| Title |
Stimulus Overselectivity Four Decades Later: A Review of the Literature and Its Implications for Current Research in Autism Spectrum Disorder
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, March 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10803-010-0990-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bertram O. Ploog |
| Abstract |
This review of several topics related to "stimulus overselectivity" (Lovaas et al., J Abnormal Psychol 77:211-222, 1971) has three main purposes: (1) To outline the factors that may contribute to overselectivity; (2) to link the behavior-analytical notion of overselectivity to current nonbehavior-analytical research and theory; and (3) to suggest remedial strategies based on the behavior-analytical approach. While it is clear that overselectivity is not specific to autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and also that not all persons with ASD exhibit overselectivity, it is prevalent in ASD and has critical implications for symptoms, treatment, research, and theory. Weak Central Coherence and Enhanced Perceptual Functioning theories are briefly considered. The research areas addressed here include theory of mind, joint attention, language development, and executive function. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 169 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 167 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 33 | 20% |
| Researcher | 24 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 21 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 13 | 8% |
| Other | 24 | 14% |
| Unknown | 38 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 79 | 47% |
| Social Sciences | 12 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 4% |
| Engineering | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 16 | 9% |
| Unknown | 40 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 19 April 2022.
All research outputs
#7,390,600
of 23,867,274 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
#2,687
of 5,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,054
of 109,101 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
#22
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,867,274 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
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 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 109,101 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 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.