| Title |
Online Action Monitoring and Memory for Self-Performed Actions in Autism Spectrum Disorder
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, November 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10803-013-1987-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Catherine Grainger, David M. Williams, Sophie E. Lind |
| Abstract |
This study explored whether individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) experience difficulties with action monitoring. Two experimental tasks examined whether adults with ASD are able to monitor their own actions online, and whether they also show a typical enactment effects in memory (enhanced memory for actions they have performed compared to actions they have observed being performed). Individuals with ASD and comparison participants showed a similar pattern of performance on both tasks. In a task which required individuals to distinguish person-caused from computer-caused changes in phenomenology both groups found it easier to monitor their own actions compared to those of an experimenter. Both groups also showed typical enactment effects. Despite recent suggestions to the contrary, these results support suggestions that action monitoring is unimpaired in ASD. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Scientists | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 73 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 18% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 9% |
| Researcher | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 10 | 14% |
| Unknown | 20 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 29 | 39% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 8 | 11% |
| Unknown | 25 | 34% |
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 05 December 2013.
All research outputs
#14,108,848
of 23,867,274 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
#3,466
of 5,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,916
of 219,560 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
#40
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,867,274 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 5,240 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 219,560 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.