↓ Skip to main content

Crowdsourcing for Cognitive Science – The Utility of Smartphones

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, July 2014
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 (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
blogs
5 blogs
twitter
83 X users
weibo
1 weibo user
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
86 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
242 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
Crowdsourcing for Cognitive Science – The Utility of Smartphones
Published in
PLOS ONE, July 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0100662
Pubmed ID
Authors

Harriet R. Brown, Peter Zeidman, Peter Smittenaar, Rick A. Adams, Fiona McNab, Robb B. Rutledge, Raymond J. Dolan

Abstract

By 2015, there will be an estimated two billion smartphone users worldwide. This technology presents exciting opportunities for cognitive science as a medium for rapid, large-scale experimentation and data collection. At present, cost and logistics limit most study populations to small samples, restricting the experimental questions that can be addressed. In this study we investigated whether the mass collection of experimental data using smartphone technology is valid, given the variability of data collection outside of a laboratory setting. We presented four classic experimental paradigms as short games, available as a free app and over the first month 20,800 users submitted data. We found that the large sample size vastly outweighed the noise inherent in collecting data outside a controlled laboratory setting, and show that for all four games canonical results were reproduced. For the first time, we provide experimental validation for the use of smartphones for data collection in cognitive science, which can lead to the collection of richer data sets and a significant cost reduction as well as provide an opportunity for efficient phenotypic screening of large populations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 83 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 242 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 2%
United Kingdom 5 2%
Switzerland 3 1%
Germany 3 1%
France 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Uruguay 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Hungary 1 <1%
Other 7 3%
Unknown 212 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 47 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 46 19%
Student > Master 33 14%
Student > Bachelor 29 12%
Professor 12 5%
Other 48 20%
Unknown 27 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 66 27%
Social Sciences 20 8%
Computer Science 20 8%
Neuroscience 18 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 6%
Other 52 21%
Unknown 51 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 127. 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 18 November 2020.
All research outputs
#334,640
of 25,761,363 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#4,745
of 224,530 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,787
of 242,439 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#96
of 4,861 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,761,363 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 224,530 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 242,439 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,861 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 98% of its contemporaries.