↓ Skip to main content

Tactile motion lacks momentum

Overview of attention for article published in Psychological Research, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
Title
Tactile motion lacks momentum
Published in
Psychological Research, June 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00426-017-0879-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gianluca Macauda, Bigna Lenggenhager, Rebekka Meier, Gregory Essick, Peter Brugger

Abstract

The displacement of the final position of a moving object in the direction of the observed motion path, i.e. an overestimation, is known as representational momentum. It has been described both in the visual and the auditory domain, and is suggested to be modality-independent. Here, we tested whether a representational momentum can also be demonstrated in the somatosensory domain. While the cognitive literature on representational momentum suggests that it can, previous work on the psychophysics of tactile motion perception would rather predict an underestimation of the perceived endpoint of a tactile stimulus. Tactile motion stimuli were applied on the left and the right dorsal forearms of 32 healthy participants, who were asked to indicate the subjectively perceived endpoint of the stimulation. Velocity, length and direction of the trajectory were varied. Contrary to the prediction based on the representational momentum literature, participants in our experiment significantly displaced the endpoint against the direction of movement (underestimation). The results are thus compatible with previous psychophysical findings on the perception of tactile motion. Further studies combining paradigms from classical psychophysics and cognitive psychology will be needed to resolve the apparently paradoxical predictions by the two literatures.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 17%
Student > Bachelor 3 13%
Researcher 3 13%
Student > Postgraduate 3 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 13%
Other 5 22%
Unknown 2 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 13 57%
Neuroscience 3 13%
Computer Science 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Engineering 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 17%
Attention Score in Context

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 01 September 2017.
All research outputs
#18,554,389
of 22,979,862 outputs
Outputs from Psychological Research
#771
of 974 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#242,014
of 317,335 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychological Research
#14
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,979,862 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 974 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 317,335 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.