↓ Skip to main content

Action ability modulates time-to-collision judgments

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
Title
Action ability modulates time-to-collision judgments
Published in
Experimental Brain Research, June 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00221-017-5008-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eleonora Vagnoni, Vasiliki Andreanidou, Stella F. Lourenco, Matthew R. Longo

Abstract

Time-to-collision (TTC) underestimation has been interpreted as an adaptive response that allows observers to have more time to engage in a defensive behaviour. This bias seems, therefore, strongly linked to action preparation. There is evidence that the observer's physical fitness modulates the underestimation effect so that people who need more time to react (i.e. those with less physical fitness) show a stronger underestimation effect. Here we investigated whether this bias is influenced by the momentary action capability of the observers. In the first experiment, participants estimated the time-to-collision of threatening or non-threatening stimuli while being mildly immobilized (with a chin rest) or while standing freely. Having reduced the possibility of movement led participants to show more underestimation of the approaching stimuli. However, this effect was not stronger for threatening relative to non-threatening stimuli. The effect of the action capability found in the first experiment could be interpreted as an expansion of peripersonal space (PPS). In the second experiment, we thus investigated the generality of this effect using an established paradigm to measure the size of peripersonal space. Participants bisected lines from different distances while in the chin rest or standing freely. The results replicated the classic left-to-right gradient in lateral spatial attention with increasing viewing distance, but no effect of immobilization was found. The manipulation of the momentary action capability of the observers influenced the participants' performance in the TTC task but not in the line bisection task. These results are discussed in relation to the different functions of PPS.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 57 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 21%
Student > Master 7 12%
Researcher 6 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 10 18%
Unknown 14 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 25 44%
Neuroscience 5 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 16 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 11 July 2017.
All research outputs
#6,388,035
of 23,906,448 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#653
of 3,316 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,777
of 320,335 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#16
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,906,448 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,316 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 320,335 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.