↓ Skip to main content

Evaluating Weaknesses of “Perceptual-Cognitive Training” and “Brain Training” Methods in Sport: An Ecological Dynamics Critique

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
86 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
66 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
302 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
Evaluating Weaknesses of “Perceptual-Cognitive Training” and “Brain Training” Methods in Sport: An Ecological Dynamics Critique
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2019
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02468
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ian Renshaw, Keith Davids, Duarte Araújo, Ana Lucas, William M. Roberts, Daniel J. Newcombe, Benjamin Franks

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 86 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 302 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 302 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 36 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 12%
Student > Master 35 12%
Researcher 16 5%
Lecturer 14 5%
Other 55 18%
Unknown 111 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 91 30%
Psychology 29 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 4%
Neuroscience 11 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 4%
Other 27 9%
Unknown 121 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 58. 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 23 November 2023.
All research outputs
#765,840
of 26,153,058 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#1,609
of 35,021 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,446
of 451,311 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#49
of 778 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,153,058 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 35,021 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 451,311 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 778 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.