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 |
Mechanism of the SNARC Effect in Numerical Magnitude, Time Sequence, and Spatial Sequence Tasks: Involvement of LTM and WM
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01558 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Qiangqiang Wang, Mowei Liu, Wendian Shi, Jingmei Kang |
| Abstract |
The spatial-numerical association of response codes (SNARC) effect refers to the phenomenon that responses involving small numbers are faster with the left hand and responses involving large numbers are faster with the right hand. Previous studies have investigated the mechanism of the SNARC effect only when the time sequence is induced by centrally presented successive numbers. No study has investigated the mechanism of the SNARC effect when the spatial sequence is induced. Given that the induction of a spatial sequence together with a time sequence provides a new temporary reference for the serial order to be coded in working memory (WM), it would be interesting to examine the SNARC effect when both the time sequence and spatial sequence are induced. Therefore, a novel priming paradigm that simultaneously induced the time sequence and spatial sequence was employed in the present study to investigate the mechanism of the SNARC effect. Specifically, the time sequence and spatial sequence were induced by presenting a series of self-paced successive numbers, centrally or in a left-to-right or right-to-left direction, on the screen. Following the presentation of successive numbers, the probe number was centrally presented on the screen and university students were asked to distinguish to which time sequence or spatial sequence the probe number belonged by pressing a specified key of a qwerty keyboard. The results indicated that (1) the SNARC effect simultaneously appeared in the processing of the number magnitude and time sequence when only the time sequence was induced. (2) The SNARC effect disappeared in the processing of the time sequence; however, the SNARC effect coexisted in the processing of the numerical magnitude and spatial sequence when the spatial sequence was induced and participants performed a time sequence relevant task. (3) The SNARC effect coexisted in the processing of the numerical magnitude, time sequence, and spatial sequence when the spatial sequence was induced and participants performed a spatial sequence relevant task. Based on these results, we conclude that whether the SNARC effect coexists in the processing of the numerical magnitude, the time sequence and spatial sequence were influenced by the spatial sequence and relevant task. The results further support the mental whiteboard hypothesis and extended the WM account. Implications for theories on the SNARC effect were discussed. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| India | 1 | 25% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
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 > Master | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 12 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 8 | 29% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 18% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 4% |
| Design | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 12 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 16 January 2023.
All research outputs
#2,940,335
of 23,549,388 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#5,618
of 31,373 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,487
of 334,860 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#198
of 727 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,549,388 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,373 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 334,860 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 727 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 72% of its contemporaries.