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 |
A role for the precuneus in thought–action fusion: Evidence from participants with significant obsessive–compulsive symptoms
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
NeuroImage: Clinical, November 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.nicl.2013.11.008 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rhiannon Jones, Joydeep Bhattacharya |
| Abstract |
Likelihood thought-action fusion (TAF-L) refers to a cognitive bias in which individuals believe that the mere thought of a negative event increases its likelihood of occurring in reality. TAF-L is most commonly associated with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) but is also present in depression, generalized anxiety disorder and psychosis. We induced TAF-L in individuals with high (High-OC, N = 23) and low (Low-OC, N = 24) levels of OC traits, and used low resolution electromagnetic tomography (LORETA) to localise the accompanying electrical brain activity patterns. The results showed greater TAF-L in the High-OC than in the Low-OC group (p < .005), which was accompanied by significantly greater upper beta frequency (19-30 Hz) activity in the precuneus (p < .05). Further, the precuneus activity was positively correlated with self-reported magnitude of TAF-L (p < .01), suggesting a specific role of this region in this cognitive bias. Results are discussed with reference to self-referential processing and the default-mode network. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 States | 2 | 22% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 11% |
| Canada | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 5 | 56% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 78% |
| Scientists | 1 | 11% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 112 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 27 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 16% |
| Researcher | 15 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 17 | 15% |
| Unknown | 25 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 39 | 34% |
| Neuroscience | 13 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 12 | 10% |
| Unknown | 32 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. 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 April 2019.
All research outputs
#1,148,397
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from NeuroImage: Clinical
#96
of 2,803 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,188
of 320,269 outputs
Outputs of similar age from NeuroImage: Clinical
#5
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 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 2,803 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 320,269 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 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.