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 |
Outlines of a multiple trace theory of temporal preparation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01058 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sander A. Los, Wouter Kruijne, Martijn Meeter |
| Abstract |
We outline a new multiple trace theory of temporal preparation (MTP), which accounts for behavior in reaction time (RT) tasks in which the participant is presented with a warning stimulus (S1) followed by a target stimulus (S2) that requires a speeded response. The theory assumes that during the foreperiod (FP; the S1-S2 interval) inhibition is applied to prevent premature response, while a wave of activation occurs upon the presentation of S2. On each trial, these actions are stored in a separate memory trace, which, jointly with earlier formed memory traces, starts contributing to preparation on subsequent trials. We show that MTP accounts for classic effects in temporal preparation, including mean RT-FP functions observed under a variety of FP distributions and asymmetric sequential effects. We discuss the advantages of MTP over other accounts of these effects (trace-conditioning and hazard-based explanations) and suggest a critical experiment to empirically distinguish among them. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 95 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 21 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 18 | 18% |
| Unknown | 19 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 45 | 45% |
| Neuroscience | 17 | 17% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 2% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 8% |
| Unknown | 23 | 23% |
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 19 September 2014.
All research outputs
#17,727,479
of 22,764,165 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#20,349
of 29,675 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,114
of 250,225 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#309
of 361 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,764,165 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,675 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 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 250,225 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 361 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.