↓ Skip to main content

No horizontal numerical mapping in a culture with mixed-reading habits

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 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
No horizontal numerical mapping in a culture with mixed-reading habits
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00072
Pubmed ID
Authors

Neda Rashidi-Ranjbar, Mahdi Goudarzvand, Sorour Jahangiri, Peter Brugger, Tobias Loetscher

Abstract

Reading habits are thought to play an important role in the emergence of cultural differences in visuo-spatial and numerical tasks. Left-to-right readers show a slight visuo-spatial bias to the left side of space, and automatically associate small numbers to the left and larger numbers to the right side of space, respectively. A paradigm that demonstrated an automatic spatial-numerical association involved the generation of random numbers while participants performed lateral head turns. That is, Westerners have been shown to produce more small numbers when the head was turned to the left compared to the right side. We here employed the head turning/random number generation (RNG) paradigm and a line bisection (LB) task with a group of 34 Iranians in their home country. In the participants' native language (Farsi) text is read from right-to-left, but numbers are read from left-to-right. If the reading direction for text determines the layout of spatial-numerical mappings we expected to find more small numbers after right than left head turns. Yet, the generation of small or large numbers was not modulated by lateral head turns and the Iranians showed therefore no association of numbers with space. There was, however, a significant rightward shift in the LB task. Thus, while the current results are congruent with the idea that text reading habits play an important role in the cultural differences observed in visuo-spatial tasks, our data also imply that these habits on their own are not strong enough to induce significant horizontal spatial-numerical associations. In agreement with previous suggestions, we assume that for the emergence of horizontal numerical mappings a congruency between reading habits for words and numbers is required.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 2 5%
United Kingdom 1 3%
Unknown 36 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 21%
Researcher 7 18%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Other 3 8%
Professor 3 8%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 9 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 17 44%
Neuroscience 3 8%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Linguistics 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 13 33%
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 30 January 2015.
All research outputs
#17,299,378
of 25,391,701 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#5,580
of 7,689 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#202,903
of 319,366 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#89
of 125 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,391,701 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,689 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 319,366 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 125 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.