↓ Skip to main content

The hand-reversal illusion revisited

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 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
The hand-reversal illusion revisited
Published in
Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fnint.2012.00083
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sang W. Hong, Linda Xu, Min-Suk Kang, Frank Tong

Abstract

The hand-reversal illusion is a visuomotor illusion that is commonly seen in children's play. When participants attempt to lift a designated finger while their hands are cross-folded, they are likely to erroneously lift the matched finger of the other hand; however, such errors are rare when subjects close their eyes. Based on the fact that the illusion disappears without visual input, researchers previously concluded that the illusion depends upon visual and proprioceptive conflict (Van Riper, 1935). Here, we re-evaluated this visual-proprioceptive conflict hypothesis by obtaining reaction time measurements because, in the original study, subjects might have relied on a strategy of responding more slowly to minimize making errors. We found that the impairment due to cross-folding one's hand persisted in the absence of the visual input, as evidenced by delayed response times (RTs). Further, we found that such impairment occurred when the fingers of only one hand were tested, indicating that the impairment was not due to left-right confusions of the hands during tactile identification or response selection. Based on these results, we suggest that the illusion is not solely due to the conflict between visual and proprioceptive information. Instead, we propose that the unusual configuration itself that involves a reversal of the left and right hands in external space also contributes to the impaired motor response.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 3%
Canada 1 3%
Unknown 28 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 30%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 17%
Student > Master 4 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 10%
Professor 2 7%
Other 5 17%
Unknown 2 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 12 40%
Engineering 4 13%
Arts and Humanities 3 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 7%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 3 10%
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 26 September 2012.
All research outputs
#20,167,959
of 22,679,690 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
#754
of 853 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,187
of 244,102 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
#74
of 93 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,679,690 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 853 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 244,102 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 93 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.