↓ Skip to main content

A common metric magnitude system for the perception and production of numerosity, length, and duration

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 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
A common metric magnitude system for the perception and production of numerosity, length, and duration
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00449
Pubmed ID
Authors

Virginie Crollen, Stéphane Grade, Mauro Pesenti, Valérie Dormal

Abstract

Numerosity, length, and duration processing may share a common functional mechanism situated within the parietal cortex. A strong parallelism between the processing of these three magnitudes has been revealed by similar behavioral signatures (e.g., Weber-Fechner's law, the distance effect) and reciprocal interference effects. Here, we extend the behavioral evidence for a common magnitude processing mechanism by exploring whether the under- and overestimation patterns observed during numerical perception and production tasks are also present in length and duration perception and production. In a first experiment, participants had to perform two estimation tasks (i.e., perception and production) on three magnitudes (i.e., numerosities, lengths, and durations). The results demonstrate similar patterns for the three magnitudes: underestimation was observed in all perception tasks, whereas overestimation was found in all production tasks. A second experiment ensured that this pattern of under- and over-estimation was not solely generated by the mere process of perceiving or producing something. Participants were required to estimate the alphabetical position of a letter (i.e., perception task) or to produce the letter corresponding to a given position (i.e., production task). No under- or overestimation were observed in this experiment, which suggests that the process of perceiving or producing something alone cannot explain the systematic pattern of estimation observed on magnitudes. Together, these findings strengthen the idea that magnitude estimations share a common metric system, requiring similar mechanisms and/or representations.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 3%
Netherlands 1 1%
Sweden 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Unknown 66 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 22%
Student > Master 10 14%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 9 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 46 64%
Neuroscience 6 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 1%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 1%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 11 15%
Attention Score in Context

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 22 July 2013.
All research outputs
#17,691,177
of 22,714,025 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#20,230
of 29,507 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#210,191
of 280,752 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#756
of 969 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,714,025 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 280,752 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.