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 |
Multimodal Semantic Quantity Representations: Further Evidence from Korean Sign Language
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2012
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00389 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Frank Domahs, Elise Klein, Korbinian Moeller, Hans-Christoph Nuerk, Byung-Chen Yoon, Klaus Willmes |
| Abstract |
Korean deaf signers performed a number comparison task on pairs of Arabic digits. In their response times profiles, the expected magnitude effect was systematically modified by properties of number signs in Korean sign language in a culture-specific way (not observed in hearing and deaf Germans or hearing Chinese). We conclude that finger-based quantity representations are automatically activated even in simple tasks with symbolic input although this may be irrelevant and even detrimental for task performance. These finger-based numerical representations are accessed in addition to another, more basic quantity system which is evidenced by the magnitude effect. In sum, these results are inconsistent with models assuming only one single amodal representation of numerical quantity. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 67% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 3% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 54 | 90% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 18% |
| Researcher | 7 | 12% |
| Professor | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 15 | 25% |
| Unknown | 11 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 28 | 47% |
| Linguistics | 6 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Engineering | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Unknown | 12 | 20% |
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 07 February 2012.
All research outputs
#15,241,801
of 22,662,201 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#18,421
of 29,353 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,125
of 244,049 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#321
of 481 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,662,201 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,353 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 244,049 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 481 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.