Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Advertisement

Scientific Reports
  • View all journals
  • Search
  • My Account Login
  • Content Explore content
  • About the journal
  • Publish with us
  • Sign up for alerts
  • RSS feed
  1. nature
  2. scientific reports
  3. articles
  4. article
Measuring SNARC effect: different task setups reveal divergent spatial-numerical associations
Download PDF
Download PDF
  • Article
  • Open access
  • Published: 16 March 2026

Measuring SNARC effect: different task setups reveal divergent spatial-numerical associations

  • Merve Bulut1,3,
  • Ayşenur Candemir4,
  • Melike Şefikoğlu2,4,
  • Beria Haugen4,
  • Hakan Çetinkaya1,3 &
  • …
  • Seda Dural2,4 

Scientific Reports , Article number:  (2026) Cite this article

  • 586 Accesses

  • Metrics details

We are providing an unedited version of this manuscript to give early access to its findings. Before final publication, the manuscript will undergo further editing. Please note there may be errors present which affect the content, and all legal disclaimers apply.

Subjects

  • Neuroscience
  • Psychology

Abstract

Spatial-Numerical Associations (SNAs) reflect the cognitive link between numerical magnitude and spatial orientation. While the SNARC effect, faster-left responses for small numbers and right responses for large ones, is robust in Western populations, findings from Turkish samples have been inconsistent. This study investigated whether methodological factors, including statistical power, sensitivity of measurement, and task setup, contribute to these inconsistencies. Using high-powered, lab-based parity judgment (PJ) and magnitude classification tasks, which are standard task setups when investigating the SNARC effect, as well as a novel Go/No-go (GNG) paradigm with lateralized stimuli and a central response, we examined directional SNAs in Turkish participants. Results revealed a weak reverse SNARC effect in the standard PJ task and a weak left-to-right SNA in the GNG PJ task, but no reliable group-level effects in magnitude tasks. Task setup significantly influenced directional SNA patterns, with opposite effects observed between standard and GNG PJ tasks. These findings suggest that SNAs are context-dependent, with different task setups activating distinct directional SNAs. This highlights the critical importance of methodological design when investigating SNAs.

Similar content being viewed by others

Impact of deafness on numerical tasks implying visuospatial and verbal processes

Article Open access 01 July 2022

The influence of semantics and numerical representation on the SNARC effect

Article Open access 15 April 2025

Manual pointing bias reflects spatial organization of number knowledge

Article Open access 11 February 2026

Data availability

The pre-registration, data, and analysis are available in The Open Science Framework (OSF) at [https://osf.io/g3b84/].

References

  1. Cipora, K., Patro, K. & Nuerk, H.-C. Situated influences on spatial–numerical associations. In Spatial Biases in Perception and Cognition (ed. Hubbard, T.) 41–49 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2018).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Dehaene, S., Bossini, S. & Giraux, P. The mental representation of parity and number magnitude. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 122(3), 371–396. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.122.3.371 (1993).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Cipora, K., Soltanlou, M., Reips, U.-D. & Nuerk, H.-C. The SNARC and MARC effects measured online: Large-scale assessment methods in flexible cognitive effects. Behav. Res. Methods 51(4), 1676–1692. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-019-01213-5 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Hubbard, E. M., Piazza, M., Pinel, P. & Dehaene, S. Interactions between number and space in parietal cortex. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 6(6), 435–448. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1684 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Wood, G., Willmes, K., Nuerk, H.-C. & Fischer, M. H. On the cognitive link between space and number: A meta-analysis of the SNARC effect. Psychol. Sci. Q. 50(4), 489–525 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Dehaene, S., Dupoux, E. & Mehler, J. Is numerical comparison digital? Analogical and symbolic effects in two-digit number comparison. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 16(3), 626–641. https://doi.org/10.1037/00961523.16.3.626 (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Fias, W., Brysbaert, M., Geypens, F. & d’Ydewalle, G. The importance of magnitude information in numerical processing: Evidence from the SNARC effect. Math. Cogn. 2(1), 95–110. https://doi.org/10.1080/135467996387552 (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Notebaert, W., Gevers, W., Verguts, T. & Fias, W. Shared spatial representations for numbers and space: The reversal of the SNARC and the Simon effects. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 32(5), 1197–1207. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.32.5.1197 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Roth, L., Cipora, K., Nuerk, H. C., Reips, U. D. & Caffier, J. True colors SNARCing: Automaticity of the SNARC effect—Evidence from color judgment tasks. Preprint at OSF Preprints. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/aeyn8 (2024).

  10. Fias, W., Lauwereyns, J. & Lammertyn, J. Irrelevant digits affect feature-based attention depending on the overlap of neural circuits. Cogn. Brain Res. 12(3), 415–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0926-6410(01)00078-7 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Lammertyn, J., Fias, W. & Lauwereyns, J. Semantic influences on feature-based attention due to overlap of neural circuits. Cortex 38(5), 878–882. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-9452(08)70061-3 (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Nuerk, H. C., Wood, G. & Willmes, K. The universal SNARC effect: The association between number magnitude and space is amodal. J. Exp. Psychol. 52(3), 187–194. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169.52.3.187 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Fischer, M. H. Spatial representations in number processing—Evidence from a pointing task. Vis. Cogn. 10(4), 493–508. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506280244000186 (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Fischer, M. H., Warlop, N., Hill, R. L. & Fias, W. Oculomotor bias induced by number perception. Exp. Psychol. 51(2), 91–97. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169.51.2.91 (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Schwarz, W. & Müller, D. Spatial associations in number-related tasks: A comparison of manual and pedal responses. Exp. Psychol. 53(1), 4–15. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169.53.1.4 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Proctor, R. W. & Cho, Y. S. Polarity correspondence: A general principle for performance of speeded binary classification tasks. Psychol. Bull. 132(3), 416–442. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.3.416 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Gevers, W., Verguts, T., Reynvoet, B., Caessens, B. & Fias, W. Numbers and space: A computational model of the SNARC effect. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 32(1), 32–44. https://doi.org/10.1037/00961523.32.1.32 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  18. van Dijck, J.-P. & Fias, W. A working memory account for spatial–numerical associations. Cognition 119(1), 114–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2010.12.013 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Zhang, P., Cao, B. & Li, F. The role of cognitive control in the SNARC effect: A review. PsyCh J. 11(6), 792–803. https://doi.org/10.1002/pchj.586 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Adachi, I. Spontaneous spatial mapping of learned sequence in chimpanzees: Evidence for a SNARC-like effect. PLoS ONE 9, e90373. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0090373 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Giurfa, M., Marcout, C., Hilpert, P., Thevenot, C. & Rugani, R. An insect brain organizes numbers on a left-to-right mental number line. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 119, e2203584119. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2203584119 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Rugani, R., Vallortigara, G., Priftis, K. & Regolin, L. Number–space mapping in the newborn chick resembles humans’ mental number line. Science 347(6221), 534–536. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa1379 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Bulf, H., de Hevia, M. D. & Macchi Cassia, V. Small on the left, large on the right: Numbers orient visual attention onto space in preverbal infants. Dev. Sci. 19(3), 394–401. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12315 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  24. de Hevia, M. D., Girelli, L., Addabbo, M. & Macchi Cassia, V. Human infants’ preference for left-to-right oriented increasing numerical sequences. PLoS ONE 9(5), e96412. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0096412 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Di Giorgio, E. et al. A mental number line in human newborns. Dev. Sci. 22(6), e12801. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12801 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  26. McCrink, K. & Opfer, J. E. Development of spatial–numerical associations. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 23(6), 439–445. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721414549751 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  27. Bächtold, D., Baumüller, M. & Brugger, P. Stimulus–response compatibility in representational space. Neuropsychologia 36(8), 731–735. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0028-3932(98)00002-5 (1998).

    Google Scholar 

  28. Mingolo, S. et al. Snarcing with a phone: The role of order in spatial-numerical associations is revealed by context and task demands. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 47(10), 1365–1377. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000947 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Mingolo, S., Prpic, V., Mariconda, A. & Murgia, M. It’s SNARC o’ clock: Manipulating the salience of the context in a conceptual replication of Bächtold et al.’s (1998) clockface study. Psychol. Res. 88, 837–851. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-023-01893-x (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Bae, G. Y., Choi, J. M., Cho, Y. S. & Proctor, R. W. Transfer of magnitude and spatial mappings to the SNARC effect for parity judgments. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 35(6), 1506–1521. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017257 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Bulut, M., Çetinkaya, H. & Dural, S. SNARC effect in a transfer paradigm: Long-lasting effects of stimulus–response compatibility practices. Psychol. Res. 89(1), 47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-024-02057-1 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  32. Fischer, M. H., Mills, R. A. & Shaki, S. How to cook a SNARC: Number placement in text rapidly changes spatial–numerical associations. Brain Cogn. 72(3), 333–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2009.10.010 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  33. Palaz, E., Çetinkaya, H., Tuncali, Z., Kamar, B. & Dural, S. Practice-induced SNARC: Evidence from a null-SNARC sample. Cogn. Process. 25, 601–612. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-024-01198-w (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Pitt, B. & Casasanto, D. The correlations in experience principle: How culture shapes concepts of time and number. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 149(6), 1048–1070. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000696 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  35. Kopiske, K. K. et al. The SNARC effect in Chinese numerals: Do visual properties of characters and hand signs influence number processing?. PLoS ONE 11(9), e0163897. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0163897 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  36. Ito, Y. & Hatta, T. Spatial structure of quantitative representation of numbers: Evidence from the SNARC effect. Mem. Cogn. 32(4), 662–673. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03195857 (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  37. Shaki, S., Fischer, M. H. & Petrusic, W. M. Reading habits for both words and numbers contribute to the SNARC effect. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 16(2), 328–331. https://doi.org/10.3758/pbr.16.2.328 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  38. Zebian, S. Linkages between number concepts, spatial thinking, and directionality of writing: The SNARC effect and the reverse SNARC effect in English and Arabic monoliterates, biliterates, and illiterate Arabic speakers. J. Cogn. Cult. 5(1–2), 165–190. https://doi.org/10.1163/1568537054068660 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  39. Lopiccolo, D. & Chang, C. B. Cultural factors weaken but do not reverse left-to-right spatial biases in numerosity processing: Data from Arabic and English monoliterates and Arabic-English biliterates. PLoS ONE 16(12), e0261146. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0261146 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  40. Shaki, S., Petrusic, W. M. & Leth-Steensen, C. SNARC effects with numerical and non-numerical symbolic comparative judgments: Instructional and cultural dependencies. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 38(2), 515–530. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026729 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  41. Fischer, M. H. & Shaki, S. Measuring spatial–numerical associations: Evidence for a purely conceptual link. Psychol. Res. 80, 109–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-015-0646-0 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  42. Zohar-Shai, B., Tzelgov, J., Karni, A. & Rubinsten, O. It does exist! A left-to-right spatial–numerical association of response codes (SNARC) effect among native Hebrew speakers. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 43(4), 719–728. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000336 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  43. Rashidi‐Ranjbar, N., Goudarzvand, M., Jahangiri, S., Brugger, P. & Loetscher, T. No horizontal numerical mapping in a culture with mixed-reading habits. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 8, 72. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00072 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  44. Bulut, M. et al. One direction? Cultural aspects of the mental number line beyond reading direction. Psychol. Res. 89(1), 37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-024-02038-4 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Hochman, S., Havedanloo, R., Heysieattalab, S. & Soltanlou, M. How does language modulate the association between number and space? A registered report of a cross-cultural study of the spatial–numerical association of response codes effect. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001653 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  46. Bulut, M., Hepdarcan, I., Palaz, E., Çetinkaya, H. & Dural, S. No SNARC effect among left-to-right readers: Evidence from a Turkish sample. Adv. Cogn. Psychol. 19(3), 224–236. https://doi.org/10.5709/acp-0394-x (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  47. Dural, S., Çetinkaya, H., Hepdarcan, I., Gür, E. & Korkut, İ. Revisiting the SNARC effect: Testing magnitude classification in a Turkish sample typically lacking the SNARC effect. J. Cogn. Psychol. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2025.2482600 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  48. Kaya, C., Candemir, A., Kaya, D., Çetinkaya, H. & Dural, S. Investigating no SNARC: Do reading habits provide insight into the SNARC patterns of Turkish sample. J. Cogn. Cult. 25(3–4), 421–437. https://doi.org/10.1163/15685373-12340218 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  49. Patro, K., Fischer, U., Nuerk, H.-C. & Cress, U. How to rapidly construct a spatial–numerical representation in preliterate children (at least temporarily). Dev. Sci. 19(1), 126–144. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12296 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  50. Nuerk, H.-C. et al. How space–number associations may be created in preliterate children: Six distinct mechanisms. Front. Psychol. 6, 215. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00215 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  51. Casasanto, D. The hierarchical structure of mental metaphors. In Metaphor: Embodied Cognition and Discourse (ed. Hampe, B.) 46–61 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2017). https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108182324.004.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Cipora, K. & Wood, G. Finding the SNARC instead of hunting it: A 20×20 Monte Carlo investigation. Front. Psychol. 8, 1194. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01194 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  53. Nuerk, H.-C., Iversen, W. & Willmes, K. Notational modulation of the SNARC and the MARC (linguistic markedness of response codes) effect. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 57(5), 835–863. https://doi.org/10.1080/02724980343000512 (2004).

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  55. Shaki, S. & Fischer, M. H. How do numbers shift spatial attention? Both processing depth and counting habits matter. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 153(1), 171–183. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001493 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  56. Stoianov, I., Kramer, P., Umiltà, C. & Zorzi, M. Visuospatial priming of the mental number line. Cognition 106(2), 770–779. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.04.013 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  57. Keus, I. M. & Schwarz, W. Searching for the functional locus of the SNARC effect: Evidence for a response-related origin. Mem. Cogn. 33(4), 681–695. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03195335 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  58. Mapelli, D., Rusconi, E. & Umiltà, C. The SNARC effect: An instance of the Simon effect?. Cognition 88(3), B1–B10. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0010-0277(03)00042-8 (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  59. Shaki, S. & Fischer, M. H. Deconstructing spatial-numerical associations. Cognition 175, 109–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.02.022 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  60. Yılmaz, H. Learning to read (again): The social experiences of Turkey’s 1928 alphabet reform. Int. J. Middle East Stud. 43(4), 677–697. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020743811000900 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  61. Pitt, B. & Casasanto, D. The order of magnitude: Why SNARC-like tasks (still) cannot support a generalized magnitude system. Cogn. Sci. 46(2), e13108. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.13108 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  62. Nan, W., Yan, L., Yang, G., Liu, X. & Fu, S. Two processing stages of the SNARC effect. Psychol. Res. 86(2), 375–385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-021-01506-5 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  64. Fischer, M. H. & Shaki, S. Spatial associations in numerical cognition—From single digits to arithmetic. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 67(8), 1461–1483. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2014.927515 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  65. Oldfield, R. C. The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia 9(1), 97–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/0028-3932(71)90067-4 (1971).

    Google Scholar 

  66. Champely, S., Ekstrom, C., Dalgaard, P. & Gill, J. pwr: Basic functions for power analysis. Version 1.3–0 (2020). Available at https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=pwr

  67. Dienes, Z. How to use and report Bayesian hypothesis tests. Psychol. Conscious. Theory Res. Pract. 8(1), 9–26. https://doi.org/10.1037/cns0000258 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  68. Moyer, R. S. & Landauer, T. K. Time required for judgments of numerical inequality. Nature 215(5109), 1519–1520. https://doi.org/10.1038/2151519a0 (1967).

    Google Scholar 

  69. Tzelgov, J., Ganor-Stern, D., Kallai, A. Y. & Pinhas, M. Primitives and non-primitives of numerical representations. In The Oxford Handbook of Numerical Cognition (eds Kadosh, R. C. & Dowker, A.) 45–66 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2015).

    Google Scholar 

  70. Roth, L. et al. One and only SNARC? Spatial-numerical associations are not fully flexible and depend on both relative and absolute number magnitude. R. Soc. Open Sci. 12(1), 241585. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.241585 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  71. Fitousi, D., Shaki, S. & Algom, D. The role of parity, physical size, and magnitude in numerical cognition: The SNARC effect revisited. Percept. Psychophys. 71(1), 143–155. https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.71.1.143 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  72. van Dijck, J. P., Gevers, W. & Fias, W. Numbers are associated with different types of spatial information depending on the task. Cognition 113(2), 248–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2009.08.005 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  73. Georges, C., Hoffmann, D. & Schiltz, C. Mathematical abilities in elementary school: Do they relate to number–space associations?. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 161, 126–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2017.04.011 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  74. Didino, D., Breil, C. & Knops, A. The influence of semantic processing and response latency on the SNARC effect. Acta Psychol. 196, 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2019.04.008 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  75. Anobile, G., Petrizzo, I., Paiardini, D., Burr, D. C. & Cicchini, G. M. Sensorimotor mechanisms selective to numerosity: Evidence from individual differences. Elife 13, e92169. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.92169.2 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  76. Lakoff, G. & Núñez, R. E. Where Mathematics Comes From: How the Embodied Mind Brings Mathematics into Being (Basic Books, 2000).

    Google Scholar 

  77. Ristic, J., Wright, A. & Kingstone, A. The number line effect reflects top-down control. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 13(5), 862–868. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194010 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  78. van Galen, M. S. & Reitsma, P. Developing access to number magnitude: A study of the SNARC effect in 7- to 9-year-olds. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 101(2), 99–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2008.05.001 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  79. Moorkens, J., van Dijck, J. P. & Fias, W. The parity judgment SNARC effect: The role of response mapping order and the nature of the instruction. J. Numer. Cogn. 11, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.5964/jnc.15051 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Prof. Martin Fischer and Prof. Samuel Shaki for their valuable suggestions regarding the measurement of directional preferences in SNARC studies.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Yaşar University, Izmir, Turkey

    Merve Bulut & Hakan Çetinkaya

  2. Department of Psychology, Izmir University of Economics, Izmir, Turkey

    Melike Şefikoğlu & Seda Dural

  3. Neuro-Cognitive-Experimental Studies Laboratory (NEXUS Lab), Yaşar University, Izmir, Turkey

    Merve Bulut & Hakan Çetinkaya

  4. Space Magnitude Associations Research Team (SMART Lab), Izmir University of Economics, Izmir, Turkey

    Ayşenur Candemir, Melike Şefikoğlu, Beria Haugen & Seda Dural

Authors
  1. Merve Bulut
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ayşenur Candemir
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Melike Şefikoğlu
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Beria Haugen
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Hakan Çetinkaya
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Seda Dural
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

S.D., H.Ç, M.B., and A.C. conceptualized the study. A.C., M.Ş. and B. H. designed the experiments and collected the data. M.B and S.D. performed the formal analysis. M.B., A.C. and M.Ş wrote the original draft. S.D. and H.Ç. and B.H. reviewed and edited the manuscript. S.D. and H.Ç. supervised the project. All authors reviewed the final manuscript and approved its submission.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Seda Dural.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1 (download DOCX )

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bulut, M., Candemir, A., Şefikoğlu, M. et al. Measuring SNARC effect: different task setups reveal divergent spatial-numerical associations. Sci Rep (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-44140-0

Download citation

  • Received: 07 July 2025

  • Accepted: 10 March 2026

  • Published: 16 March 2026

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-44140-0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Keywords

  • SNAs
  • SNARC effect
  • Parity judgment
  • Magnitude classification
  • Go/No-go paradigm
  • Turkish sample
Download PDF

Associated content

Collection

Numerical cognition

Advertisement

Explore content

  • Research articles
  • News & Comment
  • Collections
  • Subjects
  • Follow us on Facebook
  • Follow us on X
  • Sign up for alerts
  • RSS feed

About the journal

  • About Scientific Reports
  • Contact
  • Journal policies
  • Guide to referees
  • Calls for Papers
  • Editor's Choice
  • Journal highlights
  • Open Access Fees and Funding

Publish with us

  • For authors
  • Language editing services
  • Open access funding
  • Submit manuscript

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

  • Explore articles by subject
  • Find a job
  • Guide to authors
  • Editorial policies

Scientific Reports (Sci Rep)

ISSN 2045-2322 (online)

nature.com footer links

About Nature Portfolio

  • About us
  • Press releases
  • Press office
  • Contact us

Discover content

  • Journals A-Z
  • Articles by subject
  • protocols.io
  • Nature Index

Publishing policies

  • Nature portfolio policies
  • Open access

Author & Researcher services

  • Reprints & permissions
  • Research data
  • Language editing
  • Scientific editing
  • Nature Masterclasses
  • Research Solutions

Libraries & institutions

  • Librarian service & tools
  • Librarian portal
  • Open research
  • Recommend to library

Advertising & partnerships

  • Advertising
  • Partnerships & Services
  • Media kits
  • Branded content

Professional development

  • Nature Awards
  • Nature Careers
  • Nature Conferences

Regional websites

  • Nature Africa
  • Nature China
  • Nature India
  • Nature Japan
  • Nature Middle East
  • Privacy Policy
  • Use of cookies
  • Legal notice
  • Accessibility statement
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Your US state privacy rights
Springer Nature

© 2026 Springer Nature Limited

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing