↓ Skip to main content

Perceptual control models of pursuit manual tracking demonstrate individual specificity and parameter consistency

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#35 of 1,773)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
Title
Perceptual control models of pursuit manual tracking demonstrate individual specificity and parameter consistency
Published in
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, August 2017
DOI 10.3758/s13414-017-1398-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maximilian G. Parker, Sarah F. Tyson, Andrew P. Weightman, Bruce Abbott, Richard Emsley, Warren Mansell

Abstract

Computational models that simulate individuals' movements in pursuit-tracking tasks have been used to elucidate mechanisms of human motor control. Whilst there is evidence that individuals demonstrate idiosyncratic control-tracking strategies, it remains unclear whether models can be sensitive to these idiosyncrasies. Perceptual control theory (PCT) provides a unique model architecture with an internally set reference value parameter, and can be optimized to fit an individual's tracking behavior. The current study investigated whether PCT models could show temporal stability and individual specificity over time. Twenty adults completed three blocks of 15 1-min, pursuit-tracking trials. Two blocks (training and post-training) were completed in one session and the third was completed after 1 week (follow-up). The target moved in a one-dimensional, pseudorandom pattern. PCT models were optimized to the training data using a least-mean-squares algorithm, and validated with data from post-training and follow-up. We found significant inter-individual variability (partial η(2): .464-.697) and intra-individual consistency (Cronbach's α: .880-.976) in parameter estimates. Polynomial regression revealed that all model parameters, including the reference value parameter, contribute to simulation accuracy. Participants' tracking performances were significantly more accurately simulated by models developed from their own tracking data than by models developed from other participants' data. We conclude that PCT models can be optimized to simulate the performance of an individual and that the test-retest reliability of individual models is a necessary criterion for evaluating computational models of human performance.

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 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 29%
Researcher 4 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 11%
Professor 2 7%
Student > Bachelor 1 4%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 6 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 4 14%
Computer Science 4 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Engineering 2 7%
Other 5 18%
Unknown 8 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 39. 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 10 June 2022.
All research outputs
#974,437
of 24,003,070 outputs
Outputs from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#35
of 1,773 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,800
of 319,679 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#1
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,003,070 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 319,679 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.