↓ Skip to main content

Object-based selection modulates top-down attentional shifts

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
34 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
Object-based selection modulates top-down attentional shifts
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00090
Pubmed ID
Authors

Satoshi Nishida, Tomohiro Shibata, Kazushi Ikeda

Abstract

A large body of evidence supports that visual attention - the cognitive process of selectively concentrating on a salient or task-relevant subset of visual information - often works on object-based representation. Recent studies have postulated two possible accounts for the object-specific attentional advantage: attentional spreading and attentional prioritization, each of which modulates a bottom-up signal for sensory processing and a top-down signal for attentional allocation, respectively. It is still unclear which account can explain the object-specific attentional advantage. To address this issue, we examined the influence of object-specific advantage on two types of visual search: parallel search, invoked when a bottom-up signal is fully available at a target location, and serial search, invoked when a bottom-up signal is not enough to guide target selection and a top-down control for shifting of focused attention is required. Our results revealed that the object-specific advantage is given to the serial search but not to the parallel search, suggesting that object-based attention facilitates stimulus processing by affecting the priority of attentional shifts rather than by enhancing sensory signals. Thus, our findings support the notion that the object-specific attentional advantage can be explained by attentional prioritization but not attentional spreading.

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 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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 18%
Researcher 5 15%
Lecturer 4 12%
Student > Master 4 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 7 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 17 50%
Neuroscience 4 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 7 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 21 February 2014.
All research outputs
#15,329,366
of 23,573,357 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#4,988
of 7,320 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,197
of 309,125 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#83
of 122 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,573,357 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,320 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 309,125 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 122 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.