| Title |
Offline consolidation of procedural skill learning is enhanced by negative emotional content
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Experimental Brain Research, December 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00221-010-2497-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Amir Homayoun Javadi, Vincent Walsh, Penelope A. Lewis |
| Abstract |
It is now well established that both procedural skills and episodic memories consolidate across periods of offline retention, and most particularly across periods of sleep. Such consolidation has been demonstrated to be more marked for emotional than for neutral episodes, but the interaction between emotionality and the offline consolidation of procedural skills has yet to be investigated. Here, we address this issue by examining the impact of an emotional background context at encoding upon the subsequent consolidation of mirror tracing, a well-studied procedural skill. We also consider the importance of sleep for such consolidation by manipulating the retention interval (over a day, overnight, or over 24 h containing normal sleep). Our data show significantly greater offline improvements in the accuracy of mirror tracing when negative emotional content is present during the training phase when compared to when neutral or positive content is present. Furthermore, consolidation across a night of sleep is associated with faster and more accurate performance than consolidation across a day of wakefulness. These novel findings show that the emotional context in which a procedural skill is learned can impact upon subsequent offline consolidation. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 2 | 3% |
| France | 2 | 3% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Russia | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 68 | 89% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 22% |
| Researcher | 14 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 9% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 17 | 22% |
| Unknown | 6 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 28 | 37% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 9% |
| Neuroscience | 7 | 9% |
| Sports and Recreations | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 4% |
| Unknown | 15 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 12 December 2012.
All research outputs
#5,603,797
of 22,703,044 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#561
of 3,219 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,733
of 180,228 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#5
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,703,044 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,219 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 180,228 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.