| Title |
Felt heaviness is used to perceive the affordance for throwing but rotational inertia does not affect either
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Experimental Brain Research, October 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00221-012-3301-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Qin Zhu, Kevin Shockley, Michael A. Riley, Michael T. Tolston, Geoffrey P. Bingham |
| Abstract |
Bingham et al. discovered a perceptible affordance property, composed of a relation between object weight and size, used to select optimal objects for long-distance throwing. Subsequent research confirmed this finding, but disconfirmed a hypothesis formulated by Bingham et al. about the information used to perceive the affordance. Following this, Zhu and Bingham investigated the possibility that optimal objects for throwing are selected as having a particular felt heaviness. The results supported this hypothesis. Perceived heaviness exhibits the size-weight illusion: to be perceived as equally heavy, larger objects must weigh more than smaller ones. Amazeen and Turvey showed that heaviness perception is determined by rotational inertia. We investigated whether rotational inertia would determine both perceived heaviness and throw-ability when spherical objects were held in the hand and wielded about the wrist. We found again that a particular judged heaviness corresponded to judged throw-ability. However, rotational inertia was found to have no effect on either judgment, suggesting that rotational inertia does not determine perceived heaviness of spherical objects held in the hand, as it did for the weighted-rod-type objects used by Amazeen and Turvey. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 23 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 29% |
| Professor | 5 | 21% |
| Researcher | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 21% |
| Unknown | 1 | 4% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 12 | 50% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 8% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Unknown | 2 | 8% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 December 2012.
All research outputs
#2,432,398
of 22,684,168 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#173
of 3,218 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,979
of 183,259 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#1
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,684,168 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,218 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 183,259 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.