You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Additional evidence that contour attributes are not essential cues for object recognition
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Behavioral and Brain Functions, July 2008
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1744-9081-4-26 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ernest Greene |
| Abstract |
It is believed that certain contour attributes, specifically orientation, curvature and linear extent, provide essential cues for object (shape) recognition. The present experiment examined this hypothesis by comparing stimulus conditions that differentially provided such cues. A spaced array of dots was used to mark the outside boundary of namable objects, and subsets were chosen that contained either contiguous strings of dots or randomly positioned dots. These subsets were briefly and successively displayed using an MTDC information persistence paradigm. Across the major range of temporal separation of the subsets, it was found that contiguity of boundary dots did not provide more effective shape recognition cues. This is at odds with the concept that encoding and recognition of shapes is predicated on the encoding of contour attributes such as orientation, curvature and linear extent. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 11% |
| Canada | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 7 | 78% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 56% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 22% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 4 | 44% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 22% |
| Philosophy | 1 | 11% |
| Engineering | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 1 | 11% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 13 November 2012.
All research outputs
#6,745,097
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Behavioral and Brain Functions
#113
of 417 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,444
of 95,609 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavioral and Brain Functions
#2
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 417 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 95,609 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.