。我们发现在 500 毫秒 SOA 时，对于左右目标位置都存在 Att-SNARC 效应：当呈现小数时，左侧目标比右侧目标检测得更快，t(29) = −2.36, p < 0.05；当呈现大数时，右侧目标比左侧目标检测得更快，t(29) = 1.75, p = 0.09。实验 1 在不同 SOA 和形式下的事后 t 检验结果请参见补充表 S1。

However, the interaction between Cue Type and SOA was not significant, F(2,58) = 1.48, p = 0.236, η²_p = 0.049. The interaction between Target Location and SOA was not significant, F(2,58) = 0.73, p = 0.485, η²_p = 0.025. The three-way interaction between Cue Type, Target Location, and SOA was not significant, F(2,58) = 1.64, p = 0.203, η²_p = 0.054.
然而，Cue Type 和 SOA 之间的交互作用不显著，F(2,58) = 1.48, p = 0.236, η ² _p = 0.049。Target Location 和 SOA 之间的交互作用不显著，F(2,58) = 0.73, p = 0.485, η ² _p = 0.025。Cue Type、Target Location 和 SOA 之间的三重交互作用不显著，F(2,58) = 1.64, p = 0.203, η ² _p = 0.054。

Numbers in Simplified Chinese Form
数字的简体中文形式

Mean RTs were analyzed with a 2 (Cue Type: small/large number) × 2 (Target Location: left/right target) × 3 (SOA: 250, 500, 750 ms) ANOVA. There was a significant main effect of SOA, F(2,58) = 81.45, p < 0.001, η²_p = 0.737, with faster responses at longer SOAs. The main effects for Cue Type and Target Location were not significant (Fs < 1). As expected, we found a significant interaction effect between Cue Type and Target Location, F(1,29) = 4.71, p = 0.038, η²_p = 0.140. Post hoc t-tests showed that the Att-SNARC effect was significant at the 500 ms SOA for both the left and right target locations, t(29) = -2.09, p < 0.05 and t(29) = 2.43, p < 0.05 respectively.
对平均反应时间（RTs）进行了 2（线索类型：小数/大数）× 2（目标位置：左/右目标）× 3（SOA：250、500、750 毫秒）的方差分析（ANOVA）。SOA 的主要效应显著，F(2,58) = 81.45, p < 0.001, η ² _p = 0.737，表明 SOA 较长时反应速度更快。线索类型和目标位置的主要效应不显著（Fs < 1）。正如预期的那样，我们发现了线索类型和目标位置之间的显著交互作用，F(1,29) = 4.71, p = 0.038, η ² _p = 0.140。事后 t 检验显示，在 500 毫秒 SOA 下，左目标位置和右目标位置的 Att-SNARC 效应均显著，t(29) = -2.09, p < 0.05 和 t(29) = 2.43, p < 0.05。

However, the interaction between Cue Type and SOA was not significant, F(2,58) = 0.69, p = 0.505, η²_p = 0. 023. The interaction between Target Location and SOA was not significant, F(2,58) = 0.15, p = 0.863, η²_p = 0.005. The three-way interaction between Cue Type, Target Location, and SOA was not significant, F(2,58) = 2.52, p = 0.089, η²_p = 0.080.
然而，线索类型与 SOA 之间的交互作用不显著，F(2,58) = 0.69, p = 0.505, η ² _p = 0.023。目标位置与 SOA 之间的交互作用不显著，F(2,58) = 0.15, p = 0.863, η ² _p = 0.005。线索类型、目标位置和 SOA 之间的三重交互作用不显著，F(2,58) = 2.52, p = 0.089, η ² _p = 0.080。

Numbers in Traditional Chinese Form
Numbers in Traditional Chinese Form （传统中文形式的数字）

Mean RTs were analyzed with a 2 (Cue Type: small/large number) × 2 (Target Location: left/right target) × 3 (SOA: 250, 500, 750 ms) ANOVA. We found a main effect for SOA, F(2,58) = 106.26, p < 0.001, η²_p = 0.786, with faster responses at longer SOAs. The main effects for Cue Type and Target Location were not significant (Fs < 1). The only other significant effect was the interaction between Cue Type and Target Location: F(1,29) = 6.07, p = 0.020, η²_p = 0.173. Post hoc t-test showed a significant Att-SNARC effect at the 500 ms SOA for both the left and right target locations, t(29) = -2.10, p < 0.05 and t(29) = 2.18, p < 0.05, respectively.
对平均反应时间（RTs）进行了 2（线索类型：小数/大数）× 2（目标位置：左/右目标）× 3（SOA：250、500、750 毫秒）的方差分析（ANOVA）。我们发现了 SOA 的主要效应，F(2,58) = 106.26, p < 0.001, η ² _p = 0.786，即在较长的 SOA 下反应更快。线索类型和目标位置的主要效应不显著（Fs < 1）。唯一其他显著的效应是线索类型与目标位置之间的交互作用：F(1,29) = 6.07, p = 0.020, η ² _p = 0.173。事后 t 检验显示，在 500 毫秒 SOA 时，左右目标位置均存在显著的 Att-SNARC 效应，t(29) = -2.10, p < 0.05 和 t(29) = 2.18, p < 0.05。

However, the interaction between Cue Type and SOA was not significant, F(2,58) = 1.53, p = 0.226, η²_p = 0.050. The interaction between Target Location and SOA was not significant, F(2,58) = 0.08, p = 0.924, η²_p = 0.003. The three-way interaction between Cue Type, Target Location, and SOA was not significant, F(2,58) = 2.12, p = 0.129, η²_p = 0.068.
然而，Cue Type 和 SOA 之间的交互作用不显著，F(2,58) = 1.53, p = 0.226, η ² _p = 0.050。Target Location 和 SOA 之间的交互作用不显著，F(2,58) = 0.08, p = 0.924, η ² _p = 0.003。Cue Type、Target Location 和 SOA 之间的三重交互作用不显著，F(2,58) = 2.12, p = 0.129, η ² _p = 0.068。

Interim Discussion 中期讨论

In Experiment 1, an Att-SNARC effect was observed for numbers regardless of the format. Spatial attention was affected by number magnitude. Perceiving small numbers (1/一/壹; 2/二/贰) automatically shifts attention to the left whereas perceiving large numbers (8/八/捌, 9/九/玖) automatically shifts attention to the right. As the effect appeared with all three numerical notations (Arabic, Simplified Chinese, and Traditional Chinese forms), the form of stimulus may not affect the Att-SNARC effect whereas information about magnitude plays an important role in numerical processing during the Att-SNARC effect. The effect is expected to be evoked by the concept instead of the presentation form. In Experiment 2, we further investigated whether the Att-SNARC effect can generalize to other ordinal numerical sequences.
在实验 1 中，无论数字格式如何，观察到了 Att-SNARC 效应。空间注意力受到数字大小的影响。感知小数（1/一/壹；2/二/贰）会自动将注意力转移到左侧，而感知大数（8/八/捌，9/九/玖）则会自动将注意力转移到右侧。由于这种效应在三种数字表示法（阿拉伯数字、简体中文和繁体中文形式）中都出现，因此刺激的形式可能不会影响 Att-SNARC 效应，而关于大小的信息在 Att-SNARC 效应期间的数值处理中起重要作用。该效应预计是由概念而非呈现形式引发的。在实验 2 中，我们进一步研究了 Att-SNARC 效应是否可以推广到其他序数序列。

Experiment 2 实验 2

The purpose of Experiment 2 was to investigate whether months in different forms can automatically cause an Att-SNARC effect in the same way as numbers.
实验 2 的目的是研究不同形式的月份是否能像数字一样自动引起 Att-SNARC 效应。

Method 方法

Participants 参与者

Thirty undergraduate students were recruited at South China Normal University (20 females, 10 males, mean age = 20.13 ± 2.40 years) and volunteered to participate for an agreed pay of 15 RMB. Participants were different from Experiment 1. All students were right-handed Chinese native speakers and naive to the purpose of the experiment. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of South China Normal University.
招募了三十名华南师范大学的本科生（20 名女性，10 名男性，平均年龄 = 20.13 ± 2.40 岁），他们自愿参与实验，并同意支付 15 元人民币。参与者与实验 1 不同。所有学生均为右手惯用的母语为中文的人，并且对实验目的不知情。该研究得到了华南师范大学伦理审查委员会的批准。

Materials 材料

Same as in Dodd et al.’s (2008) research, we chose January, February, August, and September as stimuli (see Table 4). The stimuli were presented in Arabic form [1月(yī yuè), 2月(èr yuè), 8月(bā yuè), 9月(jiǔ yuè)], Simplified Chinese form [一月(yī yuè), 二月(èr yuè), 八月(bā yuè), 九月(jiǔ yuè)], and Traditional Chinese form [壹月(yī yuè), 贰月(èr yuè), 捌月(bā yuè), 玖月(jiǔ yuè)]. To avoid differences in the visual angle of the Arabic months and Chinese numerical months, the Arabic months were presented in Arial font (24 points in size), and the Chinese character month (月) was in boldface (22 points in size). Chinese numerical months were in boldface (22 points in size).
与 Dodd 等人（2008）的研究相同，我们选择了 1 月、2 月、8 月和 9 月作为刺激（见表 4）。刺激以阿拉伯形式[1 月(yī yuè), 2 月(èr yuè), 8 月(bā yuè), 9 月(jiǔ yuè)]、简体中文形式[一月(yī yuè), 二月(èr yuè), 八月(bā yuè), 九月(jiǔ yuè)]和繁体中文形式[壹月(yī yuè), 贰月(èr yuè), 捌月(bā yuè), 玖月(jiǔ yuè)]呈现。为了避免阿拉伯月份和中文数字月份在视角上的差异，阿拉伯月份使用 Arial 字体（24 号大小），中文“月”字加粗（22 号大小）。中文数字月份也加粗（22 号大小）。

TABLE 4 表 4

Table 4. The stimuli used in Experiment 2 and Experiment 3: months in different forms.
表 4. 在实验 2 和实验 3 中使用的刺激：不同形式的月份。

Procedure 程序

The apparatus and procedure for Experiment 2 were identical to those in Experiment 1. The only difference between these experiments was the type of cue stimuli presented at central fixation.
实验 2 的装置和程序与实验 1 相同。这两个实验之间的唯一差异是呈现在中央固定点的提示刺激的类型。

Results 结果

As in Experiment 1, trials with RTs shorter than 100 ms or longer than 1,000 ms were considered errors, accounting for 2.3% of all trials. These data were discarded from subsequent analyses. In Table 5, mean RTs and standard deviations for targets appearing at each target location are presented as a function of cue condition. Figure 3 presents the mean RTs and standard deviations of target detection at each SOA under both congruent (i.e., targets appearing on the left when cues were months from the beginning of the year: 1月/一月/壹月; 2月/二月/贰月) and incongruent (i.e., targets appearing on the left when cues were months toward the end of the year: 8月/八月/捌月; 9月/九月/玖月) conditions.
与实验 1 相同，将反应时间（RT）短于 100 毫秒或长于 1,000 毫秒的试次视为错误，占所有试次的 2.3%。这些数据被排除在后续分析之外。表 5 展示了在不同线索条件下，目标出现在每个目标位置的平均反应时间和标准差。图 3 展示了在一致条件（即，当线索为年初月份时目标出现在左侧：1 月/一月/壹月；2 月/二月/贰月）和不一致条件（即，当线索为年末月份时目标出现在左侧：8 月/八月/捌月；9 月/九月/玖月）下各个刺激呈现时间（SOA）的平均反应时间和标准差。

TABLE 5 表 5

Table 5. Experiment 2–mean RTs (in ms) and standard deviations for targets appearing at each possible location as a function of cue type and SOA.
表 5. 实验 2——目标出现在每个可能位置时的平均反应时间（毫秒）和标准差，按线索类型和 SOA 划分。

FIGURE 3 图 3

Figure 3. Mean RTs and standard deviations of the target detection at each SOA under both congruent and incongruent conditions. Panel (A) represents the result of months in Arabic form, panel (B) represents the result of months in Simplified Chinese form, panel (C) represents the result of months in Traditional Chinese form.
图 3. 在一致和不一致条件下，每个 SOA 下的平均反应时间和标准差。图(A)表示阿拉伯数字形式的月份结果，图(B)表示简体中文形式的月份结果，图(C)表示繁体中文形式的月份结果。

Months in Arabic Form
阿拉伯形式的月份

Mean RTs were analyzed with a 2 (Cue Type: left/right month) × 2 (Target Location: left/right target) × 3 (SOA: 250, 500, 750 ms) ANOVA. There was a significant main effect of SOA, F(2,58) = 66.86, p < 0.001, η²_p = 0.797. Participants responded faster in the longer SOA condition. The main effects for Cue Type and Target Location were not significant, F(1,29) = 3.44, p = 0.074, η²_p = 0.106 and F(1,29) = 0.34, p = 0.563, η²_p = 0.012, respectively. The three-way interaction effect of Cue Type, Target Location, and SOA was significant, F(2,58) = 4.27, p < 0.05, η²_p = 0.128. There was a significant interaction effect between Cue Type and Target Location, F(1,29) = 5.69, p < 0.05, η²_p = 0.164. Post hoc t-tests were conducted to determine at which SOAs the effect was present. A significant Att-SNARC effect was found at the 500 ms SOA for the left and right target location: left targets were detected faster when preceded by months from the beginning of the year, t(29) = −2.87, p < 0.05; and right targets were detected faster when preceded by months toward the end of the year, t(29) = 2.19, p < 0.05. Results of post hoc t-test of Experiment 2 in different SOAs and forms please see Supplementary Table S2.
对平均反应时间（RTs）进行了 2（线索类型：左/右月份）× 2（目标位置：左/右目标）× 3（SOA：250、500、750 毫秒）的方差分析（ANOVA）。SOA 的主效应显著，F(2,58) = 66.86, p < 0.001, η ² _p = 0.797。在较长 SOA 条件下，参与者反应更快。线索类型和目标位置的主效应不显著，F(1,29) = 3.44, p = 0.074, η ² _p = 0.106 和 F(1,29) = 0.34, p = 0.563, η ² _p = 0.012。线索类型、目标位置和 SOA 的三重交互作用显著，F(2,58) = 4.27, p < 0.05, η ² _p = 0.128。线索类型与目标位置之间存在显著的交互作用，F(1,29) = 5.69, p < 0.05, η ² _p = 0.164。进行了事后 t 检验以确定在哪些 SOA 下效应存在。在 500 毫秒 SOA 时，左侧和右侧目标位置均发现了显著的 Att-SNARC 效应：当由年初的月份引导时，左侧目标检测更快，t(29) = −2.87, p < 0.05；当由年末的月份引导时，右侧目标检测更快，t(29) = 2.19, p < 0.05。 实验 2 在不同 SOA 和形式下的事后 t 检验结果请见补充表 S2。

However, the interaction between Cue Type and SOA was not significant, F(2,58) = 0.44, p = 0.643, η²_p = 0.015. The interaction between Target Location and SOA was not significant, F(2,58) = 0.60, p = 0.551, η²_p = 0.020.
然而，线索类型与 SOA 之间的交互作用不显著，F(2,58) = 0.44, p = 0.643, η ² _p = 0.015。目标位置与 SOA 之间的交互作用也不显著，F(2,58) = 0.60, p = 0.551, η ² _p = 0.020。

Months in Simplified Chinese Form
月份的简体中文形式

Mean RTs were analyzed with a 2 (Cue Type: left/right month) × 2 (Target Location: left/right target) × 3 (SOA: 250, 500, 750 ms) ANOVA. A significant main effect was found for SOA, F(2,58) = 64.53, p < 0.001, η²_p = 0.690. The main effects for Cue Type and Target Location were not significant (Fs < 1). The only other significant effect was the interaction between Cue Type and Target Location, F(1,29) = 6.89, p < 0.05, η²_p = 0.192. Post hoc t-tests showed that the Att-SNARC effect was significant at the 500 ms SOA for both the left and right Target Locations, t(29) = -2.37, p < 0.05 and t(29) = 2.35, p < 0.05, respectively.
对平均反应时间进行了 2（线索类型：左侧/右侧月份）× 2（目标位置：左侧/右侧目标）× 3（SOA：250、500、750 毫秒）的方差分析。发现了 SOA 的主要效应显著，F(2,58) = 64.53, p < 0.001, η ² _p = 0.690。线索类型和目标位置的主要效应不显著（Fs < 1）。唯一其他显著效应是线索类型与目标位置之间的交互作用，F(1,29) = 6.89, p < 0.05, η ² _p = 0.192。事后 t 检验表明，在 500 毫秒 SOA 时，对于左侧和右侧目标位置，Att-SNARC 效应均显著，t(29) = -2.37, p < 0.05 和 t(29) = 2.35, p < 0.05。

However, the interaction between Cue Type and SOA was not significant, F(2,58) = 2.88, p = 0.064, η²_p = 0.090. The interaction between Target Location and SOA was not significant, F(2,58) = 0.24, p = 0.785, η²_p = 0.008. The three-way interaction between Cue Type, Target Location, and SOA was not significant, F(2,58) = 0.97, p = 0.386, η²_p = 0.032.
然而，Cue Type 和 SOA 之间的交互作用不显著，F(2,58) = 2.88, p = 0.064, η ² _p = 0.090。Target Location 和 SOA 之间的交互作用不显著，F(2,58) = 0.24, p = 0.785, η ² _p = 0.008。Cue Type、Target Location 和 SOA 之间的三重交互作用不显著，F(2,58) = 0.97, p = 0.386, η ² _p = 0.032。

Month in Traditional Chinese Form
月份的传统中文形式

Mean RTs were analyzed with a 2 (Cue Type: left/right month) × 2 (Target Location: left/right target) × 3 (SOA: 250, 500, 750 ms) ANOVA. We found a significant main effect of SOA, F(2,58) = 65.16, p < 0.001, η²_p = 0.692. The main effects for Cue Type and Target Location were not significant (Fs < 1). A significant interaction effect was found between Cue Type and Target Location, F(1,29) = 6.12, p < 0.05, η²_p = 0.174. A post hoc t-test analysis was conducted, which showed the Att-SNARC effect was significant at the 500 ms SOA for both the left and right target locations, t(29) = -2.95, p = 0.05 and t(29) = 2.29, p < 0.05, respectively.
对平均反应时间（RTs）进行了 2（线索类型：左/右月份）× 2（目标位置：左/右目标）× 3（SOA：250、500、750 毫秒）的方差分析（ANOVA）。我们发现 SOA 有显著的主效应，F(2,58) = 65.16, p < 0.001, η ² _p = 0.692。线索类型和目标位置的主效应不显著（Fs < 1）。发现了线索类型和目标位置之间的显著交互作用，F(1,29) = 6.12, p < 0.05, η ² _p = 0.174。进行了事后 t 检验分析，结果显示在 500 毫秒 SOA 时，对于左右目标位置，Att-SNARC 效应均显著，t(29) = -2.95, p = 0.05 和 t(29) = 2.29, p < 0.05。

However, the interaction between Cue Type and SOA was not significant, F(2,58) = 0.77, p = 0.468, η²_p = 0.026. The interaction between Target Location and SOA was not significant, F(2,58) = 1.04, p = 0.360, η²_p = 0.035. The three-way interaction between Cue Type, Target Location, and SOA was not significant, F(2,58) = 0.85, p = 0.432, η²_p = 0.028.
然而，Cue Type 和 SOA 之间的交互作用不显著，F(2,58) = 0.77, p = 0.468, η ² _p = 0.026。Target Location 和 SOA 之间的交互作用不显著，F(2,58) = 1.04, p = 0.360, η ² _p = 0.035。Cue Type、Target Location 和 SOA 之间的三重交互作用不显著，F(2,58) = 0.85, p = 0.432, η ² _p = 0.028。

In addition, we performed a paired-samples t-test comparing Experiment 1 and 2 (see Supplementary Table S3). Mean RTs in Experiment 2 was longer than in Experiment 1 except at the 250 ms SOA for numbers in Arabic form. This is perhaps because numbers convey ordinal information more obviously than months (Dodd et al., 2008). When stimuli convey more salient ordinal information there would be a shorter response time for the activation of a spatial component for the ordinal representation.
此外，我们进行了配对样本 t 检验，比较了实验 1 和实验 2（见补充表 S3）。实验 2 的平均反应时间除了在阿拉伯数字形式的 250 毫秒 SOA 外，都比实验 1 长。这可能是因为数字比月份更明显地传达了序数信息（Dodd 等，2008）。当刺激传达更显著的序数信息时，激活序数表示的空间成分的反应时间会更短。

Interim Discussion 中期讨论

In Experiment 2, we found that months in Arabic, Simplified Chinese, and Traditional Chinese forms automatically activate the Att-SNARC effect. Perceiving months from the beginning of the year (1月/一月/壹月; 2月/二月/贰月) shifts attention to the left side of space whereas perceiving months toward the end of the year (8月/八月/捌月, 9月/九月/玖月) shifts attention to the right side of space.
在实验 2 中，我们发现阿拉伯文、简体中文和繁体中文形式的月份会自动激活 Att-SNARC 效应。从一年之初感知月份（1 月/一月/壹月；2 月/二月/贰月）会使注意力偏向空间的左侧，而感知接近年底的月份（8 月/八月/捌月，9 月/九月/玖月）则使注意力偏向空间的右侧。

This finding was inconsistent with the results of the study reported by Dodd et al. (2008), in which no Att-SNARC effect was found for ordinal information (months, letters, days) in an order-irrelevant task. This may because English and Chinese month names convey different numerical information. The former is ordinal sequence with no numerical information, while the latter is ordinal numerical sequence for which numerical information still exists. Numbers are frequently used to represent quantity and order in daily life. The spatial representation of numbers is overlearned (Dodd et al., 2008). Therefore, the Att-SNARC effect may have been caused by the additional numerical information presented in Chinese months.
这一发现与 Dodd 等人（2008）报告的研究结果不一致，在该研究中，序数信息（月份、字母、日期）在与顺序无关的任务中未发现 Att-SNARC 效应。这可能是因为英文和中文的月份名称传达了不同的数值信息。前者是没有任何数值信息的序数序列，而后者是有数值信息的序数数值序列。数字在日常生活中常用于表示数量和顺序。数字的空间表征是过度学习的（Dodd 等人，2008）。因此，Att-SNARC 效应可能是由中文月份中呈现的额外数值信息引起的。

Gevers et al. (2003, 2004) obtained a SNARC effect for ordinal sequences (letters, days, and months) in an order-relevant task, indicating that the mental representation of ordinal sequences is spatially organized. Similarly, Dodd et al. (2008) found that the Att-SNARC effect appeared for ordinal sequences when participants were required to process the cue in an order-relevant fashion. In order to examine whether the Att-SNARC effect generalizes to other ordinal sequences, in Experiment 3 we chose Chinese non-numerical months as stimuli and adopted an order-relevant task.
Gevers 等（2003，2004）在顺序相关的任务中获得了序数序列（字母、星期和月份）的 SNARC 效应，表明序数序列的心理表征是空间组织的。同样，Dodd 等（2008）发现当参与者需要以顺序相关的方式处理提示时，会出现 Att-SNARC 效应。为了检验 Att-SNARC 效应是否推广到其他序数序列，在实验 3 中我们选择了中文非数字月份作为刺激材料，并采用了一个顺序相关的任务。

Experiment 3 实验 3

In Experiment 3, we wanted to examine whether an Att-SNARC effect would be observed for numerical and non-numerical ordinal sequence stimuli in an order-relevant task.
在实验 3 中，我们想要考察在顺序相关的任务中，数值和非数值序数序列刺激是否会产生 Att-SNARC 效应。

Methods 方法

Participants 参与者

Thirty undergraduate students were recruited at South China Normal University (19 females, 11 males, mean age = 21.31 ± 1.6 years) and volunteered to participate for an agreed pay of 15 RMB. All were right-handed Chinese native speakers and naive to the purpose of the experiment. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of South China Normal University.
招募了三十名华南师范大学的本科生（19 名女性，11 名男性，平均年龄 = 21.31 ± 1.6 岁），他们自愿参与实验，并同意支付 15 元人民币。所有参与者均为右利手的母语为中文的人，且对实验目的不知情。本研究得到了华南师范大学伦理委员会的批准。

Materials 材料

Materials were the same as in Experiment 2, including months in Arabic form [1月(yī yuè), 2月(èr yuè), 8月(bā yuè), 9月(jiǔ yuè)], Simplified Chinese form [一月(yī yuè), 二月(èr yuè), 八月(bā yuè), 九月(jiǔ yuè)], and Traditional Chinese form [壹月(yī yuè), 贰月(èr yuè), 捌月(bā yuè), 玖月(jiǔ yuè)], but also included the ordinal non-numerical form [正月(zhēng yuè), 杏月(xìng yuè), 桂月(guì yuè), 菊月(jú yuè), see Table 4].
材料与实验 2 相同，包括阿拉伯数字形式的月份[1 月(yī yuè), 2 月(èr yuè), 8 月(bā yuè), 9 月(jiǔ yuè)]，简体中文形式的月份[一月(yī yuè), 二月(èr yuè), 八月(bā yuè), 九月(jiǔ yuè)]，以及繁体中文形式的月份[壹月(yī yuè), 贰月(èr yuè), 捌月(bā yuè), 玖月(jiǔ yuè)]，同时还包括序数非数字形式的月份[正月(zhēng yuè), 杏月(xìng yuè), 桂月(guì yuè), 菊月(jú yuè)，见表 4]。

Procedure 程序

The procedure was same as Experiment 2 in Dodd et al.’s (2008), with one exception: when a month appeared at the fixation point, participants were asked whether the month was before or after “May” (i.e., before or after “五月” in the Simplified Chinese form block; before or after “伍月” in the Traditional Chinese form block; and before or after “榴月(liú yuè)” in the non-numerical form block). After a target detection response was made, participants were asked to state aloud whether the cue came before (say “before”) or after (say “after”) May. Each participant completed an experimental session consisting of four randomized blocks of 384 experimental trials. 20 practice trials were administered before four blocks. Short breaks were allowed after every 96 trials. The entire task lasted approximately 15–20 minutes.
程序与 Dodd 等人（2008）的实验 2 相同，仅有一个例外：当月份出现在注视点时，参与者被问及该月份是在“五月”之前还是之后（即，在简化字形式块中是在“五月”之前还是之后；在繁体字形式块中是在“伍月”之前还是之后；在非数字形式块中是在“榴月（liú yuè）”之前还是之后）。在做出目标检测反应后，参与者被要求大声说出提示是在五月之前（说“之前”）还是之后（说“之后”）。每位参与者完成了一个由四个随机排列的实验区块组成的实验会话，每个区块包含 384 个实验试次。在四个区块之前进行了 20 次练习试次。每 96 次试验后允许短暂休息。整个任务大约持续 15-20 分钟。

Results 结果

Trials with RTs shorter than 100 ms or longer than 1,000 ms were again considered errors, accounting for 3.7% of all trials. These data were discarded from subsequent analyses. In Table 6, mean RTs and standard deviations for targets appearing at each target location are presented as a function of cue condition. Figure 4 presents mean RTs and standard deviations of target detection at each SOA under both congruent and incongruent conditions.
反应时间短于 100 毫秒或长于 1,000 毫秒的试次再次被视为错误，占所有试次的 3.7%。这些数据被排除在后续分析之外。表 6 展示了每个目标位置的目标出现时的平均反应时间和标准差，作为线索条件的函数。图 4 展示了在一致和不一致条件下每个刺激呈现时间的目标检测的平均反应时间和标准差。

TABLE 6 表 6

Table 6. Experiment 3-mean RTs (in ms) and standard deviations for targets appearing at each possible location as a function of cue type and SOA.
表 6. 实验 3-每个可能位置的目标的平均反应时间（毫秒）和标准差，按线索类型和 SOA 划分。

FIGURE 4 图 4

Figure 4. Mean RTs and standard deviations detection at each SOA under both congruent and incongruent conditions. Panel (A) represents the result of months in Arabic form, panel (B) represents the result of months in Simplified Chinese form, panel (C) represents the result of months in Traditional Chinese form, panel (D) represents the result of months in Chinese non-numerical form.
图 4. 在一致和不一致条件下，每个 SOA 下的平均反应时间和标准差检测。图(A)表示阿拉伯数字形式的月份结果，图(B)表示简体中文形式的月份结果，图(C)表示繁体中文形式的月份结果，图(D)表示中文非数字形式的月份结果。

Months in Arabic Form
阿拉伯形式的月份

Mean RTs were analyzed with a 2 (Cue Type: left/right month) × 2 (Target Location: left/right target) × 3 (SOA: 250, 500, 750 ms) ANOVA. There was a significant main effect of SOA, F(2,58) = 50.04, p < 0.001, η²_p = 0.633, with faster responses in the longer SOA condition. There were no other significant main effects of Cue Type or Target Location, F(1,29) = 0.78, p = 0.385, η²_p = 0.026 and F(1,29) = 0.06, p = 0.938, η²_p = 0.00, respectively. The three-way interaction between Cue Type, Target Location, and SOA was significant, F(2,58) = 3.43, p < 0.05, η²_p = 0.106. The interaction between the Cue Type and Target Location was significant, F(1,29) = 4.98, p < 0.05, η²_p = 0.15. Post hoc t-tests showed that the Att-SNARC effect was significant at the 500 ms SOA for both the left and right target locations: left targets were detected faster when preceded by months from the beginning of the year, t(29) = −1.95, p = 0.06; right targets were detected faster when preceded by months toward the end of the year, t(29) = 2.57, p < 0.05. Results of post hoc t-test of Experiment 3 in different SOAs and forms please see Supplementary Table S4.
对平均反应时间（RTs）进行了 2（线索类型：左/右月份）× 2（目标位置：左/右目标）× 3（SOA：250、500、750 毫秒）的方差分析（ANOVA）。SOA 的主效应显著，F(2,58) = 50.04, p < 0.001, η ² _p = 0.633，表明在较长 SOA 条件下反应更快。线索类型和目标位置的主效应均不显著，F(1,29) = 0.78, p = 0.385, η ² _p = 0.026 和 F(1,29) = 0.06, p = 0.938, η ² _p = 0.00。线索类型、目标位置和 SOA 之间的三阶交互作用显著，F(2,58) = 3.43, p < 0.05, η ² _p = 0.106。线索类型与目标位置之间的交互作用显著，F(1,29) = 4.98, p < 0.05, η ² _p = 0.15。事后 t 检验显示，在 500 毫秒 SOA 下，左右目标位置的 Att-SNARC 效应均显著：当目标位于左侧时，年初的月份提示后反应更快，t(29) = −1.95, p = 0.06；当目标位于右侧时，年末的月份提示后反应更快，t(29) = 2.57, p < 0.05。不同 SOA 和形式下的实验 3 的事后 t 检验结果请参见补充表 S4。

However, the interaction between Cue Type and SOA was not significant, F(2,58) = 0.53, p = 0.594, η²_p = 0.018. The interaction between Target Location and SOA was not significant, F(2,58) = 0.40, p = 0.675, η²_p = 0.013.
然而，线索类型与 SOA 之间的交互作用不显著，F(2,58) = 0.53, p = 0.594, η ² _p = 0.018。目标位置与 SOA 之间的交互作用也不显著，F(2,58) = 0.40, p = 0.675, η ² _p = 0.013。

Months in Simplified Chinese Form
月份的简体中文形式

Mean RTs were analyzed with a 2 (Cue Type: left/right month) × 2 (Target Location: left/right target) × 3 (SOA: 250, 500, 750 ms) ANOVA. There was a significant main effect of SOA, F(2,58) = 54.68, p < 0.001, η²_p = 0.65. There were no other significant main effects of the Cue Type [F(1,29) = 1.06, p = 0.312, η²_p = 0.035] or Target Location [F(1,29) = 0.03, p = 0.865, η²_p = 0.001]. A significant interaction effect was found between the Cue Type and Target Location, F(1,29) = 5.45, p < 0.05, η²_p = 0.158. Post hoc t-test showed a Att-SNARC effect at the 500 ms SOA for both the left and right target locations, t(29) = -2.09, p < 0.05 and t(29) = 1.78, p = 0.085, respectively. In addition, a significant interaction effect was found between the Cue Type and SOA, F(2,58) = 4.48, p < 0.05, η²_p = 0.134.
对平均反应时间进行了 2（线索类型：左侧/右侧月份）× 2（目标位置：左侧/右侧目标）× 3（SOA：250、500、750 毫秒）的方差分析。SOA 有显著的主效应，F(2,58) = 54.68, p < 0.001, η ² _p = 0.65。线索类型[F(1,29) = 1.06, p = 0.312, η ² _p = 0.035]和目标位置[F(1,29) = 0.03, p = 0.865, η ² _p = 0.001]没有显著的主效应。线索类型与目标位置之间存在显著的交互作用，F(1,29) = 5.45, p < 0.05, η ² _p = 0.158。事后 t 检验显示，在 500 毫秒 SOA 时，左右目标位置均出现了 Att-SNARC 效应，t(29) = -2.09, p < 0.05 和 t(29) = 1.78, p = 0.085。此外，线索类型与 SOA 之间存在显著的交互作用，F(2,58) = 4.48, p < 0.05, η ² _p = 0.134。

However, the interaction between Target Location and SOA was not significant, F(2,58) = 0.17, p = 0.841, η²_p = 0.006. The three-way interaction between Cue Type, Target Location, and SOA was also not significant, F(2,58) = 1.85, p = 0.167, η²_p = 0.060.
然而，目标位置和 SOA 之间的交互作用不显著，F(2,58) = 0.17, p = 0.841, η ² _p = 0.006。提示类型、目标位置和 SOA 之间的三重交互作用也不显著，F(2,58) = 1.85, p = 0.167, η ² _p = 0.060。

Months in Traditional Chinese Form
传统形式的月份

Mean RTs were analyzed with a 2 (Cue Type: left/right month) × 2 (Target Location: left/right target) × 3 (SOA: 250, 500, 750 ms) ANOVA. A significant main effect for SOA was found, F(2,58) = 67.61, p < 0.001, η²_p = 0.700. There were no other significant main effects of Cue Type [F(1,29) = 0.57, p = 0.457, η²_p = 0.019] or Target Location [F(1,29) = 0.13, p = 0.722, η²_p = 0.004]. The only other significant effect was the interaction between the Cue Type and Target Location, F(1,29) = 4.93, p < 0.05, η²_p = 0.145. We found a significant Att-SNARC effect at the 500 ms SOA for both the left and right target locations using a post hoc t-test analysis, t(29) = -2.19, p < 0.05 and t(29) = 2.30, p < 0.05, respectively.
对平均反应时间（RTs）进行了 2（线索类型：左/右月份）× 2（目标位置：左/右目标）× 3（SOA：250、500、750 毫秒）的方差分析（ANOVA）。发现了 SOA 的主要效应显著，F(2,58) = 67.61, p < 0.001, η ² _p = 0.700。线索类型[F(1,29) = 0.57, p = 0.457, η ² _p = 0.019]和目标位置[F(1,29) = 0.13, p = 0.722, η ² _p = 0.004]没有其他显著的主要效应。唯一其他的显著效应是线索类型与目标位置之间的交互作用，F(1,29) = 4.93, p < 0.05, η ² _p = 0.145。通过事后 t 检验分析，在 500 毫秒 SOA 时，在左右目标位置均发现了显著的 Att-SNARC 效应，t(29) = -2.19, p < 0.05 和 t(29) = 2.30, p < 0.05。

However, the interaction between Target Location and SOA was not significant, F(2,58) = 0.05, p = 0.954, η²_p = 0.002. The interaction between Cue Type and SOA was not significant, F(2,58) = 2.46, p = 0.095, η²_p = 0.078. The three-way interaction between the Cue Type, Target Location, and SOA was also not significant, F(2,58) = 2.86, p = 0.065, η²_p = 0.090.
然而，目标位置与 SOA 之间的交互作用不显著，F(2,58) = 0.05, p = 0.954, η ² _p = 0.002。提示类型与 SOA 之间的交互作用不显著，F(2,58) = 2.46, p = 0.095, η ² _p = 0.078。提示类型、目标位置和 SOA 之间的三重交互作用也不显著，F(2,58) = 2.86, p = 0.065, η ² _p = 0.090。

Months in Chinese Non-numerical Ordinal Form
中国月份的非数字序数形式

Mean RTs were analyzed with a 2 (Cue Type: left/right month) × 2 (Target Location: left/right target) × 3 (SOA: 250, 500, 750 ms) ANOVA. A main effect of SOA again appeared in this analysis, F(2,58) = 85.14, p < 0.001, η²_p = 0.746, with faster responses in the longer SOA condition. However, there were no significant main effects of the Cue Type or Target Location, F(1,29) = 0.22, p = 0.643, η²_p = 0.008 and F(1,29) = 1.43, p = 0.241, η²_p = 0.047, respectively. The interaction between Cue Type and Target Location was not significant, F(1,29) = 2.33, p = 0.633, η²_p = 0.008. The interaction between the Cue Type and SOA was not significant, F(2,58) = 2.71, p = 0.075, η²_p = 0.085. The interaction between the Target Location and SOA was not significant, F(2,58) = 0.18, p = 0.837, η²_p = 0.006. The three-way interaction between the Cue Type, Target Location, and SOA was also not significant, F(2,58) = 0.43, p = 0.671, η²_p = 0.015.
对平均反应时间进行了 2（线索类型：左/右月份）× 2（目标位置：左/右目标）× 3（SOA：250、500、750 毫秒）的方差分析。SOA 的主要效应再次出现在此分析中，F(2,58) = 85.14, p < 0.001, η ² _p = 0.746，在较长 SOA 条件下反应更快。然而，线索类型或目标位置没有显著的主要效应，F(1,29) = 0.22, p = 0.643, η ² _p = 0.008 和 F(1,29) = 1.43, p = 0.241, η ² _p = 0.047。线索类型和目标位置之间的交互作用不显著，F(1,29) = 2.33, p = 0.633, η ² _p = 0.008。线索类型和 SOA 之间的交互作用不显著，F(2,58) = 2.71, p = 0.075, η ² _p = 0.085。目标位置和 SOA 之间的交互作用不显著，F(2,58) = 0.18, p = 0.837, η ² _p = 0.006。线索类型、目标位置和 SOA 之间的三重交互作用也不显著，F(2,58) = 0.43, p = 0.671, η ² _p = 0.015。

Interim Discussion 中期讨论

In Experiment 3, an Att-SNARC effect was observed for months in Arabic, Simplified Chinese, and Traditional Chinese forms; however, the effect was not observed for months in Chinese non-numerical form. A possible explanation for this result is that months in Chinese non-numerical form are an ordinal non-numerical sequence without numerical properties. Besides, it is worth noting that the three-way interaction was significant only for months in Arabic form in Experiment 2 and Experiment 3. Three-way interaction between Cue Type, Target Location, and SOA indicates Att-SNARC modulated by SOA, whereas two-way interaction between Cue Type, Target Location indicates a general Att-SNARC.
在实验 3 中，观察到了阿拉伯文、简体中文和繁体中文形式的月份存在 Att-SNARC 效应；然而，在非数字形式的中文月份中未观察到该效应。这一结果的一个可能解释是非数字形式的中文月份是一种没有数值特性的序数非数字序列。此外，值得注意的是，三元交互作用仅在实验 2 和实验 3 的阿拉伯文形式的月份中显著。Cue Type、Target Location 和 SOA 之间的三元交互作用表明 Att-SNARC 受到 SOA 的调节，而 Cue Type 和 Target Location 之间的二元交互作用则表明了一般的 Att-SNARC。

In addition, we compared mean RTs in Experiment 2 and Experiment 3 (see Supplementary Table S5). The results show that RTs are faster in the order-relevant task than in the order-irrelevant task. Specifically, for the months in Arabic form and Traditional Chinese form, mean RTs in Experiment 3 were significantly shorter than in Experiment 2 at the 500 ms SOA, t(119) = −2.076, p = 0.040 and t(119) = -3.147, p = 0.002, respectively. This response difference could be explained by greater attention to the cue’s magnitude causing faster target detection. Spotlight (Posner et al., 1980) and zoom lens (Eriksen and St. James, 1986) models of spatial attention suggest that attention influences the speed of processing in the visual system (Casarotti et al., 2007). Participants use more attentional resources for deeper processing tasks than shallow processing tasks. The explicit processing of magnitude causes more attention to magnitude information of the cue and the activation of spatial representations associated with ordinal meaning, thereby increasing processing efficiency of target detection.
此外，我们比较了实验 2 和实验 3 的平均反应时间（见补充表 S5）。结果表明，在顺序相关任务中的反应时间比在顺序无关任务中的反应时间更快。具体来说，对于阿拉伯形式和繁体中文形式的月份，实验 3 在 500 毫秒 SOA 下的平均反应时间显著短于实验 2，t(119) = -2.076, p = 0.040 和 t(119) = -3.147, p = 0.002。这种反应差异可以通过对线索的数量关注增加导致的目标检测速度加快来解释。聚光灯模型（Posner 等，1980）和变焦镜头模型（Eriksen 和 St. James，1986）的空间注意力模型表明，注意力影响视觉系统中的处理速度（Casarotti 等，2007）。参与者在深度加工任务中使用更多的注意力资源，而在浅层加工任务中使用的较少。数量的显式加工导致对线索的数量信息更多关注，并激活与序数意义相关的空间表示，从而提高目标检测的处理效率。

General Discussion 一般讨论

In this study, we investigated whether the Att-SNARC effect can be found in numbers and other numerical and non-numerical ordinal sequences (Chinese months). Some authors claim that number perception induces a spatial shift of attention (Fischer et al., 2003; Galfano et al., 2006; Ristic et al., 2006; Casarotti et al., 2007; Dodd et al., 2008). Dodd et al. (2008) suggest that the effect can generalize to non-numerical ordinal sequences when participants are required to process magnitude information in an order-relevant fashion. Some authors have failed to replicate the Att-SNARC, or observed the effect for numbers only when participants actively processed number magnitude (Van Dijck et al., 2014; Zanolie and Pecher, 2014; Fattorini et al., 2015; Pellegrino et al., 2019). In light of the mixed results reported in previous studies, we ran three experiments using Arabic numbers (Experiment 1), the months in Arabic, Simplified Chinese, and Traditional Chinese forms (Experiment 2), and the months in Chinese non-numerical form (Experiment 3, order-relevant task). The main results show that perception of numbers and other numerical ordinal sequence (months in Arabic, Simplified Chinese, and Traditional Chinese forms) presented at a central fixation produce automatic magnitude-related shifts of spatial attention. However, the Att-SNARC effect is specific to numerical sequence processing and does not generalize to non-numerical ordinal sequences.
在本研究中，我们探讨了是否可以在数字和其他数值和非数值序数序列（中文月份）中发现 Att-SNARC 效应。一些作者认为，数字感知会诱导注意力的空间转移（Fischer 等，2003；Galfano 等，2006；Ristic 等，2006；Casarotti 等，2007；Dodd 等，2008）。Dodd 等（2008）提出，当参与者需要以顺序相关的方式处理大小信息时，该效应可以推广到非数值序数序列。一些作者未能复制出 Att-SNARC 效应，或者仅在参与者积极处理数字大小时观察到了这种效应（Van Dijck 等，2014；Zanolie 和 Pecher，2014；Fattorini 等，2015；Pellegrino 等，2019）。鉴于之前研究中报告的混合结果，我们进行了三个实验，使用阿拉伯数字（实验 1），以阿拉伯文、简体中文和繁体中文形式表示的月份（实验 2），以及以非数值形式表示的中文月份（实验 3，顺序相关任务）。 主要结果表明，中心固定显示的数字和其他数值序数序列（阿拉伯文、简体中文和繁体中文的月份）会引起自动的数量相关空间注意力偏移。然而，Att-SNARC 效应仅限于数值序列处理，并不泛化到非数值序数序列。

In Experiment 1, we aimed to determine whether the mere perception of numbers at a central fixation causes automatic shifts of spatial attention by using numbers in Arabic, Simplified Chinese, and Traditional Chinese forms. The Att-SNARC effect was found for all number formats at the 500 ms SOA: targets were detected faster in the left side of space than in the right when a small number (e.g., 1/一/壹, 2/二/贰) was presented; targets were detected faster in the right side of space than in the left when a large number (e.g., 8/八/捌, 9/九/玖) was presented. The associations between numbers and spatial representations are modality-independent. Regardless of format, number perception automatically activates a spatial representation associated with magnitude and causes a shift of spatial attention.
在实验 1 中，我们旨在确定仅仅感知中央注视点的数字是否会导致空间注意力的自动转移，使用了阿拉伯数字、简体中文数字和繁体中文数字。在 500 毫秒的 SOA 下，所有数字格式都发现了 Att-SNARC 效应：当呈现小数（例如，1/一/壹，2/二/贰）时，目标在空间左侧比右侧检测得更快；当呈现大数（例如，8/八/捌，9/九/玖）时，目标在空间右侧比左侧检测得更快。数字与空间表征之间的关联是模态独立的。无论格式如何，数字感知都会自动激活与大小相关的空间表征，并导致空间注意力的转移。

In Experiment 2, our goal was to further investigate whether the Att-SNARC effect can be observed in other numerical ordinal sequences. The results show that a significant Att-SNARC effect was found at the 500 ms SOA: targets in the left side of space were detected faster when preceded by months from the beginning of the year (e.g., 1月/一月/壹月, 2月/二月/贰月); targets in the right side of space were detected faster when preceded by months toward the end of the year (e.g., 8月/八月/捌月, 9月/九月/玖月). The results are partially inconsistent with the Dodd et al.’s (2008) findings that an Att-SNARC effect was observed for months only when the participants were required to process the cue in an order-relevant fashion. This is perhaps because months in Arabic, Simplified Chinese, and Traditional Chinese forms all contain numerical information, unlike the months used in Dodd et al.’s (2008) study. Left-to-right representations of number magnitude can be elicited when processing numerical month stimuli. Thus, these materials produce similar effects as numbers.
在实验 2 中，我们的目标是进一步探讨 Att-SNARC 效应是否可以在其他数值顺序序列中观察到。结果表明，在 500 毫秒的 SOA 下，显著的 Att-SNARC 效应被发现：空间左侧的目标在被一年之初的月份（如 1 月/一月/壹月，2 月/二月/贰月）前置时检测更快；空间右侧的目标在被一年之末的月份（如 8 月/八月/捌月，9 月/九月/玖月）前置时检测更快。结果部分与 Dodd 等人（2008）的研究发现不一致，即只有当参与者需要以顺序相关的方式处理提示时才会观察到月份的 Att-SNARC 效应。这可能是因为阿拉伯数字、简体中文和繁体中文形式的月份都包含数值信息，而 Dodd 等人（2008）研究中使用的月份则没有。在处理数值月份刺激时，可以引发从左到右的数量大小表征。因此，这些材料产生了类似数字的效果。

Converging evidence from Experiment 1 and 2 suggests that the Att-SNARC effect can be elicited by numbers and other numerical ordinal sequences. The association between shifts of spatial attention and number magnitude is automatic, not driven by strategic top-down processing. These results suggest that a similar processing mechanism might exist for numbers and numerical Chinese months (months in Arabic, Simplified Chinese, and Traditional Chinese forms).
来自实验 1 和实验 2 的汇聚证据表明，Att-SNARC 效应可以由数字和其他数值序数序列引发。空间注意力转移与数字大小之间的关联是自动的，不由策略性的自上而下加工驱动。这些结果表明，数字和数值中文月份（阿拉伯数字、简体中文和繁体中文形式的月份）可能存在类似的处理机制。

In Experiment 3 (order-relevant task), we tested the same stimuli used in Experiment 2 and added non-numerical ordinal stimuli (e.g., 正月, 杏月, 桂月, 菊月). An Att-SNARC effect was again observed in numerical ordinal sequences (months in Arabic, Simplified Chinese, and Traditional Chinese forms). It is possible that the Att-SNARC effect observed in our experiments is mainly influenced by the numerical prefix. However, we did not find the Att-SNARC effect in Chinese non-numerical months, indicating that the effect does not generalize to ordinal sequences, even in an order-relevant task.
在实验 3（顺序相关任务）中，我们测试了实验 2 中使用的相同刺激，并添加了非数字序数刺激（例如，正月、杏月、桂月、菊月）。再次在数字序数序列（阿拉伯文、简体中文和繁体中文的月份）中观察到了 Att-SNARC 效应。可能我们的实验中观察到的 Att-SNARC 效应主要受数字前缀的影响。然而，我们在中文非数字月份中并未发现 Att-SNARC 效应，表明该效应不会泛化到序数序列，即使在顺序相关任务中也是如此。

One possible explanation for these results is that there is a tight link between space and numbers due to the influences of culture and experience. Reading habits and finger counting habits provide importance contributions to the left-to-right organization of the MNL and the occurrence of SNARC effects (Dehaene et al., 1993; Fischer, 2008; Shaki et al., 2009; Fischer et al., 2010; Eerland et al., 2011; Fischer and Brugger, 2011; Göbel et al., 2011; Lindemann et al., 2011). People frequently use numbers in real life situations to represent quantity and order. Consequently, a tight association between space and numbers is established in which left/right spatial codes are linked to small/large number magnitudes. These culturally acquired and spatially meaningful stimuli automatically produce magnitude-related shifts of spatial attention in target detection tasks. However, Chinese non-numerical ordinal months (e.g., 正月, 杏月, 桂月, 菊月) mainly appear in poetry and are less frequently used in contemporary China. Due to the unfamiliarity of Chinese non-numerical ordinal months, the association between the magnitude of these stimuli and space is too weak to evoke the Att-SNARC effect.
这些结果的一种可能解释是，由于文化和经验的影响，空间与数字之间存在紧密联系。阅读习惯和手指计数习惯为从左到右的 MNL 组织和 SNARC 效应的发生提供了重要贡献（Dehaene 等，1993；Fischer，2008；Shaki 等，2009；Fischer 等，2010；Eerland 等，2011；Fischer 和 Brugger，2011；Göbel 等，2011；Lindemann 等，2011）。人们在现实生活中频繁使用数字来表示数量和顺序。因此，在空间和数字之间建立了紧密的关联，其中左右空间编码与小/大数值大小相关联。这些文化习得且具有空间意义的刺激物在目标检测任务中自动产生与大小相关的空间注意力转移。然而，中国的非数字序数月份（例如，正月、杏月、桂月、菊月）主要出现在诗歌中，在当代中国较少使用。由于对中国非数字序数月份的不熟悉，这些刺激物的大小与空间之间的关联太弱，无法引发 Att-SNARC 效应。

Another possibility is that Chinese numerical and non-numerical months have different properties. The former are numerical ordinal stimuli that contain numeral information (e.g., 1月, which means January), whereas the latter is a non-numerical ordered sequence (e.g., 正月, which means January) similar to days, letters, and English months. Numbers convey ordinal information in a more salient manner than an ordinal sequence (Dodd et al., 2008). Participants mainly encode numerical information when processing numbers and numerical Chinese months. Therefore, the left-to-right spatial coding of number and/or ordinal magnitudes is activated. However, due to the properties of a non-numerical ordinal sequence, the strength and reliability of a spatial association might not be as strong as with numbers. Participants might process ordinal information when perceiving non-numerical month stimuli. For instance, “菊月(September)” is after “榴月(May)” and “杏月(February)” is the second month of the year. They might also associate non-numerical months with other semantic information irrelevant to space. For instance, “杏月(February)” might evoke “春天 (spring)” or “杏 (apricot).” This irrelevant information might interfere with activation of a spatial component of the ordinal representation. Therefore, the Att-SNARC effect would only be observed in numbers and numerical ordinal months.
另一种可能性是，中文的数字月份和非数字月份具有不同的属性。前者是包含数字信息的数值序数刺激（例如，1 月，表示一月），而后者是非数字的有序序列（例如，正月，表示一月），类似于日子、字母和英文月份。与序数序列相比，数字以更显著的方式传达序数信息（Dodd 等人，2008）。参与者在处理数字和数值中文月份时主要编码数值信息。因此，激活了从左到右的空间编码数字和/或序数大小。然而，由于非数字序数序列的属性，空间关联的强度和可靠性可能不如数字那么强。参与者在感知非数字月份刺激时可能会处理序数信息。例如，“菊月（九月）”在“榴月（五月）”之后，“杏月（二月）”是一年的第二个月。他们也可能将非数字月份与其他与空间无关的语义信息联系起来。例如，“杏月（二月）”可能会唤起“春天（spring）”或“杏（apricot）”。这种无关信息可能会干扰序数表示的空间成分的激活。因此，Att-SNARC 效应仅在数字和数值序数月份中观察到。

The results of our study also showed that the cognitive mechanisms of the Att-SNARC effect are different from the SNARC effect. The SNARC effect was found in different notations, including letters, days, months, auditory number word, visual Arabic numeral, visual number word, and visual dice pattern. This indicates that the SNARC effect is modality-independent (Gevers et al., 2003, 2004; Nuerk et al., 2005). Motor responses in left-to-right space might play an important role in accessing spatial codes of magnitude related information, thus causing a consistent SNARC effect in different notation conditions. Nonetheless, our study suggested that the Att-SNARC effect is only sensitive to numbers and ordinal sequence that contain numeric information.
我们的研究结果还表明，Att-SNARC 效应的认知机制与 SNARC 效应不同。SNARC 效应在不同的表示法中都有发现，包括字母、日期、月份、听觉数字词语、视觉阿拉伯数字、视觉数字词语和视觉骰子点数。这表明 SNARC 效应是与感觉通道无关的（Gevers 等，2003，2004；Nuerk 等，2005）。左右空间中的运动反应可能在获取与大小相关的信息的空间编码中起重要作用，从而在不同的表示法条件下导致一致的 SNARC 效应。然而，我们的研究表明，Att-SNARC 效应仅对包含数字信息的数字和序数序列敏感。

In summary, the findings from our study provide evidence that perceiving numbers causes an automatic shift of spatial attention. We replicated and extended partial results from previous research. The Att-SNARC effect is not just number-specific. It can also be observed in some numerical ordinal sequences, e.g., months in Arabic, Simplified Chinese, and Traditional Chinese forms. To our knowledge, the present study is the first to examine the Att-SNARC effect in different forms of Chinese months. However, there are noteworthy limitations in the current research. First, we did not examine the Att-SNARC effect in non-numerical Chinese months in Experiment 2. Therefore, we were unable to directly compare the performance difference between order-irrelevant and order-relevant tasks. Second, the present experiments did not include catch trials (false alarms). We believe that future studies would benefit from the addition of catch trials, which may help to estimate the level at which a participant is guessing when no target is present. In addition, future studies are needed to systematically determine the cognitive mechanisms underlying the perception of numbers and numerical Chinese months.
综上所述，我们研究的结果提供了感知数字会引起空间注意力自动转移的证据。我们复制并扩展了先前研究的部分结果。Att-SNARC 效应不仅仅是特定于数字的，也可以在某些数值序数序列中观察到，例如阿拉伯文、简体中文和繁体中文形式的月份。据我们所知，目前的研究首次探讨了不同形式的中文月份的 Att-SNARC 效应。然而，当前研究存在值得注意的局限性。首先，我们在实验 2 中没有检验非数字中文月份的 Att-SNARC 效应，因此无法直接比较顺序无关任务与顺序相关任务之间的表现差异。其次，当前实验未包含陷阱试次（假警报）。我们认为未来的研究将从添加陷阱试次中受益，这可能有助于估计参与者在没有目标时的猜测水平。 此外，未来的研究需要系统地确定数字感知和数值中文月份背后的认知机制。

Data Availability Statement
数据可用性声明

The datasets generated for this study are available on request to the corresponding author.
本研究生成的数据集可应要求向通讯作者索取。

Ethics Statement 伦理声明

The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by Human Research Ethics Committee for Non-Clinical Faculties, School of Psychology, South China Normal University. The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.
涉及人类参与者的研究由华南师范大学心理学院非临床学院系人类研究伦理委员会审查和批准。参与者提供了书面知情同意参与本研究。

Author Contributions 作者贡献

DH analyzed the data and wrote and revised the manuscript. XH and ML contributed to the conception of the study and manuscript revisions. TZ analyzed the data and wrote the manuscript. JW and LL designed the study and collected the data. All authors approved the final version of the manuscript.
DH 分析了数据并撰写了和修改了手稿。XH 和 ML 对研究的构思和手稿修改做出了贡献。TZ 分析了数据并撰写了手稿。JW 和 LL 设计了研究并收集了数据。所有作者批准了手稿的最终版本。

Funding 资金资助

This research was supported by the MOE Project of Key Research Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences in Universities (Grant Number: 15JJD190005) and National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Number: 31671132).
本研究得到了教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地项目（项目编号：15JJD190005）和国家自然科学基金（项目编号：31671132）的支持。

Conflict of Interest 利益冲突

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
作者声明，本研究是在没有任何可能被视为潜在利益冲突的商业或财务关系的情况下进行的。

Acknowledgments 致谢

The authors declare that all results from the project have been reported. The authors thank Joe Ptacek for helping with English editing. The authors also thank Tom Verguts and Carol Anne Seger for their pertinent advice concerning this research.
作者声明已报告了项目的所有结果。作者感谢 Joe Ptacek 帮助进行英语编辑。作者还要感谢 Tom Verguts 和 Carol Anne Seger 对本研究提出的中肯建议。

Supplementary Material 补充材料

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00680/full#supplementary-material
本文的补充材料可在以下网址在线获取：https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00680/full#supplementary-material

References 参考文献

Bonato, M., Priftis, K., Marenzi, R., and Zorzi, M. (2009). Normal and impaired reflexive orienting of attention after central nonpredictive cues. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 21, 745–759. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2009.21054
博纳托, M., 普里夫蒂斯, K., 马伦齐, R., 和佐尔齐, M. (2009). 中央非预测线索后的正常和受损的反射性注意力定向. 认知神经科学杂志 21, 745–759. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2009.21054

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
CrossRef 全文 | Google 学术搜索

Casarotti, M., Michielin, M., Zorzi, M., and Umiltà, C. (2007). Temporal order judgment reveals how number magnitude affects visuospatial attention. Cognition 102, 101–117. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2006.09.001
卡萨罗蒂，M.，米切林，M.，佐尔齐，M.，和乌米尔塔，C. （2007）。时间顺序判断揭示了数字大小如何影响视空间注意。认知 102，101–117。doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2006.09.001

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Dehaene, S., Bossini, S., and Giraux, P. (1993). The mental representation of parity and number magnitude. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 122, 371–396. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.122.3.371

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Dodd, M. D., Stigchel, S. V., Leghari, M. A., Fung, G., and Kingstone, A. (2008). Attentional SNARC: there’s something special about numbers (let us count the ways). Cognition 108, 810–818. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.04.006

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Eerland, A., Guadalupe, T. M., and Zwaan, R. A. (2011). Leaning to the left makes the eiffel tower seem smaller. Psychol. Sci. 22, 1511–1514. doi: 10.1177/0956797611420731

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Eriksen, C. W., and St. James, J. D. (1986). Visual attention within and around the weld of focal attention: a zoom lens model. Percept. Psychophys. 40, 225–240. doi: 10.3758/bf03211502

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Fattorini, E., Pinto, M., Rotondaro, F., and Doricchi, F. (2015). Perceiving numbers does not cause automatic shifts of spatial attention. Cortex 73, 298–316. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2015.09.007

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Fias, W., and Fischer, M. H. (2005). “Spatial representation of numbers,” in Handbook of Mathematical Cognition, ed. J. Campbell, (London: Routledge), 43–54.

Google Scholar

Fischer, M. H. (2003). Cognitive representation of negative numbers. Psychol. Sci. 14, 278–282. doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.03435

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Fischer, M. H. (2008). Finger counting habits modulate spatial-numerical associations. Cortex 44, 386–392. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2007.08.004

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Fischer, M. H., and Brugger, P. (2011). When digits help digits: spatial–numerical associations point to finger counting as prime example of embodied cognition. Front. Psychol. 2:260. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00260

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Fischer, M. H., Castel, A. D., Dodd, M. D., and Pratt, J. (2003). Perceiving numbers causes spatial shifts of attention. Nat. Neurosci. 6, 555–556. doi: 10.1038/nn1066

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Fischer, M. H., Mills, R. A., and Shaki, S. (2010). How to cook a snarc: number placement in text rapidly changes spatial-numerical associations? Brain Cogn. 72, 333–336. doi: 10.1016/j.bandc.2009.10.010

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Galfano, G., Rusconi, E., and Umiltà, C. (2006). Number magnitude orients attention, but not against one’s will. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 13, 869–874. doi: 10.3758/bf03194011

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Gevers, W., Reynvoet, B., and Fias, W. (2003). The mental representation of ordinal sequences is spatially organized. Cognition 87, B87–B95.

Google Scholar

Gevers, W., Reynvoet, B., and Fias, W. (2004). The mental representation of ordinal sequences is spatially organized: evidence from days of the week. Cortex 40, 171–172. doi: 10.1016/s0010-9452(08)70938-9

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Göbel, S. M., Shaki, S., and Fischer, M. H. (2011). The cultural number line: a review of cultural and linguistic influences on the development of number processing. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 42, 543–565. doi: 10.1177/0022022111406251

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Hung, Y. H., Hung, D. L., Tzeng, O. J. L., and Wu, D. H. (2008). Flexible spatial mapping of different notations of numbers in Chinese readers. Cognition 106, 1441–1450. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.04.017

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Kong, F., Zhao, J., You, X., and Zhang, Y. (2012). The attentional SNARC effect caused by low-level processing of negative numbers in auditory modality. Stud. Psychol. Behav. 10, 12–17.

Google Scholar

Kopiske, K. K., Löwenkamp, C., Eloka, O., Schiller, F., and Kao, C. S. (2016). The SNARC effect in Chinese numerals: do visual properties of characters and hand signs influence number processing? PLoS One 11:e0163897. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0163897

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Lindemann, O., Alipour, A., and Fischer, M. H. (2011). Finger counting habits in middle eastern and western individuals: an online survey. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 42, 566–578. doi: 10.1177/0022022111406254

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Liu, C., Mai, X.-Q., and Fu, X.-L. (2004). The spatial numerical association of response codes effect of number processing in different attention conditions. Acta Psychol. Sin. 36, 671–680.

Google Scholar

Liu, C., Tang, H., Luo, Y. J., and Mai, X. (2011). Multi-representation of symbolic and nonsymbolic numerical magnitude in Chinese number processing. PLoS One 6:e19373. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0019373

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Macnamara, A., Keage, H. A., and Loetscher, T. (2018). Mapping of non-numerical domains on space: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Exp. Brain Res. 236, 335–346. doi: 10.1007/s00221-017-5154-6

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Mapelli, D., Rusconi, E., and Umiltà, C. (2003). The SNARC effect: an instance of the Simon effect? Cognition 88, B1–B10.

Google Scholar

Nuerk, H. C., Wood, G., and Willmes, K. (2005). The universal SNARC effect: the association between number magnitude and space is amodal. Exp. Psychol. 52, 187–194. doi: 10.1027/1618-3169.52.3.187

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Pellegrino, M., Pinto, M., Marson, F., Lasaponara, S., Rossi-Arnaud, C., Cestari, V., et al. (2019). The Attentional-SNARC effect 16 years later: no automatic space–number association (taking into account finger counting style, imagery vividness, and learning style in 174 participants). Exp. Brain Res. 237, 2633–2643. doi: 10.1007/s00221-019-05617-9

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Posner, M. L., Snyder, C. R. R., and Davidson, J. B. (1980). Attention and the detection of signals. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 109, 160–174.

Google Scholar

Prpic, V., Fumarola, A., De Tommaso, M., Luccio, R., Murgia, M., and Agostini, T. (2016). Separate mechanisms for magnitude and order processing in the spatial-numerical association of response codes (SNARC) effect: The strange case of musical note values. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 42:1241. doi: 10.1037/xhp0000217

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Prpic, V., Soranzo, A., Santoro, I., Fantoni, C., Galmonte, A., Agostini, T., et al. (2018). SNARC-like compatibility effects for physical and phenomenal magnitudes: a study on visual illusions. Psychol. Res. 1–16.

Google Scholar

Restle, F. (1970). Speed of adding and comparing numbers. J. Exp. Psychol. 95, 437–444.

Google Scholar

Ristic, J., Wright, A., and Kingstone, A. (2006). The number line effect reflects top-down control. Psychono. Bull. Rev. 13, 862–868. doi: 10.3758/bf03194010

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Shaki, S., Fischer, M. H., and Petrusic, W. M. (2009). Reading habits for both words and numbers contribute to the SNARC effect. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 16, 328–331. doi: 10.3758/pbr.16.2.328

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Van Dijck, J. P., Abrahamse, E. L., Acar, F., Ketels, B., and Fias, W. (2014). A working memory account of the interaction between numbers and spatial attention. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 67, 1500–1513. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2014.903984

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Van Dijck, J. P., Gevers, W., Lafosse, C., and Fias, W. (2012). The heterogeneous nature of number space interactions. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 5:182. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2011.00182

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Yang, T., Chen, C., Zhou, X., Xu, J., Dong, Q., and Chen, C. (2014). Development of spatial representation of numbers: a study of the SNARC effect in Chinese children. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 117, 1–11. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2013.08.011

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Zanolie, K., and Pecher, D. (2014). Number-induced shifts in spatial attention: a replication study. Front. Psychol. 5:987. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00987

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Zhao, T., He, X., Zhao, X., Huang, J., Zhang, W., Wu, S., et al. (2018). The influence of time units on the flexibility of the spatial numerical association of response codes effect. Br. J. Psychol. 109, 299–320. doi: 10.1111/bjop.12273

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar