↓ Skip to main content

A closer look at visually guided saccades in autism and Asperger’s disorder

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
98 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
A closer look at visually guided saccades in autism and Asperger’s disorder
Published in
Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fnint.2012.00099
Pubmed ID
Authors

Beth P. Johnson, Nicole J. Rinehart, Nicole Papadopoulos, Bruce Tonge, Lynette Millist, Owen White, Joanne Fielding

Abstract

Motor impairments have been found to be a significant clinical feature associated with autism and Asperger's disorder (AD) in addition to core symptoms of communication and social cognition deficits. Motor deficits in high-functioning autism (HFA) and AD may differentiate these disorders, particularly with respect to the role of the cerebellum in motor functioning. Current neuroimaging and behavioral evidence suggests greater disruption of the cerebellum in HFA than AD. Investigations of ocular motor functioning have previously been used in clinical populations to assess the integrity of the cerebellar networks, through examination of saccade accuracy and the integrity of saccade dynamics. Previous investigations of visually guided saccades in HFA and AD have only assessed basic saccade metrics, such as latency, amplitude, and gain, as well as peak velocity. We used a simple visually guided saccade paradigm to further characterize the profile of visually guided saccade metrics and dynamics in HFA and AD. It was found that children with HFA, but not AD, were more inaccurate across both small (5°) and large (10°) target amplitudes, and final eye position was hypometric at 10°. These findings suggest greater functional disturbance of the cerebellum in HFA than AD, and suggest fundamental difficulties with visual error monitoring in HFA.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Sweden 1 1%
Belgium 1 1%
Unknown 95 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 20%
Researcher 11 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 10%
Student > Master 8 8%
Student > Postgraduate 7 7%
Other 22 22%
Unknown 20 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 35 36%
Neuroscience 10 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 4%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 23 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 07 November 2012.
All research outputs
#13,876,020
of 22,685,926 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
#480
of 853 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#151,749
of 244,115 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
#44
of 93 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,685,926 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 853 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 244,115 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 93 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 51% of its contemporaries.