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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Reentrant processing mediates object substitution masking: comment on Põder (2013)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00819 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Vincent Di Lollo |
| Abstract |
Object-substitution masking (OSM) occurs when a target stimulus and a surrounding mask are displayed briefly together, and the display then continues with the mask alone. Target identification is accurate when the stimuli co-terminate but is progressively impaired as the duration of the trailing mask is increased. In reentrant accounts, OSM is said to arise from iterative exchanges between brain regions connected by two-way pathways. In an alternative account, OSM is explained on the basis of exclusively feed-forward processes, without recourse to reentry. Here I show that the feed-forward account runs afoul of the extant phenomenological, behavioral, brain-imaging, and electrophysiological evidence. Further, the feed-forward assumption that masking occurs when attention finds a degraded target is shown to be entirely ad hoc. In contrast, the evidence is uniformly consistent with a reentrant-processing account of OSM. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 22 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 32% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 14% |
| Researcher | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 2 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 12 | 55% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 14% |
| Philosophy | 1 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 5% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 4 | 18% |
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 04 August 2014.
All research outputs
#18,375,478
of 22,759,618 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,029
of 29,671 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,118
of 229,899 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#329
of 374 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,759,618 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,671 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 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 229,899 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 374 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.