Although a direct relationship between numerical-allocation and spatial-attention has been proposed, recent research suggests these processes are not directly coupled. In keeping with this, spatial attention shifts induced either via visual or vestibular motion can modulate numerical allocation in some circumstances but not in others. In addition to shifting spatial attention, visual or vestibular motion-paradigms also (i) elicit compensatory eye-movements which themselves can influence numerical-processing and (ii) alter the perceptual-state of-"self", inducing changes in bodily self-consciousness impacting upon cognitive mechanisms. Thus, the precise mechanism by which motion modulates numerical-allocation remains unknown. We sought to investigate the influence that different perceptual experiences of motion have upon numerical magnitude allocation whilst controlling for both eye-movements and task-related effects. We first used optokinetic visual-motion stimulation (OKS) to elicit the perceptual experience of either "visual world" or "self"-motion during which eye movements were identical. In a second experiment we used a vestibular protocol examining the effects of perceived and subliminal angular rotations in darkness, which also provoked identical eye movements. We observed that during the perceptual experience of "visual-world" motion, rightward OKS biased judgments towards smaller numbers, whereas leftward OKS biased judgments towards larger numbers. During the perceptual experience of "self-motion", judgments were biased towards larger numbers irrespective of the OKS direction. Contrastingly, vestibular motion perception was found not to modulate numerical magnitude allocation, nor was there any differential modulation when comparing "perceived" versus "subliminal" rotations. We provide a novel demonstration that magnitude-allocation can be differentially modulated by the perceptual state of-self during visual-motion. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 15 August 2016.
All research outputs
#2,712,992
of 24,561,012 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Neuroscience
#742
of 6,057 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,577
of 365,097 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Neuroscience
#25
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,561,012 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,057 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 365,097 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 85 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 70% of its contemporaries.
