↓ Skip to main content

Object Recognition in Mental Representations: Directions for Exploring Diagnostic Features through Visual Mental Imagery

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
100 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Object Recognition in Mental Representations: Directions for Exploring Diagnostic Features through Visual Mental Imagery
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, May 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00833
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephanie M Roldan

Abstract

One of the fundamental goals of object recognition research is to understand how a cognitive representation produced from the output of filtered and transformed sensory information facilitates efficient viewer behavior. Given that mental imagery strongly resembles perceptual processes in both cortical regions and subjective visual qualities, it is reasonable to question whether mental imagery facilitates cognition in a manner similar to that of perceptual viewing: via the detection and recognition of distinguishing features. Categorizing the feature content of mental imagery holds potential as a reverse pathway by which to identify the components of a visual stimulus which are most critical for the creation and retrieval of a visual representation. This review will examine the likelihood that the information represented in visual mental imagery reflects distinctive object features thought to facilitate efficient object categorization and recognition during perceptual viewing. If it is the case that these representational features resemble their sensory counterparts in both spatial and semantic qualities, they may well be accessible through mental imagery as evaluated through current investigative techniques. In this review, methods applied to mental imagery research and their findings are reviewed and evaluated for their efficiency in accessing internal representations, and implications for identifying diagnostic features are discussed. An argument is made for the benefits of combining mental imagery assessment methods with diagnostic feature research to advance the understanding of visual perceptive processes, with suggestions for avenues of future investigation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 100 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 26%
Researcher 9 9%
Student > Master 9 9%
Student > Bachelor 9 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 24 24%
Unknown 17 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 32 32%
Neuroscience 11 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 6%
Engineering 6 6%
Arts and Humanities 4 4%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 28 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 June 2020.
All research outputs
#14,875,162
of 25,312,451 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#13,972
of 34,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,044
of 319,946 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#336
of 605 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,312,451 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,187 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 319,946 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 605 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.