↓ Skip to main content

Dual Systems for Spatial Updating in Immediate and Retrieved Environments: Evidence from Bias Analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 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
Dual Systems for Spatial Updating in Immediate and Retrieved Environments: Evidence from Bias Analysis
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, February 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00085
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chuanjun Liu, Chengli Xiao

Abstract

The spatial updating and memory systems are employed during updating in both the immediate and retrieved environments. However, these dual systems seem to work differently, as the difference of pointing latency and absolute error between the two systems vary across environments. To verify this issue, the present study employed the bias analysis of signed errors based on the hypothesis that the transformed representation will bias toward the original one. Participants learned a spatial layout and then either stayed in the learning location or were transferred to a neighboring room directly or after being disoriented. After that, they performed spatial judgments from perspectives aligned with the learning direction, aligned with the direction they faced during the test, or a novel direction misaligned with the two above-mentioned directions. The patterns of signed error bias were consistent across environments. Responses for memory aligned perspectives were unbiased, whereas responses for sensorimotor aligned perspectives were biased away from the memory aligned perspective, and responses for misaligned perspectives were biased toward sensorimotor aligned perspectives. These findings indicate that the spatial updating system is consistently independent of the spatial memory system regardless of the environments, but the updating system becomes less accessible as the environment changes from immediate to a retrieved one.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 25%
Student > Postgraduate 3 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 17%
Researcher 2 17%
Lecturer 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 1 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 7 58%
Computer Science 1 8%
Social Sciences 1 8%
Neuroscience 1 8%
Unknown 2 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 19 February 2019.
All research outputs
#6,868,782
of 23,016,919 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#9,837
of 30,271 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#139,569
of 437,309 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#241
of 503 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,016,919 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,271 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 437,309 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 503 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 51% of its contemporaries.