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 |
Do ‘literate’ pigeons (Columba livia) show mirror-word generalization?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Animal Cognition, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10071-017-1116-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Damian Scarf, Michael C. Corballis, Onur Güntürkün, Michael Colombo |
| Abstract |
Many children pass through a mirror stage in reading, where they write individual letters or digits in mirror and find it difficult to correctly utilize letters that are mirror images of one another (e.g., b and d). This phenomenon is thought to reflect the fact that the brain does not naturally discriminate left from right. Indeed, it has been argued that reading acquisition involves the inhibition of this default process. In the current study, we tested the ability of literate pigeons, which had learned to discriminate between 30 and 62 words from 7832 nonwords, to discriminate between words and their mirror counterparts. Subjects were sensitive to the left-right orientation of the individual letters, but not the order of letters within a word. This finding may reflect the fact that, in the absence of human-unique top-down processes, the inhibition of mirror generalization may be limited. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 25% |
| United States | 1 | 8% |
| France | 1 | 8% |
| Sweden | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 83% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 8% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 18 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 28% |
| Researcher | 4 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 17% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 6% |
| Professor | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 11% |
| Unknown | 2 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 7 | 39% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 22% |
| Linguistics | 2 | 11% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 3 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 06 August 2017.
All research outputs
#4,516,957
of 24,727,020 outputs
Outputs from Animal Cognition
#712
of 1,549 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,318
of 316,945 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Cognition
#17
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,727,020 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,549 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 316,945 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.