↓ Skip to main content

Act on Numbers: Numerical Magnitude Influences Selection and Kinematics of Finger Movement

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

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
Act on Numbers: Numerical Magnitude Influences Selection and Kinematics of Finger Movement
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01481
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rosa Rugani, Sonia Betti, Francesco Ceccarini, Luisa Sartori

Abstract

In the past decade hand kinematics has been reliably adopted for investigating cognitive processes and disentangling debated topics. One of the most controversial issues in numerical cognition literature regards the origin - cultural vs. genetically driven - of the mental number line (MNL), oriented from left (small numbers) to right (large numbers). To date, the majority of studies have investigated this effect by means of response times, whereas studies considering more culturally unbiased measures such as kinematic parameters are rare. Here, we present a new paradigm that combines a "free response" task with the kinematic analysis of movement. Participants were seated in front of two little soccer goals placed on a table, one on the left and one on the right side. They were presented with left- or right-directed arrows and they were instructed to kick a small ball with their right index toward the goal indicated by the arrow. In a few test trials participants were presented also with a small (2) or a large (8) number, and they were allowed to choose the kicking direction. Participants performed more left responses with the small number and more right responses with the large number. The whole kicking movement was segmented in two temporal phases in order to make a hand kinematics' fine-grained analysis. The Kick Preparation and Kick Finalization phases were selected on the basis of peak trajectory deviation from the virtual midline between the two goals. Results show an effect of both small and large numbers on action execution timing. Participants were faster to finalize the action when responding to small numbers toward the left and to large number toward the right. Here, we provide the first experimental demonstration which highlights how numerical processing affects action execution in a new and not-overlearned context. The employment of this innovative and unbiased paradigm will permit to disentangle the role of nature and culture in shaping the direction of MNL and the role of finger in the acquisition of numerical skills. Last but not least, similar paradigms will allow to determine how cognition can influence action execution.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 > Bachelor 6 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 14%
Student > Postgraduate 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Other 7 19%
Unknown 10 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 12 33%
Sports and Recreations 3 8%
Unspecified 2 6%
Decision Sciences 2 6%
Social Sciences 2 6%
Other 6 17%
Unknown 9 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 22 October 2018.
All research outputs
#12,992,364
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#11,855
of 30,225 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#148,055
of 315,743 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#320
of 594 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,225 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 315,743 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 594 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.