↓ Skip to main content

Does direction of walking impact binocular rivalry between competing patterns of optic flow?

Overview of attention for article published in Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
Title
Does direction of walking impact binocular rivalry between competing patterns of optic flow?
Published in
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, February 2017
DOI 10.3758/s13414-017-1299-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Richard Paris, Bobby Bodenheimer, Randolph Blake

Abstract

When dissimilar monocular images are viewed simultaneously by the two eyes, stable binocular vision gives way to unstable vision characterized by alternations in dominance between the two images in a phenomenon called binocular rivalry. These alternations in perception reveal the existence of inhibitory interactions between neural representations associated with conflicting visual inputs. Binocular rivalry has been studied since the days of Wheatstone, but one recent strategy is to investigate its susceptibility to influences caused by one's own motor activity. This paper focused on the activity of walking, which produces an expected, characteristic direction of optic flow dependent upon the direction of one's walking. In a set of experiments, we employed virtual reality technology to present dichoptic stimuli to observers who walked forward, backward, or were sitting. Optic flow was presented to a given eye, and was sometimes congruent with the direction of walking, sometimes incongruent, and sometimes random, except when the participant was sitting. Our results indicate that, while walking had a reliable influence on rivalry dynamics, the predominance of congruent or incongruent motion did not.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 21%
Student > Master 5 13%
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Researcher 3 8%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 11 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 12 32%
Neuroscience 3 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Engineering 2 5%
Sports and Recreations 2 5%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 14 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 16 April 2019.
All research outputs
#14,035,952
of 24,003,070 outputs
Outputs from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#552
of 1,773 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#216,153
of 434,492 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#7
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,003,070 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,773 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 434,492 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.