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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Audiotactile interaction can change over time in cochlear implant users
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, May 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00316 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Simon P. Landry, Jean-Paul Guillemot, François Champoux |
| Abstract |
Recent results suggest that audiotactile interactions are disturbed in cochlear implant (CI) users. However, further exploration regarding the factors responsible for such abnormal sensory processing is still required. Considering the temporal nature of a previously used multisensory task, it remains unclear whether any aberrant results were caused by the specificity of the interaction studied or rather if it reflects an overall abnormal interaction. Moreover, although duration of experience with a CI has often been linked with the recovery of auditory functions, its impact on multisensory performance remains uncertain. In the present study, we used the parchment-skin illusion, a robust illustration of sound-biased perception of touch based on changes in auditory frequencies, to investigate the specificities of audiotactile interactions in CI users. Whereas individuals with relatively little experience with the CI performed similarly to the control group, experienced CI users showed a significantly greater illusory percept. The overall results suggest that despite being able to ignore auditory distractors in a temporal audiotactile task, CI users develop to become greatly influenced by auditory input in a spectral audiotactile task. When considered with the existing body of research, these results confirm that normal sensory interaction processing can be compromised in CI users. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 37 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 16% |
| Unknown | 10 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 6 | 16% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 5% |
| Engineering | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 16% |
| Unknown | 15 | 39% |
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 28 April 2014.
All research outputs
#18,977,955
of 23,527,856 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#6,182
of 7,310 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,872
of 227,868 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#217
of 240 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,527,856 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,310 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% 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 227,868 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 240 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.