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 |
Beauty and cuteness in peripheral vision
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00566 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kana Kuraguchi, Hiroshi Ashida |
| Abstract |
Guo et al. (2011) showed that attractiveness was detectable in peripheral vision. Since there are different types of attractiveness (Rhodes, 2006), we investigated how beauty and cuteness are detected in peripheral vision with a brief presentation. Participants (n = 45) observed two Japanese female faces for 100 ms, then were asked to respond which face was more beautiful (or cuter). The results indicated that both beauty and cuteness were detectable in peripheral vision, but not in the same manner. Discrimination rates for judging beauty were invariant in peripheral and central vision, while discrimination rates for judging cuteness declined in peripheral vision as compared with central vision. This was not explained by lower resolution in peripheral vision. In addition, for male participants, it was more difficult to judge cuteness than beauty in peripheral vision, thus suggesting that gender differences can have a certain effect when judging cuteness. Therefore, central vision might be suitable for judging cuteness while judging beauty might not be affected by either central or peripheral vision. This might be related with the functional difference between beauty and cuteness. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 18% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 12% |
| Switzerland | 2 | 12% |
| Kenya | 1 | 6% |
| Japan | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 8 | 47% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 16 | 94% |
| Scientists | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 32 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 25% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 13% |
| Researcher | 4 | 13% |
| Professor | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 6 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 15 | 47% |
| Engineering | 2 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 16% |
| Unknown | 6 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 08 June 2018.
All research outputs
#3,281,011
of 23,314,015 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#6,092
of 31,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,037
of 265,614 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#133
of 516 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,314,015 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,003 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 265,614 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 516 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.