↓ Skip to main content

Social attention with real versus reel stimuli: toward an empirical approach to concerns about ecological validity

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Readers on

mendeley
333 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Social attention with real versus reel stimuli: toward an empirical approach to concerns about ecological validity
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00143
Pubmed ID
Authors

Evan F. Risko, Kaitlin E. W. Laidlaw, Megan Freeth, Tom Foulsham, Alan Kingstone

Abstract

Cognitive neuroscientists often study social cognition by using simple but socially relevant stimuli, such as schematic faces or images of other people. Whilst this research is valuable, important aspects of genuine social encounters are absent from these studies, a fact that has recently drawn criticism. In the present review we argue for an empirical approach to the determination of the equivalence of different social stimuli. This approach involves the systematic comparison of different types of social stimuli ranging in their approximation to a real social interaction. In garnering support for this cognitive ethological approach, we focus on recent research in social attention that has involved stimuli ranging from simple schematic faces to real social interactions. We highlight both meaningful similarities and differences in various social attentional phenomena across these different types of social stimuli thus validating the utility of the research initiative. Furthermore, we argue that exploring these similarities and differences will provide new insights into social cognition and social neuroscience.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 333 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 7 2%
Hungary 2 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Belgium 2 <1%
United States 2 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Peru 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Other 4 1%
Unknown 310 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 78 23%
Researcher 42 13%
Student > Master 40 12%
Student > Bachelor 34 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 23 7%
Other 54 16%
Unknown 62 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 159 48%
Neuroscience 25 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 4%
Social Sciences 9 3%
Other 36 11%
Unknown 79 24%
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 24 February 2020.
All research outputs
#7,724,716
of 24,021,239 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#3,225
of 7,403 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,429
of 250,628 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#141
of 294 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,021,239 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 7,403 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. 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 250,628 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 70% of its contemporaries.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.