↓ Skip to main content

Weber’s law in 2D and 3D grasping

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
Title
Weber’s law in 2D and 3D grasping
Published in
Psychological Research, September 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00426-017-0913-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aviad Ozana, Tzvi Ganel

Abstract

Visually guided grasping movements directed to real, 3D objects are characterized by a distinguishable trajectory pattern that evades the influence of Weber's law, a basic principle of perception. Conversely, grasping trajectories directed to 2D line drawings of objects adhere to Weber's law. It can be argued, therefore, that during 2D grasping, the visuomotor system fails at operating in analytic mode and is intruded by irrelevant perceptual information. Here, we explored the visual and tactile cues that enable such analytic processing during grasping. In Experiment 1, we compared grasping directed to 3D objects with grasping directed to 2D object photos. Grasping directed to photos adhered to Weber's law, suggesting that richness in visual detail does not contribute to analytic processing. In Experiment 2, we tested whether the visual presentation of 3D objects could support analytic processing even when only partial object-specific tactile information is provided. Surprisingly, grasping could be performed in an analytic fashion, violating Weber's law. In Experiment 3, participants were denied of any haptic feedback at the end of the movement and grasping trajectories again showed adherence to Weber's law. Taken together, the findings suggest that the presentation of real objects combined with indirect haptic information at the end of the movement is sufficient to allow analytic processing during grasp.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 19%
Researcher 5 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Student > Master 3 9%
Professor 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 11 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 8 25%
Neuroscience 5 16%
Engineering 4 13%
Computer Science 1 3%
Unknown 14 44%
Attention Score in Context

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 04 September 2020.
All research outputs
#13,031,458
of 23,479,361 outputs
Outputs from Psychological Research
#363
of 979 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#145,268
of 316,661 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychological Research
#7
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,479,361 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 979 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 316,661 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.