↓ Skip to main content

Grasping intentions: from thought experiments to empirical evidence

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
151 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
233 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
Grasping intentions: from thought experiments to empirical evidence
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00117
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cristina Becchio, Valeria Manera, Luisa Sartori, Andrea Cavallo, Umberto Castiello

Abstract

Skepticism has been expressed concerning the possibility to understand others' intentions by simply observing their movements: since a number of different intentions may have produced a particular action, motor information-it has been argued-might be sufficient to understand what an agent is doing, but not her remote goal in performing that action. Here we challenge this conclusion by showing that in the absence of contextual information, intentions can be inferred from body movement. Based on recent empirical findings, we shall contend that: (1) intentions translate into differential kinematic patterns; (2) observers are especially attuned to kinematic information and can use early differences in visual kinematics to anticipate the intention of an agent in performing a given action; (3) during interacting activities, predictions about the future course of others' actions tune online action planning; (4) motor activation during action observation subtends a complementary understanding of what the other is doing. These findings demonstrate that intention understanding is deeply rooted in social interaction: by simply observing others' movements, we might know what they have in mind to do and how we should act in response.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 233 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 5 2%
Canada 3 1%
France 2 <1%
Netherlands 2 <1%
Italy 2 <1%
Turkey 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 214 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 66 28%
Researcher 38 16%
Student > Master 25 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 7%
Student > Bachelor 14 6%
Other 43 18%
Unknown 31 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 96 41%
Neuroscience 23 10%
Engineering 14 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 5%
Computer Science 9 4%
Other 35 15%
Unknown 45 19%
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 September 2013.
All research outputs
#15,249,959
of 22,675,759 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#5,254
of 7,115 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,175
of 244,088 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#223
of 294 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,675,759 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 7,115 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 244,088 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 294 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.