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 |
Local spatial distortion caused by simple geometrical figures
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1080/17470218.2016.1192657 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Aleksandar Aksentijevic, Mark A. Elliott |
| Abstract |
Dynamic distortion of the visual field has been shown to affect perceptual judgment of visual dimensions such as size, length and distance. Here, we report four experiments demonstrating that the different aspects of a triangle differently influence judgments of distance. Specifically, when the base of the triangle faces the centre of the display, participants consistently underestimate and overestimate the distance of a small dot from the unmarked centre of the display relative to conditions in which the vertex of the triangle faces the centre. When the dot is close to the figure, the distance of the dot to the centre is underestimated. Conversely, when the dot is close to the figure, the distance to the centre is overestimated. The effect is replicated when the internal distances are equalized and when ellipses are used instead of triangles. These results support a ripple model of spatial distortion in which local curvature acts to attract or repel objects. In conclusion, we suggest some implications of our findings for theories of perceptual organization. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 6 | 86% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 1 | 14% |
| Professor | 1 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 1 | 14% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 3 | 43% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 13 June 2016.
All research outputs
#18,463,662
of 22,877,793 outputs
Outputs from Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
#1,119
of 1,513 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#242,491
of 316,974 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
#35
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,877,793 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,513 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 316,974 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.