↓ Skip to main content

Visual crowding illustrates the inadequacy of local vs. global and feedforward vs. feedback distinctions in modeling visual perception

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
41 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
Visual crowding illustrates the inadequacy of local vs. global and feedforward vs. feedback distinctions in modeling visual perception
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, October 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01193
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aaron M. Clarke, Michael H. Herzog, Gregory Francis

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Switzerland 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 37 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 22%
Student > Bachelor 6 15%
Student > Master 5 12%
Researcher 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 9 22%
Unknown 6 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 13 32%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 12%
Neuroscience 5 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 8 20%
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 09 February 2016.
All research outputs
#18,438,457
of 22,844,985 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,202
of 29,853 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,855
of 259,914 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#335
of 386 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,844,985 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 29,853 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 259,914 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 386 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.