↓ Skip to main content

Space and time bisection in schizophrenia

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
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 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
Space and time bisection in schizophrenia
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00823
Pubmed ID
Authors

Isidro Martinez-Cascales, Juanma de la Fuente, Julio Santiago, Julio Santiago

Abstract

As a test of the idea of a common brain system responsible for representing all prothetic dimensions, schizophrenic patients and healthy participants took part in a line bisection task and two visual temporal bisection tasks, one using durations from 1 to 4 s and another using 30 s long specially designed stimuli (aging faces). Against expectations, schizophrenics showed better precision (smaller variable error) both in line bisection and the aging faces temporal task than healthy controls. Moreover, patients also showed less bias (smaller constant error) than controls in the aging faces task. This increased precision correlated with degree of severity of schizophrenia. Although no group differences were found in the temporal task with shorter intervals, both variable and constant error measures correlated marginally with severity of schizophrenia, also in the direction of smaller error in more severe cases. Thus, overall, spatial and temporal tasks behaved similarly across groups. However, bias and precision indexes did not covary across the three tasks when correlations where computed over the whole set of participants in the present study. The results thus provide mixed support for a common system behind spatial and temporal processing and point toward the need of developing a more nuanced view of magnitude representation in the mind/brain.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 3%
Poland 1 3%
Germany 1 3%
Unknown 35 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 18%
Researcher 6 16%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 13%
Professor 3 8%
Other 6 16%
Unknown 4 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 27 71%
Philosophy 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Linguistics 1 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 6 16%
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 22 November 2013.
All research outputs
#13,902,082
of 22,731,677 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#14,082
of 29,561 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,428
of 280,774 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#580
of 969 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,731,677 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 29,561 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 280,774 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 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.