↓ Skip to main content

Cross-cultural differences in object recognition: Comparing asylum seekers from Sub-Saharan Africa and a matched Western European control group

Overview of attention for article published in Applied Cognitive Psychology, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
9 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
10 Mendeley
Title
Cross-cultural differences in object recognition: Comparing asylum seekers from Sub-Saharan Africa and a matched Western European control group
Published in
Applied Cognitive Psychology, May 2018
DOI 10.1002/acp.3419
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gabi de Bruïne, Annelies Vredeveldt, Peter J. van Koppen

Abstract

Nowadays, more and more people report about their memories in cross-cultural contexts. In international criminal settings and asylum procedures, object recognition tests can provide valuable information, for example, about weapons used during a crime or landmarks from the claimed region of origin. This study was the first to compare object recognition performance by asylum seekers from Sub-Saharan Africa to a matched Western European control group. African participants performed worse than European participants on perceptual tests involving transformations from two- to three-dimensional representations, but both groups performed equally well on an object recognition test that involved transformation from three- to two-dimensional representations. However, African participants were significantly more likely to respond "yes" on the recognition test (i.e., an acquiescence response style) than European participants. Our findings elucidate cultural differences in responding on an object recognition test. Judges, juries, and immigration officials would be wise to take these differences into account when evaluating recognition performance in cross-cultural contexts.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 10 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor > Associate Professor 2 20%
Student > Bachelor 2 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 10%
Researcher 1 10%
Other 2 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 5 50%
Social Sciences 5 50%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 31 July 2018.
All research outputs
#754,734
of 13,309,886 outputs
Outputs from Applied Cognitive Psychology
#110
of 852 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,822
of 271,172 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Applied Cognitive Psychology
#4
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,309,886 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 852 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 271,172 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.