↓ Skip to main content

Surround-Masking Affects Visual Estimation Ability

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
16 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
Surround-Masking Affects Visual Estimation Ability
Published in
Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, March 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnint.2017.00007
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicola R. Jastrzebski, Laila E. Hugrass, Sheila G. Crewther, David P. Crewther

Abstract

Visual estimation of numerosity involves the discrimination of magnitude between two distributions or perceptual sets that vary in number of elements. How performance on such estimation depends on peripheral sensory stimulation is unclear, even in typically developing adults. Here, we varied the central and surround contrast of stimuli that comprised a visual estimation task in order to determine whether mechanisms involved with the removal of unessential visual input functionally contributes toward number acuity. The visual estimation judgments of typically developed adults were significantly impaired for high but not low contrast surround stimulus conditions. The center and surround contrasts of the stimuli also differentially affected the accuracy of numerosity estimation depending on whether fewer or more dots were presented. Remarkably, observers demonstrated the highest mean percentage accuracy across stimulus conditions in the discrimination of more elements when the surround contrast was low and the background luminance of the central region containing the elements was dark (black center). Conversely, accuracy was severely impaired during the discrimination of fewer elements when the surround contrast was high and the background luminance of the central region was mid level (gray center). These findings suggest that estimation ability is functionally related to the quality of low-order filtration of unessential visual information. These surround masking results may help understanding of the poor visual estimation ability commonly observed in developmental dyscalculia.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 25%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 19%
Researcher 3 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 6%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 2 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 5 31%
Psychology 4 25%
Mathematics 1 6%
Physics and Astronomy 1 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 6%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 2 13%
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 16 April 2017.
All research outputs
#18,151,354
of 23,317,888 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
#655
of 863 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#222,399
of 309,237 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
#5
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,317,888 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 863 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.6. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 309,237 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.