↓ Skip to main content

Visual Illusions: An Interesting Tool to Investigate Developmental Dyslexia and Autism Spectrum Disorder

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
12 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
189 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
Visual Illusions: An Interesting Tool to Investigate Developmental Dyslexia and Autism Spectrum Disorder
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, April 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00175
Pubmed ID
Authors

Simone Gori, Massimo Molteni, Andrea Facoetti

Abstract

A visual illusion refers to a percept that is different in some aspect from the physical stimulus. Illusions are a powerful non-invasive tool for understanding the neurobiology of vision, telling us, indirectly, how the brain processes visual stimuli. There are some neurodevelopmental disorders characterized by visual deficits. Surprisingly, just a few studies investigated illusory perception in clinical populations. Our aim is to review the literature supporting a possible role for visual illusions in helping us understand the visual deficits in developmental dyslexia and autism spectrum disorder. Future studies could develop new tools - based on visual illusions - to identify an early risk for neurodevelopmental disorders.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 189 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 1%
France 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 184 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 26 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 12%
Student > Master 23 12%
Researcher 21 11%
Student > Postgraduate 15 8%
Other 36 19%
Unknown 45 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 63 33%
Neuroscience 37 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 3%
Social Sciences 4 2%
Other 20 11%
Unknown 50 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 56. 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 04 March 2023.
All research outputs
#685,072
of 23,933,166 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#316
of 7,370 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,008
of 301,642 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#14
of 169 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,933,166 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,370 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 done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 301,642 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 169 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.