| Title |
Behavioural asymmetries on the greyscales task: The influence of native reading direction
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Culture and Brain, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40167-014-0019-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Trista E. Friedrich, Lorin J. Elias |
| Abstract |
Reliable leftward attentional and perceptual biases demonstrated in a variety of visuospatial tasks have been found to deviate from the left in research examining the influence of scanning habits. The aim of the current research was to examine the influence of native script direction on pseudoneglect during the greyscales task in a representative sample of native right-to-left readers. Fifty-four native left-to-right readers and 43 right-to-left readers completed the greyscales task, which required judging the darker of two left-right mirrored brightness gradients. Native left-to-right readers demonstrated a left response bias on the greyscales task, whereas right-to-left readers failed to demonstrate a bias, however, both groups responded more quickly when making leftward choices. The research suggests that the strength of attentional biases are influenced by behavioural biases, such as scanning habits, and neural and anatomical asymmetries in the right parietal and frontal cortices. Thus, to improve the clinical utility of the greyscales task for diagnosing neglect, right-to-left readers should be examined to fully understand the normal range of biases displayed by neurologically healthy individuals. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 19 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 25% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 20% |
| Researcher | 3 | 15% |
| Professor | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 2 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 14 | 70% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 10% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 27 August 2016.
All research outputs
#14,787,304
of 22,766,595 outputs
Outputs from Culture and Brain
#39
of 68 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#141,529
of 256,316 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Culture and Brain
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,766,595 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 68 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 256,316 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them