↓ Skip to main content

Toward a Dynamic Probabilistic Model for Vestibular Cognition

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 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
Toward a Dynamic Probabilistic Model for Vestibular Cognition
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, February 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00138
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew W Ellis, Fred W Mast

Abstract

We suggest that research in vestibular cognition will benefit from the theoretical framework of probabilistic models. This will aid in developing an understanding of how interactions between high-level cognition and low-level sensory processing might occur. Many such interactions have been shown experimentally; however, to date, no attempt has been made to systematically explore vestibular cognition by using computational modeling. It is widely assumed that mental imagery and perception share at least in part neural circuitry, and it has been proposed that mental simulation is closely connected to the brain's ability to make predictions. We claim that this connection has been disregarded in the vestibular domain, and we suggest ways in which future research may take this into consideration.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 1 2%
Unknown 63 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 14%
Researcher 9 14%
Student > Master 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Professor 4 6%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 26 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 13 20%
Neuroscience 6 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 5%
Engineering 2 3%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 30 47%
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 13 February 2017.
All research outputs
#14,036,290
of 22,940,083 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#14,244
of 30,092 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#222,460
of 420,290 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#293
of 459 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,940,083 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,092 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its peers.
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 420,290 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 459 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.