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 |
Nosewitness Identification: Effects of Lineup Size and Retention Interval
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00713 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Laura Alho, Sandra C. Soares, Liliana P. Costa, Elisa Pinto, Jacqueline H. T. Ferreira, Kimmo Sorjonen, Carlos F. Silva, Mats J. Olsson |
| Abstract |
Although canine identification of body odor (BO) has been widely used as forensic evidence, the concept of nosewitness identification by human observers was only recently put to the test. The results indicated that BOs associated with male characters in authentic crime videos could later be identified in BO lineup tests well above chance. To further evaluate nosewitness memory, we assessed the effects of lineup size (Experiment 1) and retention interval (Experiment 2), using a forced-choice memory test. The results showed that nosewitness identification works for all lineup sizes (3, 5, and 8 BOs), but that larger lineups compromise identification performance in similarity to observations from eye- and earwitness studies. Also in line with previous eye- and earwitness studies, but in disagreement with some studies on odor memory, Experiment 2 showed significant forgetting between shorter retention intervals (15 min) and longer retention intervals (1-week) using lineups of five BOs. Altogether this study shows that identification of BO in a forensic setting is possible and has limits and characteristics in line with witness identification through other sensory modalities. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 10% |
| Luxembourg | 1 | 10% |
| Botswana | 1 | 10% |
| Germany | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 6 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 90% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Portugal | 1 | 3% |
| Luxembourg | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 31 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 4 | 12% |
| Researcher | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 8 | 24% |
| Unknown | 8 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 14 | 42% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Linguistics | 1 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 12% |
| Unknown | 10 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 212. 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 October 2021.
All research outputs
#163,229
of 23,743,910 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#331
of 31,651 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,416
of 341,382 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#10
of 443 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,743,910 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 31,651 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 341,382 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 443 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 97% of its contemporaries.