↓ Skip to main content

The Heterogeneous Nature of Number–Space Interactions

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
91 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
The Heterogeneous Nature of Number–Space Interactions
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2011.00182
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jean-Philippe van Dijck, Wim Gevers, Christophe Lafosse, Wim Fias

Abstract

It is generally accepted that the mental representation of numerical magnitude consists of a spatial "mental number line" (MNL) with smaller quantities on the left and larger quantities on the right. However, the amount of dissociations between tasks that were believed to tap onto this representational medium is accumulating, questioning the universality of this model. The aim of the present study was to unravel the functional relationship between the different tasks and effects that are typically used as evidence for the MNL. For this purpose, a group of right brain damaged patients (with and without neglect) and healthy controls were subjected to physical line bisection, number interval bisection, parity judgment, and magnitude comparison. Using principal component analysis, different orthogonal components were extracted. We discuss how this component structure captures the dissociations reported in the literature and how it can be considered as a first step toward a new unitary framework for understanding the relation between numbers and space.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 2%
United Kingdom 2 2%
Switzerland 1 1%
France 1 1%
Italy 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
Chile 1 1%
Belgium 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 78 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 24%
Researcher 21 23%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Student > Master 8 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 8%
Other 15 16%
Unknown 9 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 65 71%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 5%
Neuroscience 4 4%
Arts and Humanities 2 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 10 11%
Attention Score in Context

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 10 January 2012.
All research outputs
#20,165,369
of 22,675,759 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#6,513
of 7,114 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,176
of 244,088 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#273
of 294 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,675,759 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,114 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 244,088 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 294 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.