| Title |
Domain-specific reports of visual imagery vividness are not related to perceptual expertise
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Behavior Research Methods, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3758/s13428-016-0730-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mackenzie Sunday, Rankin W. McGugin, Isabel Gauthier |
| Abstract |
Just as people vary in their perceptual expertise with a given domain, they also vary in their abilities to imagine objects. Visual imagery and perception share common mechanisms. However, it is unclear whether domain-specific expertise is relevant to visual imagery. Although the vividness of visual imagery is typically measured as a domain-general construct, a component of this vividness may be domain-specific. For example, individuals who have gained perceptual expertise with a specific domain might experience clearer mental images within this domain. Here we investigated whether perceptual expertise for cars relates to visual imagery vividness in the same domain, by assessing the correlations between a widely used domain-general measure of visual imagery vividness (the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire; Marks in British Journal of Psychology, 64, 17-24, 1973), a new measure of visual imagery vividness specific to cars, and behavioral tests of car expertise. We found that domain-specific imagery relates most strongly to general imagery vividness and less strongly to self-reported expertise, while it does not relate to perceptual or semantic expertise. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Guinea | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 36 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 28% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 14% |
| Professor | 3 | 8% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 17% |
| Unknown | 4 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 18 | 50% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 14% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 3% |
| Linguistics | 1 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 7 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 21 May 2016.
All research outputs
#17,286,645
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Behavior Research Methods
#1,635
of 2,525 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#193,850
of 315,494 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavior Research Methods
#21
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,525 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 315,494 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.