↓ Skip to main content

Did you hear that? The role of stimulus similarity and uncertainty in auditory change deafness

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 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
Did you hear that? The role of stimulus similarity and uncertainty in auditory change deafness
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, October 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01125
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kelly Dickerson, Jeremy R. Gaston

Abstract

Change deafness, the auditory analog to change blindness, occurs when salient, and behaviorally relevant changes to sound sources are missed. Missing significant changes in the environment can have serious consequences, however, this effect, has remained little more than a lab phenomenon and a party trick. It is only recently that researchers have begun to explore the nature of these profound errors in change perception. Despite a wealth of examples of the change blindness phenomenon, work on change deafness remains fairly limited. The purpose of the current paper is to review the state of the literature on change deafness and propose an explanation of change deafness that relies on factors related to stimulus information rather than attentional or memory limits. To achieve this, work on across several auditory research domains, including environmental sound classification, informational masking, and change deafness are synthesized to present a unified perspective on the perception of change errors in complex, dynamic sound environments. We hope to extend previous research by describing how it may be possible to predict specific patters of change perception errors based on varying degrees of similarity in stimulus features and uncertainty about which stimuli and features are important for a given perceptual decision.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 4%
United States 1 4%
Germany 1 4%
Unknown 21 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 38%
Researcher 3 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 13%
Student > Master 2 8%
Lecturer 1 4%
Other 5 21%
Unknown 1 4%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 9 38%
Engineering 4 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 8%
Social Sciences 2 8%
Computer Science 1 4%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 3 13%
Attention Score in Context

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 20 October 2014.
All research outputs
#18,381,794
of 22,768,097 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,048
of 29,681 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#181,060
of 253,586 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#323
of 367 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,768,097 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 29,681 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 253,586 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 367 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.