↓ Skip to main content

Waves of visibility: probing the depth of inter-ocular suppression with transient and sustained targets

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, July 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 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
Waves of visibility: probing the depth of inter-ocular suppression with transient and sustained targets
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, July 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00804
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lisandro N. Kaunitz, Alessio Fracasso, Māris Skujevskis, David Melcher

Abstract

In order to study non-conscious visual processing, researchers render otherwise consciously perceived images into invisible stimuli. Through the years, several psychophysical techniques have been developed for this purpose. Yet the comparison of experimental results across techniques remains a difficult task as the depth of suppression depends on the interactions between the type of stimuli and the suppression methods employed. This poses a limit to the inferences that researchers make about the extent of non-conscious processes. We investigated the mechanisms underlying inter-ocular suppression during continuous flash suppression (CFS) and dichoptic visual masking using a transient onset target stimulus and a variety of stimulus/mask temporal manipulations. We show that target duration, timing of target onset, and mask frequency are key aspects of inter-ocular suppression during CFS with transient targets. The differences between our results and sustained target CFS studies suggest that two distinct mechanisms are involved in the detection of transient and prolonged target stimuli during CFS. Our results provide insight into the dynamics of CFS together with evidence for similarities between transient target CFS and dichoptic visual masking.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Sweden 1 2%
Italy 1 2%
Unknown 48 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 20%
Student > Bachelor 10 20%
Researcher 7 14%
Student > Master 4 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 6%
Other 10 20%
Unknown 6 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 26 52%
Neuroscience 7 14%
Unspecified 3 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 4%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 8 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 15 May 2016.
All research outputs
#13,177,677
of 22,758,963 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#12,461
of 29,672 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,213
of 228,682 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#207
of 376 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,758,963 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,672 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 228,682 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 376 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.