↓ Skip to main content

Are patients with schizophrenia impaired in processing non-emotional features of human faces?

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
76 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
Are patients with schizophrenia impaired in processing non-emotional features of human faces?
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00529
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hayley Darke, Joel S. Peterman, Sohee Park, Suresh Sundram, Olivia Carter

Abstract

It is known that individuals with schizophrenia exhibit signs of impaired face processing, however, the exact perceptual and cognitive mechanisms underlying these deficits are yet to be elucidated. One possible source of confusion in the current literature is the methodological and conceptual inconsistencies that can arise from the varied treatment of different aspects of face processing relating to emotional and non-emotional aspects of face perception. This review aims to disentangle the literature by focusing on the performance of patients with schizophrenia in a range of tasks that required processing of non-emotional features of face stimuli (e.g., identity or gender). We also consider the performance of patients on non-face stimuli that share common elements such as familiarity (e.g., cars) and social relevance (e.g., gait). We conclude by exploring whether observed deficits are best considered as "face-specific" and note that further investigation is required to properly assess the potential contribution of more generalized attentional or perceptual impairments.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 76 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 34%
Student > Master 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 9 12%
Researcher 7 9%
Professor 4 5%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 9 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 32 42%
Neuroscience 12 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 13 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 09 November 2013.
All research outputs
#7,180,248
of 25,078,088 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#10,357
of 33,867 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,835
of 293,438 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#405
of 969 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,078,088 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,867 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 293,438 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.