Recognition of biological motion is pervasive in early child development. Further, viewing the movement behavior of others is a primary component of a child's acquisition of complex, robust movement repertoires, through imitation and real-time coordinated action. We theorize that inherent to biological movements are particular qualities of mathematical chaos and complexity. We further posit that this character affords the rich and complex inter-dynamics throughout early motor development. Specifically, we explored whether children's preference for biological motion may be related to an affinity for mathematical chaos. Cross recurrence quantification analysis (cRQA) was used to investigate the coordination of gaze and posture with various temporal structures (periodic, chaotic, and aperiodic) of the motion of an oscillating visual stimulus. Children appear to competently perceive and respond to chaotic motion, both in rate (cRQA-percent determinism) and duration (cRQA-maxline) of coordination. We interpret this to indicate that children not only recognize chaotic motion structures, but also have a preference for coordination with them. Further, stratification of our sample (by age) uncovers the suggestion that this preference may become refined with age.
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 March 2015.
All research outputs
#24,019,139
of 34,296,127 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#21,084
of 43,846 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#210,356
of 323,131 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#333
of 472 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,296,127 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 43,846 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 323,131 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 472 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
