↓ Skip to main content

Differences in Spatial Memory Recognition Due to Cognitive Style

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pharmacology, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 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
Differences in Spatial Memory Recognition Due to Cognitive Style
Published in
Frontiers in Pharmacology, August 2017
DOI 10.3389/fphar.2017.00550
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laura Tascón, Maddalena Boccia, Laura Piccardi, José M. Cimadevilla

Abstract

Field independence refers to the ability to perceive details from the surrounding context as a whole and to represent the environment by relying on an internal reference frame. Conversely, field dependence individuals tend to focus their attention on single environmental features analysing them individually. This cognitive style affects several visuo-spatial abilities including spatial memory. This study assesses both the effect of field independence and field dependence on performance displayed on virtual environments of different complexity. Forty young healthy individuals took part in this study. Participants performed the Embedded Figures Test for field independence or dependence assessment and a new spatial memory recognition test. The spatial memory recognition test demanded to memorize a green box location in a virtual room picture. Thereafter, during ten trials participants had to decide if a green box was located in the same position as in the sample picture. Five of the pictures were correct. The information available in the virtual room was manipulated. Hence, two different experimental conditions were tested: a virtual room containing all landmarks and a virtual room with only two cues. Accuracy and reaction time were registered. Analyses demonstrated that higher field independent individuals were related to better spatial memory performance in two landmarks condition and were faster in all landmark condition. In addition, men and women did not differ in their performance. These results suggested that cognitive style affects spatial memory performance and this phenomenon is modulated by environment complexity. This does not affect accuracy but time spent. Moreover, field dependent individuals are unable to organize the navigational field by relying on internal reference frames when few landmarks are available, and this causes them to commit more errors.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 20%
Student > Master 5 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Researcher 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 12 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 11 24%
Neuroscience 4 9%
Social Sciences 3 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Design 2 4%
Other 9 20%
Unknown 15 33%
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 08 August 2020.
All research outputs
#14,362,315
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#4,750
of 16,305 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#176,354
of 317,355 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#73
of 250 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,305 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 317,355 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 250 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 68% of its contemporaries.