↓ Skip to main content

Non-Instrumental Movement Inhibition (NIMI) Differentially Suppresses Head and Thigh Movements during Screenic Engagement: Dependence on Interaction

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, February 2016
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 (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
41 news outlets
blogs
6 blogs
twitter
13 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages
wikipedia
6 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 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
Non-Instrumental Movement Inhibition (NIMI) Differentially Suppresses Head and Thigh Movements during Screenic Engagement: Dependence on Interaction
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, February 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00157
Pubmed ID
Authors

Harry J. Witchel, Carlos P. Santos, James K. Ackah, Carina E. I. Westling, Nachiappan Chockalingam

Abstract

Estimating engagement levels from postural micromovements has been summarized by some researchers as: increased proximity to the screen is a marker for engagement, while increased postural movement is a signal for disengagement or negative affect. However, these findings are inconclusive: the movement hypothesis challenges other findings of dyadic interaction in humans, and experiments on the positional hypothesis diverge from it. (1) Under controlled conditions, adding a relevant visual stimulus to an auditory stimulus will preferentially result in Non-Instrumental Movement Inhibition (NIMI) of the head. (2) When instrumental movements are eliminated and computer-interaction rate is held constant, for two identically-structured stimuli, cognitive engagement (i.e., interest) will result in measurable NIMI of the body generally. Twenty-seven healthy participants were seated in front of a computer monitor and speakers. Discrete 3-min stimuli were presented with interactions mediated via a handheld trackball without any keyboard, to minimize instrumental movements of the participant's body. Music videos and audio-only music were used to test hypothesis (1). Time-sensitive, highly interactive stimuli were used to test hypothesis (2). Subjective responses were assessed via visual analog scales. The computer users' movements were quantified using video motion tracking from the lateral aspect. Repeated measures ANOVAs with Tukey post hoc comparisons were performed. For two equivalently-engaging music videos, eliminating the visual content elicited significantly increased non-instrumental movements of the head (while also decreasing subjective engagement); a highly engaging user-selected piece of favorite music led to further increased non-instrumental movement. For two comparable reading tasks, the more engaging reading significantly inhibited (42%) movement of the head and thigh; however, when a highly engaging video game was compared to the boring reading, even though the reading task and the game had similar levels of interaction (trackball clicks), only thigh movement was significantly inhibited, not head movement. NIMI can be elicited by adding a relevant visual accompaniment to an audio-only stimulus or by making a stimulus cognitively engaging. However, these results presume that all other factors are held constant, because total movement rates can be affected by cognitive engagement, instrumental movements, visual requirements, and the time-sensitivity of the stimulus.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 58 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 18%
Student > Bachelor 9 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 12%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Other 13 22%
Unknown 9 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 11 18%
Psychology 10 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 12%
Engineering 5 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 7%
Other 12 20%
Unknown 11 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 366. 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 28 November 2023.
All research outputs
#85,746
of 25,315,460 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#161
of 34,191 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,438
of 305,470 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#3
of 477 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,315,460 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,191 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 305,470 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 477 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.