↓ Skip to main content

Updating working memory in aircraft noise and speech noise causes different fMRI activations

Overview of attention for article published in Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
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
Updating working memory in aircraft noise and speech noise causes different fMRI activations
Published in
Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, October 2014
DOI 10.1111/sjop.12171
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bjørn Sætrevik, Patrik Sörqvist

Abstract

The present study used fMRI/BOLD neuroimaging to investigate how visual-verbal working memory is updated when exposed to three different background-noise conditions: speech noise, aircraft noise and silence. The number-updating task that was used can distinguish between "substitution processes," which involve adding new items to the working memory representation and suppressing old items, and "exclusion processes," which involve rejecting new items and maintaining an intact memory set. The current findings supported the findings of a previous study by showing that substitution activated the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, the posterior medial frontal cortex and the parietal lobes, whereas exclusion activated the anterior medial frontal cortex. Moreover, the prefrontal cortex was activated more by substitution processes when exposed to background speech than when exposed to aircraft noise. These results indicate that (a) the prefrontal cortex plays a special role when task-irrelevant materials should be denied access to working memory and (b) that, when compensating for different types of noise, either different cognitive mechanisms are involved or those cognitive mechanisms that are involved are involved to different degrees.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 2%
Unknown 44 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 24%
Student > Master 6 13%
Researcher 5 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 8 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 18 40%
Engineering 6 13%
Neuroscience 4 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 9%
Environmental Science 2 4%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 8 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 11 March 2015.
All research outputs
#6,580,716
of 23,344,526 outputs
Outputs from Scandinavian Journal of Psychology
#235
of 712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,902
of 261,845 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scandinavian Journal of Psychology
#5
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,344,526 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 712 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 261,845 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.