↓ Skip to main content

Auditory Motion Elicits a Visual Motion Aftereffect

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 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
Auditory Motion Elicits a Visual Motion Aftereffect
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, December 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2016.00559
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christopher C. Berger, H. Henrik Ehrsson

Abstract

The visual motion aftereffect is a visual illusion in which exposure to continuous motion in one direction leads to a subsequent illusion of visual motion in the opposite direction. Previous findings have been mixed with regard to whether this visual illusion can be induced cross-modally by auditory stimuli. Based on research on multisensory perception demonstrating the profound influence auditory perception can have on the interpretation and perceived motion of visual stimuli, we hypothesized that exposure to auditory stimuli with strong directional motion cues should induce a visual motion aftereffect. Here, we demonstrate that horizontally moving auditory stimuli induced a significant visual motion aftereffect-an effect that was driven primarily by a change in visual motion perception following exposure to leftward moving auditory stimuli. This finding is consistent with the notion that visual and auditory motion perception rely on at least partially overlapping neural substrates.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 3%
Sweden 1 2%
Unknown 60 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 25%
Student > Master 11 17%
Researcher 8 13%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 6%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 7 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 27 43%
Neuroscience 10 16%
Engineering 5 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 8 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 March 2017.
All research outputs
#14,915,476
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#6,085
of 11,541 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#216,341
of 416,426 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#61
of 142 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,541 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 416,426 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 142 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.