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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Reduction of the Spatial Stroop Effect by Peripheral Cueing as a Function of the Presence/Absence of Placeholders
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, July 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0069456 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chunming Luo, Juan Lupiáñez, María Jesús Funes, Xiaolan Fu |
| Abstract |
In a paradigm combining spatial Stroop with spatial cueing, the current study investigated the role of the presence vs. absence of placeholders on the reduction of the spatial Stroop effect by peripheral cueing. At a short cue-target interval, the modulation of peripheral cueing over the spatial Stroop effect was observed independently of the presence/absence of placeholders. At the long cue-target interval, however, this modulation over the spatial Stroop effect only occurred in the placeholders-present condition. These findings show that placeholders are modulators but not mediators of the reduction of the spatial Stroop effect by peripheral cueing, which further favor the cue-target integration account. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 22 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Professor | 4 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 5% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 18% |
| Unknown | 6 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 10 | 45% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 9% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 5% |
| Engineering | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 7 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 25 July 2013.
All research outputs
#20,196,270
of 22,714,025 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#173,072
of 193,925 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,990
of 197,947 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#4,205
of 4,796 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,714,025 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,925 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 197,947 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,796 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.