↓ Skip to main content

“Slight” of Hand: The Processing of Visually Degraded Gestures with Speech

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 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
“Slight” of Hand: The Processing of Visually Degraded Gestures with Speech
Published in
PLOS ONE, August 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0042620
Pubmed ID
Authors

Spencer D. Kelly, Bruce C. Hansen, David T. Clark

Abstract

Co-speech hand gestures influence language comprehension. The present experiment explored what part of the visual processing system is optimized for processing these gestures. Participants viewed short video clips of speech and gestures (e.g., a person saying "chop" or "twist" while making a chopping gesture) and had to determine whether the two modalities were congruent or incongruent. Gesture videos were designed to stimulate the parvocellular or magnocellular visual pathways by filtering out low or high spatial frequencies (HSF versus LSF) at two levels of degradation severity (moderate and severe). Participants were less accurate and slower at processing gesture and speech at severe versus moderate levels of degradation. In addition, they were slower for LSF versus HSF stimuli, and this difference was most pronounced in the severely degraded condition. However, exploratory item analyses showed that the HSF advantage was modulated by the range of motion and amount of motion energy in each video. The results suggest that hand gestures exploit a wide range of spatial frequencies, and depending on what frequencies carry the most motion energy, parvocellular or magnocellular visual pathways are maximized to quickly and optimally extract meaning.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 4%
United States 1 4%
Germany 1 4%
Unknown 25 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 11%
Lecturer 2 7%
Student > Master 2 7%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 5 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 9 32%
Linguistics 4 14%
Engineering 2 7%
Computer Science 2 7%
Neuroscience 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 7 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 27 July 2016.
All research outputs
#7,172,306
of 22,673,450 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#84,779
of 193,525 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,939
of 166,798 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,581
of 4,137 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,673,450 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,525 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 166,798 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,137 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 60% of its contemporaries.