↓ Skip to main content

Dressmakers show enhanced stereoscopic vision

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
59 news outlets
blogs
7 blogs
twitter
13 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 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
Dressmakers show enhanced stereoscopic vision
Published in
Scientific Reports, June 2017
DOI 10.1038/s41598-017-03425-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adrien Chopin, Dennis M. Levi, Daphné Bavelier

Abstract

The ability to estimate the distance of objects from one's self and from each other is fundamental to a variety of behaviours from grasping objects to navigating. The main cue to distance, stereopsis, relies on the slight offsets between the images derived from our left and right eyes, also termed disparities. Here we ask whether the precision of stereopsis varies with professional experience with precise manual tasks. We measured stereo-acuities of dressmakers and non-dressmakers for both absolute and relative disparities. We used a stereoscope and a computerized test removing monocular cues. We also measured vergence noise and bias using the Nonius line technique. We demonstrate that dressmakers' stereoscopic acuities are better than those of non-dressmakers, for both absolute and relative disparities. In contrast, vergence noise and bias were comparable in the two groups. Two non-exclusive mechanisms may be at the source of the group difference we document: (i) self-selection or the fact that stereo-vision is functionally important to become a dressmaker, and (ii) plasticity, or the fact that training on demanding stereovision tasks improves stereo-acuity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 22%
Student > Bachelor 7 19%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Researcher 3 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 6%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 8 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 8 22%
Neuroscience 6 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 10 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 510. 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 21 October 2021.
All research outputs
#46,325
of 24,294,745 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#680
of 132,069 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#975
of 321,202 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#24
of 4,346 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,294,745 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 132,069 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 321,202 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,346 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.