Cited by 113Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skillsTactile and Sensory InteractionsMultisensory perception and integration

Absence of visual experience modifies the neural basis of numerical thinking

Open access
Kanjlia, Shipra, Lane, Connor, Feigenson, Lisa, Bedny, Marina·2016·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Significance: Human numerical reasoning relies on a cortical network that includes frontal and parietal regions. We asked how the neural basis of numerical reasoning is shaped by experience by comparing congenitally blind and sighted individuals. Participants performed auditory math and language tasks while undergoing fMRI. Both groups activated frontoparietal number regions during the math task, suggesting that some aspects of the neural basis of numerical cognition develop independently of visual experience. However, blind participants additionally recruited early visual cortices that, in sighted populations, perform visual processing. In blindness, these “visual” areas showed sensitivity to mathematical difficulty. These results suggest that experience can radically change the neural basis of numerical thinking. Hence, human cortex has a broad computational capacity early in development.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.1524982113

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Previous studies have shown that sentences with content words lead to larger responses in the perisylvian fronto-temporal language network than spoken equations or logical statements with variables.

    “Although all of the tasks in the language/math/logic localizer contain language stimuli, previous studies have shown that sentences with content words lead to larger responses in the perisylvian fronto-temporal language network than spoken equations or logical statements with variables (Kanjlia et al., 2016; Monti et al., 2009; Monti et al., 2012).”
  • Previous studies have found that responses to language, logic and math when compared to each other were similar to what was observed for each domain relative to independent control conditions.

    “Furthermore, previous studies have found that responses to language, logic and math when compared to each other were similar to what was observed for each domain relative to independent control conditions (e.g. sentences relative to lists of non-words for language, and easy vs. hard logic problems; Kanjlia et al., 2016; Monti et al., 2009, Monti et al., 2012).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Grill-Spector K, et al. (1998) A sequence of object-processing stages revealed by fMRI in the human occipital lobe. Hum Brain Mapp 6(4):316-328.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kanjlia, S., Lane, C., Feigenson, L., & Bedny, M.
Affiliations
Johns Hopkins University (US)
Corresponding author
Kanjlia, Shipra
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2016-09-16
Volume
113
Issue
40
Pages
11172-11177
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2519594211
Cited by
113
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4
FWCI
10.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (DGE-1232825)
  • Science of Learning Institute at Johns Hopkins University (80034917)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Multisensory perception and integration
Keywords
numerical cognition, congenital blindness, visual experience, intraparietal sulcus, cross-modal plasticity, deafferentation, visual cortex, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, functional connectivity, neuroplasticity
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Behavior, Blindness, Brain, Brain Mapping, Demography, Female, Humans, Language, Male, Mathematics, Middle Aged, Occipital Lobe, Rest, Task Performance and Analysis, Thinking, Vision, Ocular, Visual Cortex, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review