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 |
Abnormal self-schema in semantic memory in major depressive disorder: Evidence from event-related brain potentials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Biological Psychology, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2017.04.003 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michael Kiang, Faranak Farzan, Daniel M. Blumberger, Marta Kutas, Margaret C. McKinnon, Vinay Kansal, Tarek K. Rajji, Zafiris J. Daskalakis |
| Abstract |
An overly negative self-schema is a proposed cognitive mechanism of major depressive disorder (MDD). Self-schema - one's core conception of self, including how strongly one believes one possesses various characteristics - is part of semantic memory (SM), our knowledge about concepts and their relationships. We used the N400 event-related potential (ERP) - elicited by meaningful stimuli, and reduced by greater association of the stimulus with preceding context - to measure association strength between self-concept and positive, negative, and neutral characteristics in SM. ERPs were recorded from MDD patients (n=16) and controls (n=16) who viewed trials comprising a self-referential phrase followed by a positive, negative, or neutral adjective. Participants' task was to indicate via button-press whether or not they felt each adjective described themselves. Controls endorsed more positive adjectives than did MDD patients, but the opposite was true for negative adjectives. Patients had smaller N400s than controls specifically for negative adjectives, suggesting that MDD is associated with stronger than normal functional neural links between self-concept and negative characteristics in SM. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 89 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 15 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 10% |
| Researcher | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 9% |
| Other | 14 | 16% |
| Unknown | 21 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 38 | 43% |
| Neuroscience | 8 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 2% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 9 | 10% |
| Unknown | 28 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 08 April 2017.
All research outputs
#16,725,651
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Biological Psychology
#1,124
of 1,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#196,611
of 323,671 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biological Psychology
#21
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,806 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 323,671 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.