| Abstract: | This study mainly investigated the specificity of the processing of fraction magnitudes. Adults performed a magnitude-estimation task on fractions, the ratios of collections of dots, and the ratios of surface areas. Their performance on fractions was directly compared with that on nonsymbolic ratios. At odds with the hypothesis that the symbolic notation impedes the processing of the ratio magnitudes, the estimates were less variable and more accurate for fractions than for nonsymbolic ratios. This indicates that the symbolic notation activated a more precise mental representation than did the nonsymbolic ratios. This study also showed, for both fractions and the ratios of dot collections, that the larger the components the less precise the mental representation of the magnitude of the ratio. This effect suggests that the mental representation of the magnitude of the ratio was activated from the mental representation of the magnitude of the components and the processing of their numerical relation (indirect access). Finally, because most previous studies of fractions have used a numerical comparison task, we tested whether the mental representation of magnitude activated in the fraction-estimation task could also underlie performance in the fraction-comparison task. The subjective distance between the fractions to be compared was computed from the mean and the variability of the estimates. This distance was the best predictor of the time taken to compare the fractions, suggesting that the same approximate mental representation of the magnitude was activated in both tasks. |
