↓ Skip to main content

A Dynamical Systems Account of Sensorimotor Contingencies

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
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 (93rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
20 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
97 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
141 Mendeley
citeulike
2 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
A Dynamical Systems Account of Sensorimotor Contingencies
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00285
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas Buhrmann, Ezequiel Alejandro Di Paolo, Xabier Barandiaran

Abstract

According to the sensorimotor approach, perception is a form of embodied know-how, constituted by lawful regularities in the sensorimotor flow or in sensorimotor contingencies (SMCs) in an active and situated agent. Despite the attention that this approach has attracted, there have been few attempts to define its core concepts formally. In this paper, we examine the idea of SMCs and argue that its use involves notions that need to be distinguished. We introduce four distinct kinds of SMCs, which we define operationally. These are the notions of sensorimotor environment (open-loop motor-induced sensory variations), sensorimotor habitat (closed-loop sensorimotor trajectories), sensorimotor coordination (reliable sensorimotor patterns playing a functional role), and sensorimotor strategy (normative organization of sensorimotor coordinations). We make use of a minimal dynamical model of visually guided categorization to test the explanatory value of the different kinds of SMCs. Finally, we discuss the impact of our definitions on the conceptual development and empirical as well as model-based testing of the claims of the sensorimotor approach.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 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 141 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 5 4%
United States 3 2%
Portugal 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Other 2 1%
Unknown 124 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 42 30%
Researcher 24 17%
Student > Master 17 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 10 7%
Student > Bachelor 7 5%
Other 30 21%
Unknown 11 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 31 22%
Computer Science 20 14%
Philosophy 17 12%
Neuroscience 13 9%
Engineering 10 7%
Other 29 21%
Unknown 21 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 June 2023.
All research outputs
#2,135,273
of 24,953,268 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#4,294
of 33,683 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,412
of 293,040 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#199
of 969 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,953,268 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,683 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 293,040 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 969 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.