↓ Skip to main content

The Influence of Co-action on a Simple Attention Task: A Shift Back to the Status Quo

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Readers on

mendeley
12 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
The Influence of Co-action on a Simple Attention Task: A Shift Back to the Status Quo
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, June 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00874
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jill A. Dosso, Kevin H. Roberts, Alessandra DiGiacomo, Alan Kingstone

Abstract

There is a growing consensus among researchers that a complete description of human attention and action should include information about how these processes are informed by social context. When we actively engage in co-action with others, there are characteristic changes in action kinematics, reaction time, search behavior, as well as other processes (see Sebanz et al., 2003; Becchio et al., 2010; Wahn et al., 2017). It is now important to identify precisely what is shared between co-actors in these joint action situations. One group recently found that participants seem to withdraw their attention away from a partner and toward themselves when co-engaged in a line bisection judgment task (Szpak et al., 2016). This effect runs counter to the typical finding that attention is drawn toward social items in the environment (Birmingham et al., 2008, 2009; Foulsham et al., 2011). As such, the result suggests that joint action can uniquely lead to the withdrawal of covert attention in a manner detectable by a line bisection task performed on a computer screen. This task could therefore act as a simple and elegant measure of interpersonal effects on attention within particular pairs of participants. For this reason, the present work attempted to replicate and extend the finding that attention, as measured by a line-bisection task, is withdrawn away from nearby co-actors. Overall our study found no evidence of social modulation of covert attention. This suggests that the line bisection task may not be sensitive enough to reliably measure interpersonal attention effects - at least when one looks at overall group performance. However, our data also hint at the possibility that the effect of nearby others on the distribution of attention may be modulated by individual differences.

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 9 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 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 25%
Student > Postgraduate 2 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 17%
Professor 1 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 2 17%
Psychology 2 17%
Computer Science 1 8%
Unspecified 1 8%
Neuroscience 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 4 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 17 December 2018.
All research outputs
#6,073,014
of 23,053,169 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#8,629
of 30,373 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,542
of 329,789 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#278
of 659 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,053,169 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,373 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 71% 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 329,789 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 659 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.