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 |
Finger posing primes number comprehension
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cognitive Processing, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10339-017-0804-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elena Sixtus, Martin H. Fischer, Oliver Lindemann |
| Abstract |
Canonical finger postures, as used in counting, activate number knowledge, but the exact mechanism for this priming effect is unclear. Here we dissociated effects of visual versus motor priming of number concepts. In Experiment 1, participants were exposed either to pictures of canonical finger postures (visual priming) or actively produced the same finger postures (motor priming) and then used foot responses to rapidly classify auditory numbers (targets) as smaller or larger than 5. Classification times revealed that manually adopted but not visually perceived postures primed magnitude classifications. Experiment 2 obtained motor priming of number processing through finger postures also with vocal responses. Priming only occurred through canonical and not through non-canonical finger postures. Together, these results provide clear evidence for motor priming of number knowledge. Relative contributions of vision and action for embodied numerical cognition and the importance of canonicity of postures are discussed. |
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 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 44 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 18% |
| Researcher | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Unknown | 10 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 21 | 47% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 4% |
| Linguistics | 2 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Unknown | 12 | 27% |
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 05 April 2017.
All research outputs
#20,412,387
of 22,962,258 outputs
Outputs from Cognitive Processing
#293
of 337 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#269,225
of 308,921 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cognitive Processing
#12
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,962,258 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 337 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. 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 308,921 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 17 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.