↓ Skip to main content

Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) “brain reading”: detecting and classifying distributed patterns of fMRI activity in human visual cortex

Overview of attention for article published in NeuroImage, June 2003
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users
patent
2 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
887 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1085 Mendeley
citeulike
15 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
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
Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) “brain reading”: detecting and classifying distributed patterns of fMRI activity in human visual cortex
Published in
NeuroImage, June 2003
DOI 10.1016/s1053-8119(03)00049-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

David D Cox, Robert L Savoy

Abstract

Traditional (univariate) analysis of functional MRI (fMRI) data relies exclusively on the information contained in the time course of individual voxels. Multivariate analyses can take advantage of the information contained in activity patterns across space, from multiple voxels. Such analyses have the potential to greatly expand the amount of information extracted from fMRI data sets. In the present study, multivariate statistical pattern recognition methods, including linear discriminant analysis and support vector machines, were used to classify patterns of fMRI activation evoked by the visual presentation of various categories of objects. Classifiers were trained using data from voxels in predefined regions of interest during a subset of trials for each subject individually. Classification of subsequently collected fMRI data was attempted according to the similarity of activation patterns to prior training examples. Classification was done using only small amounts of data (20 s worth) at a time, so such a technique could, in principle, be used to extract information about a subject's percept on a near real-time basis. Classifiers trained on data acquired during one session were equally accurate in classifying data collected within the same session and across sessions separated by more than a week, in the same subject. Although the highest classification accuracies were obtained using patterns of activity including lower visual areas as input, classification accuracies well above chance were achieved using regions of interest restricted to higher-order object-selective visual areas. In contrast to typical fMRI data analysis, in which hours of data across many subjects are averaged to reveal slight differences in activation, the use of pattern recognition methods allows a subtle 10-way discrimination to be performed on an essentially trial-by-trial basis within individuals, demonstrating that fMRI data contain far more information than is typically appreciated.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 1,085 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 36 3%
United Kingdom 14 1%
Germany 13 1%
Netherlands 12 1%
France 5 <1%
Japan 5 <1%
Canada 4 <1%
Denmark 3 <1%
China 3 <1%
Other 21 2%
Unknown 969 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 290 27%
Researcher 223 21%
Student > Master 152 14%
Student > Bachelor 68 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 64 6%
Other 162 15%
Unknown 126 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 314 29%
Neuroscience 174 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 130 12%
Computer Science 82 8%
Engineering 68 6%
Other 132 12%
Unknown 185 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 04 March 2023.
All research outputs
#1,530,694
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from NeuroImage
#1,044
of 12,205 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,572
of 53,649 outputs
Outputs of similar age from NeuroImage
#1
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,205 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 53,649 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 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 97% of its contemporaries.