↓ Skip to main content

Chronologically organized structure in autobiographical memory search

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
55 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 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
Chronologically organized structure in autobiographical memory search
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, March 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00338
Pubmed ID
Authors

Iva K. Brunec, Martin J. Chadwick, Amir-Homayoun Javadi, Ling Guo, Charlotte P. Malcolm, Hugo J. Spiers

Abstract

Each of us has a rich set of autobiographical memories that provides us with a coherent story of our lives. These memories are known to be highly structured both thematically and temporally. However, it is not known how we naturally tend to explore the mental timeline of our memories. Here we developed a novel cued retrieval paradigm in order to investigate the temporal element of memory search. We found that, when asked to search for memories in the days immediately surrounding a salient cued event, participants displayed a marked set of temporal biases in their search patterns. Specifically, participants first tended to jump back in time and retrieve memories from the day prior to the cued event. Following this they then transitioned forward in time, and retrieved memories from the day after the cued event. This pattern of results replicated in a second experiment with a much larger group of participants, and a different method of cueing the memories. We argue that this set of temporal biases is consistent with memory search conforming to a temporally ordered narrative structure.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 55 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 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 6%
United States 2 4%
Netherlands 1 2%
France 1 2%
Unknown 46 87%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 21%
Student > Master 9 17%
Researcher 6 11%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Student > Postgraduate 4 8%
Other 11 21%
Unknown 8 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 29 55%
Neuroscience 7 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 6%
Mathematics 1 2%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 12 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. 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 July 2016.
All research outputs
#1,225,586
of 24,844,992 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#2,541
of 33,513 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,598
of 268,597 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#57
of 475 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,844,992 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,513 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 268,597 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 475 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.