↓ Skip to main content

Up or down? Reading direction influences vertical counting direction in the horizontal plane – a cross-cultural comparison

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
44 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
Up or down? Reading direction influences vertical counting direction in the horizontal plane – a cross-cultural comparison
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, March 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00228
Pubmed ID
Authors

Silke M Göbel

Abstract

Most adults and children in cultures where reading text progresses from left to right also count objects from the left to the right side of space. The reverse is found in cultures with a right-to-left reading direction. The current set of experiments investigated whether vertical counting in the horizontal plane is also influenced by reading direction. Participants were either from a left-to-right reading culture (UK) or from a mixed (left-to-right and top-to-bottom) reading culture (Hong Kong). In Experiment 1, native English-speaking children and adults and native Cantonese-speaking children and adults performed three object counting tasks. Objects were presented flat on a table in a horizontal, vertical, and square display. Independent of culture, the horizontal array was mostly counted from left to right. While the majority of English-speaking children counted the vertical display from bottom to top, the majority of the Cantonese-speaking children as well as both Cantonese- and English-speaking adults counted the vertical display from top to bottom. This pattern was replicated in the counting pattern for squares: all groups except the English-speaking children started counting with the top left coin. In Experiment 2, Cantonese-speaking adults counted a square array of objects after they read a text presented to them either in left-to-right or in top-to-bottom reading direction. Most Cantonese-speaking adults started counting the array by moving horizontally from left to right. However, significantly more Cantonese-speaking adults started counting with a top-to-bottom movement after reading the text presented in a top-to-bottom reading direction than in a left-to-right reading direction. Our results show clearly that vertical counting in the horizontal plane is influenced by longstanding as well as more recent experience of reading direction.

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 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Spain 1 2%
Netherlands 1 2%
Belgium 1 2%
Unknown 40 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 23%
Student > Master 7 16%
Student > Bachelor 6 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Researcher 4 9%
Other 9 20%
Unknown 4 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 24 55%
Social Sciences 3 7%
Engineering 3 7%
Linguistics 2 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 5%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 5 11%
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 16 February 2015.
All research outputs
#18,401,176
of 22,792,160 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,088
of 29,702 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#188,711
of 258,980 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#384
of 450 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,792,160 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 29,702 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 258,980 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 450 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.