↓ Skip to main content

Bodies adapt orientation-independent face representations

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
31 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
Bodies adapt orientation-independent face representations
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00413
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ellyanna Kessler, Shawn A. Walls, Avniel S. Ghuman

Abstract

Faces and bodies share a great number of semantic attributes, such as gender, emotional expressiveness, and identity. Recent studies demonstrate that bodies can activate and modulate face perception. However, the nature of the face representation that is activated by bodies remains unknown. In particular, face and body representations have previously been shown to have a degree of orientation specificity. Here we use body-face adaptation aftereffects to test whether bodies activate face representations in an orientation-dependent manner. Specifically, we used a two-by-two design to examine the magnitude of the body-face aftereffect using upright and inverted body adaptors and upright and inverted face targets. All four conditions showed significant body-face adaptation. We found neither a main effect of body orientation nor an interaction between body and face orientation. There was a main effect of target face orientation, with inverted target faces showing larger aftereffects than upright target faces, consistent with traditional face-face adaptation. Taken together, these results suggest that bodies adapt and activate a relatively orientation-independent representation of faces.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Ireland 1 3%
Unknown 29 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 35%
Researcher 3 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 10%
Student > Master 3 10%
Other 8 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 21 68%
Neuroscience 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Unspecified 1 3%
Philosophy 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 13%
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 11 July 2013.
All research outputs
#14,109,611
of 22,714,025 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#14,801
of 29,507 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#166,784
of 280,747 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#619
of 969 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,714,025 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 29,507 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 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 280,747 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.