↓ Skip to main content

Extrapolation occurs in multiple object tracking when eye movements are controlled

Overview of attention for article published in Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

peer_reviews
1 peer review site
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
Title
Extrapolation occurs in multiple object tracking when eye movements are controlled
Published in
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, April 2015
DOI 10.3758/s13414-015-0891-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tina Luu, Piers D. L. Howe

Abstract

There is much debate regarding the types of information observers use to track moving objects. Howe and Holcombe (Journal of Vision 12(13): 1-10, 2012) recently reported evidence that observers employ extrapolation while tracking. However, their study is potentially confounded because it did not control for eye movements. As eye movements can aid extrapolation, it is unclear whether extrapolation can still occur in multiple object tracking (MOT) when eye movements are eliminated. In the current study, we addressed this question using an eye tracker to ensure that fixation was always maintained on a central fixation point while observers performed a tracking task. In the predictable condition, objects always travelled along linear paths. In the unpredictable condition, objects randomly changed direction every 300-600 ms. If observers employ extrapolation, we would expect performance to be greater in the former condition than in the latter condition. Our results showed that observers did indeed perform better in the predictable condition than in the unpredictable condition, at least when tracking just two objects (Experiments 1, 3, and 4). Extrapolation occurred less when tracking loads increased or when the objects moved more slowly (Experiment 2).

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 3%
Canada 1 3%
Unknown 38 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 18%
Student > Postgraduate 3 8%
Student > Master 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 3%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 10 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 15 38%
Computer Science 5 13%
Engineering 4 10%
Sports and Recreations 2 5%
Unspecified 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 13 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 May 2023.
All research outputs
#6,868,706
of 24,003,070 outputs
Outputs from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#318
of 1,773 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,460
of 268,340 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#13
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,003,070 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,773 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 268,340 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 79 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.