↓ Skip to main content

Biases in the perception of self-motion during whole-body acceleration and deceleration

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 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
Biases in the perception of self-motion during whole-body acceleration and deceleration
Published in
Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fnint.2013.00090
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luc Tremblay, Andrew Kennedy, Dany Paleressompoulle, Liliane Borel, Laurence Mouchnino, Jean Blouin

Abstract

Several studies have investigated whether vestibular signals can be processed to determine the magnitude of passive body motions. Many of them required subjects to report their perceived displacements offline, i.e., after being submitted to passive displacements. Here, we used a protocol that allowed us to complement these results by asking subjects to report their introspective estimation of their displacement continuously, i.e., during the ongoing body rotation. To this end, participants rotated the handle of a manipulandum around a vertical axis to indicate their perceived change of angular position in space at the same time as they were passively rotated in the dark. The rotation acceleration (Acc) and deceleration (Dec) lasted either 1.5 s (peak of 60°/s(2), referred to as being "High") or 3 s (peak of 33°/s(2), referred to as being "Low"). The participants were rotated either counter-clockwise or clockwise, and all combinations of acceleration and deceleration were tested (i.e., AccLow-DecLow; AccLow-DecHigh; AccHigh-DecLow; AccHigh-DecHigh). The participants' perception of body rotation was assessed by computing the gain, i.e., ratio between the amplitude of the perceived rotations (as measured by the rotating manipulandum's handle) and the amplitude of the actual chair rotations. The gain was measured at the end of the rotations, and was also computed separately for the acceleration and deceleration phases. Three salient findings resulted from this experiment: (i) the gain was much greater during body acceleration than during body deceleration, (ii) the gain was greater during High compared to Low accelerations and (iii) the gain measured during the deceleration was influenced by the preceding acceleration (i.e., Low or High). These different effects of the angular stimuli on the perception of body motion can be interpreted in relation to the consequences of body acceleration and deceleration on the vestibular system and on higher-order cognitive processes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 22%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 13%
Student > Bachelor 4 13%
Student > Master 4 13%
Researcher 3 9%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 7 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 7 22%
Neuroscience 6 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 13%
Engineering 3 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 8 25%
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 19 October 2016.
All research outputs
#14,770,397
of 22,738,543 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
#555
of 853 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#175,379
of 280,811 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
#68
of 89 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,738,543 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 853 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 280,811 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 89 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.