Brain activity underlying response induced by SNARC‑congruent and SNARC‑incongruent stimuli.

Abstract

At least three well-documented phenomena indicate a relationship between numbers and the internal representation of space. They are shifting attention in accordance with the localization of numbers on the mental number line (MNL); the spatial‑numerical association of response codes (SNARC) effect, which manifests as faster responses to high numbers with the right hand than with the left, and vice versa for low numbers; and the processing of both numbers and space primarily in the parietal cortex. Some EEG studies have pointed to the response selection stage as a locus of this effect. However, this explanation has yet to be corroborated by the fMRI experiments. The goal of this study was to investigate the functional anatomy underlying response selection induced by SNARC‑congruent and SNARC‑incongruent stimuli in a spatial visual cueing task. Healthy adult volunteers responded to a pair of target stimuli consisting of digits, non‑digit symbols, or a mix of both. In each trial, the stimuli were preceded by a centrally presented numerical or non‑numerical cue stimulus which was required to be memorized. One of the target stimuli that then appeared would be identical to the cue; the task was to determine which side it was presented on, within the pair. In the case of numerical stimuli, the side was congruent with its localization on the MNL in one‑half of the trials. In the other half of the trials, it was incongruent. The behavioral results revealed the SNARC effect, as well as a faster reaction to low numbers than to high numbers. The fMRI responses to the target stimuli showed engagement of regions implicated in number processing but also in sensory‑motor areas. This suggests that the motor response selection or execution stage may be the locus of the SNARC effect. Yet, the activation pattern obtained in the congruent and incongruent conditions did not allow us to determine, indisputably, the neural correlates of the mechanisms involved in the SNARC effect. Moreover, we did not observe any stimulus-specific responses to cues.