↓ Skip to main content

The Movement-Image Compatibility Effect: Embodiment Theory Interpretations of Motor Resonance With Digitized Photographs, Drawings, and Paintings

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
22 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
The Movement-Image Compatibility Effect: Embodiment Theory Interpretations of Motor Resonance With Digitized Photographs, Drawings, and Paintings
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, June 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00991
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mark-Oliver Casper, John A. Nyakatura, Anja Pawel, Christina B. Reimer, Torsten Schubert, Marion Lauschke

Abstract

To evoke the impression of movement in the "immobile" image is one of the central motivations of the visual art, and the activating effect of images has been discussed in art psychology already some 100 years ago. However, this topic has up to now been largely neglected by the researchers in cognitive psychology and neuroscience. This study investigates - from an interdisciplinary perspective - the formation of lateralized instances of motion when an observer perceives movement in an image. A first step was to identify images that evoke a perception of movement in a certain direction and to give this a rating. Reaction times leading to the engagement of a joystick following the presentation of images are used to evidence the postulated movement occasioned by the perception of movement in an image. Where the required direction of joystick moves matched the expected perception of movement direction in the image, significantly shorter reaction times were recorded. The experiment was able to prove a "movement-image compatibility effect" in observers of images. Based on this, the paper revisits and brings up to date the theses on motor sensory response to images which were developed in art psychology at the beginning of the 20th century. It furthermore contributes an embodiment theory interpretation to the prevalent representational explanation of compatibility effects.

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 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 23%
Unspecified 4 18%
Researcher 3 14%
Student > Postgraduate 2 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 9%
Other 4 18%
Unknown 2 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 9 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 9%
Neuroscience 2 9%
Unspecified 1 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Other 4 18%
Unknown 3 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 June 2018.
All research outputs
#18,630,234
of 23,079,238 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,602
of 30,437 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,962
of 327,999 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#593
of 697 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,079,238 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,437 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 327,999 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 697 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.