↓ Skip to main content

Developing Representations of Compound Stimuli

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 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
Developing Representations of Compound Stimuli
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00073
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ingmar Visser, Maartje E. J. Raijmakers

Abstract

Classification based on multiple dimensions of stimuli is usually associated with similarity-based representations, whereas uni-dimensional classifications are associated with rule-based representations. This paper studies classification of stimuli and category representations in school-aged children and adults when learning to categorize compound, multi-dimensional stimuli. Stimuli were such that both similarity-based and rule-based representations would lead to correct classification. This allows testing whether children have a bias for formation of similarity-based representations. The results are at odds with this expectation. Children use both uni-dimensional and multi-dimensional classification, and the use of both strategies increases with age. Multi-dimensional classification is best characterized as resulting from an analytic strategy rather than from procedural processing of overall-similarity. The conclusion is that children are capable of using complex rule-based categorization strategies that involve the use of multiple features of the stimuli. The main developmental change concerns the efficiency and consistency of the explicit learning system.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 1 3%
Unknown 36 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 22%
Researcher 7 19%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 11%
Student > Master 3 8%
Other 6 16%
Unknown 4 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 24 65%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Unspecified 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 5 14%
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 19 March 2012.
All research outputs
#15,249,959
of 22,675,759 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#18,438
of 29,379 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,175
of 244,088 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#321
of 481 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,675,759 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,379 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. 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 244,088 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 481 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.