↓ Skip to main content

Benefits of Motion in Animated Storybooks for Children’s Visual Attention and Story Comprehension. An Eye-Tracking Study

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
64 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
118 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
Benefits of Motion in Animated Storybooks for Children’s Visual Attention and Story Comprehension. An Eye-Tracking Study
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, October 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01591
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zsofia K. Takacs, Adriana G. Bus

Abstract

The present study provides experimental evidence regarding 4-6-year-old children's visual processing of animated versus static illustrations in storybooks. Thirty nine participants listened to an animated and a static book, both three times, while eye movements were registered with an eye-tracker. Outcomes corroborate the hypothesis that specifically motion is what attracts children's attention while looking at illustrations. It is proposed that animated illustrations that are well matched to the text of the story guide children to those parts of the illustration that are important for understanding the story. This may explain why animated books resulted in better comprehension than static books.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 118 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Malaysia 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Unknown 116 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 19%
Student > Master 11 9%
Researcher 8 7%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 4%
Other 19 16%
Unknown 45 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 22 19%
Social Sciences 12 10%
Arts and Humanities 11 9%
Linguistics 7 6%
Computer Science 6 5%
Other 13 11%
Unknown 47 40%
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 25 January 2017.
All research outputs
#15,437,553
of 22,947,506 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#18,832
of 30,092 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#201,724
of 319,828 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#348
of 477 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,947,506 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,092 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 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 319,828 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 477 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.