Contextual Scaling of Representational Uncertainty for Size and Number

preprint OA: closed CC-BY-NC-ND-4.0
📄 Open PDF Full text JSON View at publisher

Abstract

Accurate discrimination of magnitudes, such as object size and quantity, is crucial for effective action selection and decision-making. A fundamental principle in magnitude discrimination is that discriminability is determined by the ratio of the stimulus values being compared, as formalized by Weber-Fechner’s law. Here, we show evidence that the discriminability of numerosity is not as robust as previously thought; rather, it is influenced by task-irrelevant environmental statistics. We measured discrimination thresholds in 24 participants performing a numerosity discrimination task in which pairs of dot arrays were presented either simultaneously or sequentially. Stimulus values were sampled from either narrow or wide ranges. Our findings revealed that, although the magnitude pairs were identical, discrimination performance was significantly better (i.e., lower threshold) when stimulus values were sampled from a narrow-range compared to a wide-range. Strikingly, this improvement was observed only when the stimuli were presented sequentially. A similar pattern emerged in a size discrimination task with analogous manipulations. A control experiment ruled out potential confounding variables related to stimulus variety, emphasizing the importance of the stimulus range in gaining this benefit. Together, these findings suggest that perceptual variability is flexibly scaled according to context, particularly when the representations are less reliable. Our study highlights the adaptive nature of stimulus encoding strategies, whereby the brain minimizes representational uncertainty by dynamically leveraging contextual information.
Full text 1,738 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · click to expand
Abstract Accurate discrimination of magnitudes, such as object size and quantity, is crucial for effective action selection and decision-making. A fundamental principle in magnitude discrimination is that discriminability is determined by the ratio of the stimulus values being compared, as formalized by Weber-Fechner’s law. Here, we show evidence that the discriminability of numerosity is not as robust as previously thought; rather, it is influenced by task-irrelevant environmental statistics. We measured discrimination thresholds in 24 participants performing a numerosity discrimination task in which pairs of dot arrays were presented either simultaneously or sequentially. Stimulus values were sampled from either narrow or wide ranges. Our findings revealed that, although the magnitude pairs were identical, discrimination performance was significantly better (i.e., lower threshold) when stimulus values were sampled from a narrow-range compared to a wide-range. Strikingly, this improvement was observed only when the stimuli were presented sequentially. A similar pattern emerged in a size discrimination task with analogous manipulations. A control experiment ruled out potential confounding variables related to stimulus variety, emphasizing the importance of the stimulus range in gaining this benefit. Together, these findings suggest that perceptual variability is flexibly scaled according to context, particularly when the representations are less reliable. Our study highlights the adaptive nature of stimulus encoding strategies, whereby the brain minimizes representational uncertainty by dynamically leveraging contextual information. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2025) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-05-27T02:00:06.600101+00:00
License: CC-BY-NC-ND-4.0