↓ Skip to main content

Responding to social and symbolic extrafoveal cues: cue shape trumps biological relevance

Overview of attention for article published in Psychological Research, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
Title
Responding to social and symbolic extrafoveal cues: cue shape trumps biological relevance
Published in
Psychological Research, December 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00426-015-0733-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Frouke Hermens, Markus Bindemann, A. Mike Burton

Abstract

Social cues presented at visual fixation have been shown to strongly influence an observer's attention and response selection. Here we ask whether the same holds for cues (initially) presented away from fixation, as cues are commonly perceived in natural vision. In six experiments, we show that extrafoveally presented cues with a distinct outline, such as pointing hands, rotated heads, and arrow cues result in strong cueing of responses (either to the cue itself, or a cued object). In contrast, cues without a clear outline, such as gazing eyes and direction words exert much weaker effects on participants' responses to a target cue. We also show that distraction effects on response times are relatively weak, but that strong interference effects can be obtained by measuring mouse trajectories. Eye tracking suggests that gaze cues are slower to respond to because their direction cannot easily be perceived in extrafoveal vision. Together, these data suggest that the strength of an extrafoveal cue is determined by the shape of the cue outline, rather than its biological relevance (i.e., whether the cue is provided by another human being), and that this shape effect is due to how easily the direction of a cue can be perceived in extrafoveal vision.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Portugal 1 3%
Unknown 34 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 22%
Student > Master 6 17%
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Researcher 3 8%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 7 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 18 50%
Linguistics 3 8%
Engineering 2 6%
Neuroscience 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 8 22%
Attention Score in Context

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 26 January 2017.
All research outputs
#14,988,746
of 23,057,470 outputs
Outputs from Psychological Research
#521
of 975 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#218,913
of 392,524 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychological Research
#5
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,057,470 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 975 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 392,524 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.