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.
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.
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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Age-Related Declines in Early Sensory Memory: Identification of Rapid Auditory and Visual Stimulus Sequences
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnagi.2016.00090 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daniel Fogerty, Larry E. Humes, Thomas A. Busey |
| Abstract |
Age-related temporal-processing declines of rapidly presented sequences may involve contributions of sensory memory. This study investigated recall for rapidly presented auditory (vowel) and visual (letter) sequences presented at six different stimulus onset asynchronies (SOA) that spanned threshold SOAs for sequence identification. Younger, middle-aged, and older adults participated in all tasks. Results were investigated at both equivalent performance levels (i.e., SOA threshold) and at identical physical stimulus values (i.e., SOAs). For four-item sequences, results demonstrated best performance for the first and last items in the auditory sequences, but only the first item for visual sequences. For two-item sequences, adults identified the second vowel or letter significantly better than the first. Overall, when temporal-order performance was equated for each individual by testing at SOA thresholds, recall accuracy for each position across the age groups was highly similar. These results suggest that modality-specific processing declines of older adults primarily determine temporal-order performance for rapid sequences. However, there is some evidence for a second amodal processing decline in older adults related to early sensory memory for final items in a sequence. This selective deficit was observed particularly for longer sequence lengths and was not accounted for by temporal masking. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 31 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Researcher | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 11 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 7 | 23% |
| Psychology | 5 | 16% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 10 | 32% |
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 01 June 2016.
All research outputs
#17,800,994
of 22,867,327 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#3,816
of 4,809 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#204,732
of 298,725 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#72
of 90 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,867,327 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,809 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 298,725 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 90 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.