↓ Skip to main content

How Does Language Change Perception: A Cautionary Note

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% 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 (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
12 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
127 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
How Does Language Change Perception: A Cautionary Note
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00078
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nola Klemfuss, William Prinzmetal, Richard B. Ivry

Abstract

The relationship of language, perception, and action has been the focus of recent studies exploring the representation of conceptual knowledge. A substantial literature has emerged, providing ample demonstrations of the intimate relationship between language and perception. The appropriate characterization of these interactions remains an important challenge. Recent evidence involving visual search tasks has led to the hypothesis that top-down input from linguistic representations may sharpen visual feature detectors, suggesting a direct influence of language on early visual perception. We present two experiments to explore this hypothesis. Experiment 1 demonstrates that the benefits of linguistic priming in visual search may arise from a reduction in the demands on working memory. Experiment 2 presents a situation in which visual search performance is disrupted by the automatic activation of irrelevant linguistic representations, a result consistent with the idea that linguistic and sensory representations interact at a late, response-selection stage of processing. These results raise a cautionary note: While language can influence performance on a visual search, the influence need not arise from a change in perception per se.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 122 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 20%
Student > Master 24 19%
Student > Bachelor 18 14%
Researcher 14 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 4%
Other 20 16%
Unknown 21 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 54 43%
Linguistics 6 5%
Social Sciences 6 5%
Computer Science 6 5%
Neuroscience 5 4%
Other 29 23%
Unknown 21 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 03 December 2023.
All research outputs
#1,619,613
of 25,732,188 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#3,346
of 34,766 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,588
of 251,727 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#60
of 481 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,732,188 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,766 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 251,727 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 481 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.