↓ Skip to main content

Is Social Categorization Spatially Organized in a “Mental Line”? Empirical Evidences for Spatial Bias in Intergroup Differentiation

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 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
Is Social Categorization Spatially Organized in a “Mental Line”? Empirical Evidences for Spatial Bias in Intergroup Differentiation
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, February 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00152
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fabio Presaghi, Marika Rullo

Abstract

Social categorization is the differentiation between the self and others and between one's own group and other groups and it is such a natural and spontaneous process that often we are not aware of it. The way in which the brain organizes social categorization remains an unresolved issue. We present three experiments investigating the hypothesis that social categories are mentally ordered from left to right on an ingroup-outgroup continuum when membership is salient. To substantiate our hypothesis, we consider empirical evidence from two areas of psychology: research on differences in processing of ingroups and outgroups and research on the effects of spatial biases on processing of quantitative information (e.g., time; numbers) which appears to be arranged from left to right on a small-large continuum, an effect known as the spatial-numerical association of response codes (SNARC). In Experiments 1 and 2 we tested the hypothesis that when membership of a social category is activated, people implicitly locate ingroup categories to the left of a mental line whereas outgroup categories are located on the far right of the same mental line. This spatial organization persists even when stimuli are presented on one of the two sides of the screen and their (explicit) position is spatially incompatible with the implicit mental spatial organization of social categories (Experiment 3). Overall the results indicate that ingroups and outgroups are processed differently. The results are discussed with respect to social categorization theory, spatial agency bias, i.e., the effect observed in Western cultures whereby the agent of an action is mentally represented on the left and the recipient on the right, and the SNARC effect.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 11%
Researcher 3 11%
Other 2 7%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 9 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 12 43%
Social Sciences 4 14%
Mathematics 1 4%
Neuroscience 1 4%
Unknown 10 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 25 January 2020.
All research outputs
#2,962,875
of 26,430,863 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#5,869
of 35,372 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,360
of 477,263 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#127
of 541 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,430,863 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 35,372 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 477,263 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 541 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.