↓ Skip to main content

The Object Orientation Effect in Exocentric Distances

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
21 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 Object Orientation Effect in Exocentric Distances
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01374
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marlene Weller, Kohske Takahashi, Katsumi Watanabe, Heinrich H. Bülthoff, Tobias Meilinger

Abstract

The object orientation effect describes shorter perceived distances to the front than to the back of oriented objects. The present work extends previous studies in showing that the object orientation effect occurs not only for egocentric distances between an observer and an object, but also for exocentric distances, that are between two oriented objects. Participants watched animated virtual humans (avatars) which were either facing each other or looking away, and afterward adjusted a bar to estimate the perceived length. In two experiments, participants judged avatars facing each other as closer than avatars facing away from each other. As the judged distance was between two objects and did not involve the observer, results rule out an explanation that observers perceive object fronts as closer to prepare for future interaction with them. The second experiment tested an explanation by predictive coding, this is the extrapolation of the current state of affairs to likely future states here that avatars move forward. We used avatars standing on bridges either connecting them or running orthogonal to the inter-avatar line thus preventing forward movement. This variation of walkability did not influence participants' judgments. We conclude that if predictive coding was used by participants, they did not consider the whole scene layout for prediction, but concentrated on avatars. Another potential explanation of the effect assumes a general asymmetrical distribution of inter-person distances: people facing each other might typically be closer to each other than when facing away and that this asymmetry is reflected as a bias in perception.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 19%
Student > Master 3 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 6 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 6 29%
Social Sciences 3 14%
Neuroscience 2 10%
Sports and Recreations 1 5%
Arts and Humanities 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 7 33%
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 03 August 2018.
All research outputs
#18,645,475
of 23,098,660 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,628
of 30,491 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,520
of 331,034 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#652
of 717 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,098,660 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 30,491 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 331,034 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 717 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.