| Title |
Is pupillary response a reliable index of word recognition? Evidence from a delayed lexical decision task
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Behavior Research Methods, December 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3758/s13428-016-0835-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Juan Haro, Marc Guasch, Blanca Vallès, Pilar Ferré |
| Abstract |
Previous word recognition studies have shown that the pupillary response is sensitive to a word's frequency. However, such a pupillary effect may be due to the process of executing a response, instead of being an index of word processing. With the aim of exploring this possibility, we recorded the pupillary responses in two experiments involving a lexical decision task (LDT). In the first experiment, participants completed a standard LDT, whereas in the second they performed a delayed LDT. The delay in the response allowed us to compare pupil dilations with and without the response execution component. The results showed that pupillary response was modulated by word frequency in both the standard and the delayed LDT. This finding supports the reliability of using pupillometry for word recognition research. Importantly, our results also suggest that tasks that do not require a response during pupil recording lead to clearer and stronger effects. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Turkey | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 43 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 23% |
| Researcher | 6 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 11% |
| Professor | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 6 | 14% |
| Unknown | 10 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 14 | 32% |
| Linguistics | 9 | 20% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Unknown | 10 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 13 December 2016.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Behavior Research Methods
#1,980
of 2,525 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#317,237
of 420,276 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavior Research Methods
#19
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,525 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 420,276 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.