↓ Skip to main content

Developmental Dyscalculia and Automatic Magnitudes Processing: Investigating Interference Effects between Area and Perimeter

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, December 2017
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
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 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
Developmental Dyscalculia and Automatic Magnitudes Processing: Investigating Interference Effects between Area and Perimeter
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, December 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02206
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hili Eidlin-Levy, Orly Rubinsten

Abstract

The relationship between numbers and other magnitudes has been extensively investigated in the scientific literature. Here, the objectives were to examine whether two continuous magnitudes, area and perimeter, are automatically processed and whether adults with developmental dyscalculia (DD) are deficient in their ability to automatically process one or both of these magnitudes. Fifty-seven students (30 with DD and 27 with typical development) performed a novel Stroop-like task requiring estimation of one aspect (area or perimeter) while ignoring the other. In order to track possible changes in automaticity due to practice, we measured performance after initial and continuous exposure to stimuli. Similar to previous findings, current results show a significant group × congruency interaction, evident beyond exposure level or magnitude type. That is, the DD group systematically showed larger Stroop effects. However, analysis of each exposure period showed that during initial exposure to stimuli the DD group showed larger Stroop effects in the perimeter and not in the area task. In contrast, during continuous exposure to stimuli no triple interaction was evident. It is concluded that both magnitudes are automatically processed. Nevertheless, individuals with DD are deficient in inhibiting irrelevant magnitude information in general and, specifically, struggle to inhibit salient area information after initial exposure to a perimeter comparison task. Accordingly, the findings support the assumption that DD involves a deficiency in multiple cognitive components, which include domain-specific and domain-general cognitive functions.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 17%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Librarian 1 4%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 8 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 9 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Mathematics 1 4%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Engineering 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 10 43%
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 21 December 2017.
All research outputs
#15,484,498
of 23,009,818 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#18,952
of 30,248 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#268,244
of 440,649 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#381
of 515 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,009,818 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 30,248 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 440,649 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 515 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.