The most commonly cited descriptions of the behavioral characteristics of habituation come from two papers published almost 40 years ago [Groves, P. M., & Thompson, R. F. (1970). Habituation: A dual-process theory. Psychological Review, 77, 419-450; Thompson, R. F., & Spencer, W. A. (1966). Habituation: A model phenomenon for the study of neuronal substrates of behavior. Psychological Review, 73, 16-43]. In August 2007, the authors of this review, who study habituation in a wide range of species and paradigms, met to discuss their work on habituation and to revisit and refine the characteristics of habituation. This review offers a re-evaluation of the characteristics of habituation in light of these discussions. We made substantial changes to only a few of the characteristics, usually to add new information and expand upon the description rather than to substantially alter the original point. One additional characteristic, relating to long-term habituation, was added. This article thus provides a modern summary of the characteristics defining habituation, and can serve as a convenient primer for those whose research involves stimulus repetition.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 485. 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 October 2026.
All research outputs
#69,927
of 34,626,533 outputs
Outputs from Neurobiology of Learning & Memory
#2
of 1,644 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97
of 150,560 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neurobiology of Learning & Memory
#1
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,626,533 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,644 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 150,560 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
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 done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
