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.
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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Manual (a)symmetries in grasp posture planning: a short review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, December 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01480 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christian Seegelke, Charmayne Mary Lee Hughes, Thomas Schack |
| Abstract |
Many activities of daily living require that we physically interact with one or more objects. Object manipulation provides an intriguing domain in which the presence and extent of manual asymmetries can be studied on a motor planning and a motor execution level. In this literature review we present a state of the art for manual asymmetries at the level of motor planning during object manipulation. First, we introduce pioneering work on grasp posture planning. We then sketch the studies investigating the impact of future task demands during unimanual and bimanual object manipulation tasks in healthy adult populations. In sum, in contrast to motor execution, there is little evidence for hand-based performance differences in grasp posture planning. We discuss potential reasons for the lack of manual asymmetries in motor planning and outline potential avenues of future research. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 27 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 34% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 17% |
| Researcher | 3 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 2 | 7% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 8 | 28% |
| Psychology | 6 | 21% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 10% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 10% |
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 08 January 2015.
All research outputs
#20,487,260
of 25,182,110 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#25,052
of 34,011 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#271,137
of 367,121 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#309
of 356 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,182,110 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,011 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 367,121 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 356 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.