↓ Skip to main content

Social targets improve body-based and environment-based strategies during spatial navigation

Overview of attention for article published in Experimental Brain Research, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 Mendeley
Title
Social targets improve body-based and environment-based strategies during spatial navigation
Published in
Experimental Brain Research, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00221-018-5169-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Esther Kuehn, Xiaoli Chen, Pia Geise, Jan Oltmer, Thomas Wolbers

Abstract

Encoding the position of another person in space is vital for everyday life. Nevertheless, little is known about the specific navigational strategies associated with encoding the position of another person in the wider spatial environment. We asked two groups of participants to learn the location of a target (person or object) during active navigation, while optic flow information, a landmark, or both optic flow information and a landmark were available in a virtual environment. Whereas optic flow information is used for body-based encoding, such as the simulation of motor movements, landmarks are used to form an abstract, disembodied representation of the environment. During testing, we passively moved participants through virtual space, and compared their abilities to correctly decide whether the non-visible target was before or behind them. Using psychometric functions and the Bayes Theorem, we show that both groups assigned similar weights to body-based and environment-based cues in the condition, where both cue types were available. However, the group who was provided with a person as target showed generally reduced position errors compared to the group who was provided with an object as target. We replicated this effect in a second study with novel participants. This indicates a social advantage in spatial encoding, with facilitated processing of both body-based and environment-based cues during spatial navigation when the position of a person is encoded. This may underlie our critical ability to make accurate distance judgments during social interactions, for example, during fight or flight responses.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 22%
Researcher 8 17%
Student > Bachelor 7 15%
Other 2 4%
Student > Postgraduate 2 4%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 10 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 18 39%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 11%
Philosophy 2 4%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Computer Science 2 4%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 10 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 15 March 2018.
All research outputs
#3,609,199
of 23,016,919 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#283
of 3,241 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,504
of 443,312 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#5
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,016,919 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,241 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 443,312 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.