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 |
Motion dazzle and the effects of target patterning on capture success
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Ecology and Evolution, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12862-014-0201-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anna E Hughes, Jolyon Troscianko, Martin Stevens |
| Abstract |
Stripes and other high contrast patterns found on animals have been hypothesised to cause "motion dazzle", a type of defensive coloration that operates when in motion, causing predators to misjudge the speed and direction of object movement. Several recent studies have found some support for this idea, but little is currently understood about the mechanisms underlying this effect. Using humans as model 'predators' in a touch screen experiment we investigated further the effectiveness of striped targets in preventing capture, and considered how stripes compare to other types of patterning in order to understand what aspects of target patterning are important in making a target difficult to capture. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 Kingdom | 3 | 23% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 8% |
| Finland | 1 | 8% |
| Germany | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 7 | 54% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 46% |
| Scientists | 5 | 38% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 8% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Italy | 1 | 1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 77 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 19% |
| Researcher | 9 | 11% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 15% |
| Unknown | 10 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 40 | 49% |
| Psychology | 9 | 11% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 7% |
| Environmental Science | 5 | 6% |
| Design | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 9% |
| Unknown | 12 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 32. 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 13 January 2021.
All research outputs
#1,240,837
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#286
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,938
of 257,838 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#11
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,714 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 done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 257,838 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.