Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Please contact Annabelle Blangero at if you would like to get in touch.

How much, how high, how fast, how many? We routinely evaluate information based on abstractions of magnitude, be it in our everyday judgments or in psychophysical experiments. In this talk, I will address in particular two questions: (i) how is magnitude information kept in working memory (WM), and (ii) how do humans integrate abstract magnitude in comparative decisions? I will review evidence that keeping stimulus information ‘active’ in WM can involve high-level representations of magnitude in frontal areas, even in putatively simple psychophysical tasks. These findings will be discussed in light of contemporary models of WM function and therein, I will outline a potential role of beta-oscillations in endogenous content updating. In the second part of my talk, I will present new evidence for human biases in integrating numerical magnitude in decision making. One study showed that during comparison of approximate number, the weight of sequential inputs is not constant, but fluctuates at the rhythm of endogenous low-frequency signals over parietal cortex. Lastly, I will illustrate a novel, systematic bias in numerical comparisons, which, paradoxically, may act to maximise accuracy in human observers.