↓ Skip to main content

Design of embodied interfaces for engaging spatial cognition

Overview of attention for article published in Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
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.
Title
Design of embodied interfaces for engaging spatial cognition
Published in
Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, December 2016
DOI 10.1186/s41235-016-0032-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paul G. Clifton, Jack Shen-Kuen Chang, Georgina Yeboah, Alison Doucette, Sanjay Chandrasekharan, Michael Nitsche, Timothy Welsh, Ali Mazalek

Abstract

Aspects of spatial cognition, specifically spatial skills, are strongly correlated with interest and success in STEM courses and STEM-related professions. Because growth in STEM-related industries is expected to continue for the foreseeable future, it is important to develop evidence-based and theoretically grounded methods and interventions that can help train relevant spatial skills. In this article, we discuss research showing that aspects of spatial cognition are embodied and how these findings and theoretical developments can be used to influence the design of tangible and embodied interfaces (TEIs). TEIs seek to bring interaction with digital content off the screen and into the physical environment. By incorporating physical movement and tangible feedback in digital systems, TEIs can leverage the relationship between the body and spatial cognition to engage, support, or improve spatial skills. We use this knowledge to define a design space for TEIs that engage spatial cognition and illustrate how TEIs that are designed and evaluated from a spatial cognition perspective can expand the design space in ways that contribute to the fields of cognitive science and human computer interaction.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 20%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 10%
Researcher 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 9 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 9 18%
Psychology 6 12%
Social Sciences 5 10%
Design 4 8%
Engineering 3 6%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 14 29%

Attention Score in Context

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 12 January 2017.
All research outputs
#4,175,882
of 8,934,300 outputs
Outputs from Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications
#1
of 1 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,090
of 307,365 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications
#3
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,934,300 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 52nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 0.0. This one scored the same or higher as 0 of them.
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 307,365 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.