↓ Skip to main content

Toward a visuospatial developmental account of sequence-space synesthesia

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
44 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
Toward a visuospatial developmental account of sequence-space synesthesia
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00689
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mark C. Price, David G. Pearson

Abstract

Sequence-space synesthetes experience some sequences (e.g., numbers, calendar units) as arranged in spatial forms, i.e., spatial patterns in their mind's eye or even outside their body. Various explanations have been offered for this phenomenon. Here we argue that these spatial forms are continuous with varieties of non-synesthetic visuospatial imagery and share their central characteristics. This includes their dynamic and elaborative nature, their involuntary feel, and consistency over time. Drawing from literatures on mental imagery and working memory, we suggest how the initial acquisition and subsequent elaboration of spatial forms could be accounted for in terms of the known developmental trajectory of visuospatial representations. This extends from the formation of image-based representations of verbal material in childhood to the later maturation of dynamic control of imagery. Individual differences in the development of visuospatial style also account for variation in the character of spatial forms, e.g., in terms of distinctions such as visual versus spatial imagery, or ego-centric versus object-based transformations.

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 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 7%
Unknown 41 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 34%
Student > Bachelor 6 14%
Researcher 6 14%
Student > Master 4 9%
Professor 2 5%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 7 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 18 41%
Engineering 4 9%
Neuroscience 4 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 7%
Arts and Humanities 2 5%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 9 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 22 November 2016.
All research outputs
#7,755,290
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#3,350
of 7,319 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,993
of 284,974 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#461
of 862 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,319 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 284,974 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 862 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.