↓ Skip to main content

Embodied cognition, abstract concepts, and the benefits of new technology for implicit body manipulation

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, August 2014
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 (90th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
7 X users
q&a
1 Q&A thread

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
139 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
Embodied cognition, abstract concepts, and the benefits of new technology for implicit body manipulation
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00757
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katinka Dijkstra, Anita Eerland, Josjan Zijlmans, Lysanne S. Post

Abstract

Current approaches on cognition hold that concrete concepts are grounded in concrete experiences. There is no consensus, however, as to whether this is equally true for abstract concepts. In this review we discuss how the body might be involved in understanding abstract concepts through metaphor activation. Substantial research has been conducted on the activation of common orientational metaphors with bodily manipulations, such as "power is up" and "more is up" representations. We will focus on the political metaphor that has a more complex association between the concept and the concrete domain. However, the outcomes of studies on this political metaphor have not always been consistent, possibly because the experimental manipulation was not implicit enough. The inclusion of new technological devices in this area of research, such as the Wii Balance Board, seems promising in order to assess the groundedness of abstract conceptual spatial metaphors in an implicit manner. This may aid further research to effectively demonstrate the interrelatedness between the body and more abstract representations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 139 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 4%
Germany 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
Peru 1 <1%
Unknown 129 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 17%
Researcher 20 14%
Student > Master 18 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 9%
Professor 11 8%
Other 29 21%
Unknown 25 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 52 37%
Social Sciences 16 12%
Linguistics 5 4%
Engineering 4 3%
Arts and Humanities 4 3%
Other 22 16%
Unknown 36 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 08 April 2023.
All research outputs
#2,249,633
of 25,390,203 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#4,526
of 34,321 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,419
of 244,898 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#82
of 383 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,390,203 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 34,321 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 244,898 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 383 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.