<p>The ability to enumerate objects without counting is known as <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subitizing" rel="noreferrer">subitizing</a>.</p>
<p>Most studies suggest that we can subitize up to about 3 or 4 items (e.g. Starkey &amp; Cooper, 1995). Enumeration of a small number of objects (i.e. subitizing) yields consistent response times regardless of the quantity of objects. Enumeration of larger quantities (i.e. counting) yields response times that increase linearly with the number of objects. This is taken as evidence that the two processes are computationally distinct.</p>
<p>Further studies in both neuropsychology (Dehaene &amp; Cohen, 1994) and neuroimaging (Piazza et al., 2002) have supported the idea that separate neural substrates underly the two computational processes.</p>
<h1>References</h1>
<blockquote>
<p>Dehaene, S., &amp; Cohen, L. (1994). Dissociable mechanisms of subitizing and counting: Neuropsychological evidence from simultanagnosic patients. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Perception and Performance, 20(5), 958-975. <a href="http://www.unicog.org/publications/DehaeneCohen_SimultanagnosiaSubitizing_JEPHPP1994.pdf" rel="noreferrer">PDF</a></p>
<p>Piazza, M., Mechelli, A., Butterworth, B., &amp; Price, C. J. (2002). Are subitizing and counting implemented as separate or functionally overlapping processes?. Neuroimage, 15(2), 435-446. <a href="http://www.mathematicalbrain.com/pdf/SUBIT.PDF" rel="noreferrer">PDF</a></p>
<p>Starkey, P., &amp; Cooper, R. G. (1995). The development of subitizing in young children. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 13(4), 399-420.</p>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-05-03T17:35:33.880Z
@what the average is about 4, but there is definitely a range. you may be on the high end of the spectrum. there are two other alternatives i can think of: for eggs in a carton, you may simply be recognizing specific spatial patterns and associating them with numeric quantities. similarly for apples or other objects, perhaps you're using total spatial area as a proxy for quantity. these are not really subitizing, as they are domain-specific and rely on expertise.
Jeff
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-05-03T18:49:29.973Z
also remember that if you can subitize 4 items, counting to 5-6 will only tack on about 250-500ms, a very short amount of time. so i think it's difficult to establish whether you're counting or subitizing without using more controlled chronometry
Jeff
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-08-29T19:00:19.183Z
It is also important to note that subitizing can be confounded with pattern recognition with regard to canonical dot patterns (for example, the dots on the sides of a pair of dice), as those are easier to recognize than any other random arrangement of n objects, given n>3. The fact that it is difficult, if not impossible, to avoid canonical arrangements for n of 4 or less is also important.
Jonathan Thiele
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-05-01T21:04:45.767Z
2013-05-01T21:04:45.767Z
2020-06-17T09:55:31.633Z
Jeff
<p>I'm wondering, how many objects can the average human being can recognize?</p>

<p>For example, most of us can't look at this and say how many boxes there are  without counting them:</p>

<p><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/4KC2Z.jpg" alt="lots of boxes"></p>

<p>But I think we can all recognize that there are only 3 boxes here (without  manually counting):</p>

<p><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/9iioa.jpg" alt="3 boxes"></p>

<p>So how many objects can an average human being recognize at once?</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-01-05T07:34:58.090Z
I can identify up to 60 objects in a short period But i dont really use subitizing i use personal visual processing technique i close my eyes and it goes instinctively strangely when i keep my eyes open the dots or object ar harder for me to quantify
Yaya
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-09-06T17:29:00.657Z
2 better than 3 , 3 better than subitizing 4 , subitizing 4 better than 5 and five is the limit .
David Edwards
<cognitive-psychology><perception>
What is the maximum number of objects an average human being can recognize at once?
MiJyn
# What is the maximum number of objects an average human being can recognize at once?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2013-05-01)

I'm wondering, how many objects can the average human being can recognize?

For example, most of us can't look at this and say how many boxes there are without counting them:

![lots of boxes](https://i.sstatic.net/4KC2Z.jpg)

But I think we can all recognize that there are only 3 boxes here (without manually counting):

![3 boxes](https://i.sstatic.net/9iioa.jpg)

So how many objects can an average human being recognize at once?

**Tags:** cognitive-psychology, perception

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: I can identify up to 60 objects in a short period But i dont really use subitizing i use personal visual processing technique i close my eyes and it goes instinctively strangely when i keep my eyes open the dots or object ar harder for me to quantify  
> **username_2**: 2 better than 3 , 3 better than subitizing 4 , subitizing 4 better than 5 and five is the limit .  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2013-05-01. Score: 16 | Accepted answer

The ability to enumerate objects without counting is known as [subitizing](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subitizing).

Most studies suggest that we can subitize up to about 3 or 4 items (e.g. Starkey & Cooper, 1995). Enumeration of a small number of objects (i.e. subitizing) yields consistent response times regardless of the quantity of objects. Enumeration of larger quantities (i.e. counting) yields response times that increase linearly with the number of objects. This is taken as evidence that the two processes are computationally distinct.

Further studies in both neuropsychology (Dehaene & Cohen, 1994) and neuroimaging (Piazza et al., 2002) have supported the idea that separate neural substrates underly the two computational processes.

# References

> Dehaene, S., & Cohen, L. (1994). Dissociable mechanisms of subitizing and counting: Neuropsychological evidence from simultanagnosic patients. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Perception and Performance, 20(5), 958-975. [PDF](http://www.unicog.org/publications/DehaeneCohen_SimultanagnosiaSubitizing_JEPHPP1994.pdf)
>
> Piazza, M., Mechelli, A., Butterworth, B., & Price, C. J. (2002). Are subitizing and counting implemented as separate or functionally overlapping processes?. Neuroimage, 15(2), 435-446. [PDF](http://www.mathematicalbrain.com/pdf/SUBIT.PDF)
>
> Starkey, P., & Cooper, R. G. (1995). The development of subitizing in young children. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 13(4), 399-420.

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: @what the average is about 4, but there is definitely a range. you may be on the high end of the spectrum. there are two other alternatives i can think of: for eggs in a carton, you may simply be recognizing specific spatial patterns and associating them with numeric quantities. similarly for apples or other objects, perhaps you're using total spatial area as a proxy for quantity. these are not really subitizing, as they are domain-specific and rely on expertise.  
> **username_3**: also remember that if you can subitize 4 items, counting to 5-6 will only tack on about 250-500ms, a very short amount of time. so i think it's difficult to establish whether you're counting or subitizing without using more controlled chronometry  
> **username_4**: It is also important to note that subitizing can be confounded with pattern recognition with regard to canonical dot patterns (for example, the dots on the sides of a pair of dice), as those are easier to recognize than any other random arrangement of n objects, given n>3. The fact that it is difficult, if not impossible, to avoid canonical arrangements for n of 4 or less is also important.  

---

