↓ Skip to main content

Cathodal electrical stimulation of frontoparietal cortex disrupts statistical learning of visual configural information

Overview of attention for article published in Cortex: A Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System & Behavior, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 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
Cathodal electrical stimulation of frontoparietal cortex disrupts statistical learning of visual configural information
Published in
Cortex: A Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System & Behavior, November 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.cortex.2017.11.008
Pubmed ID
Authors

Abbey S. Nydam, David K. Sewell, Paul E. Dux

Abstract

Attentional performance is facilitated by exploiting regularities and redundancies in the environment by way of incidental statistical learning. For example, during visual search, response times to a target are reduced by repeating distractor configurations-a phenomenon known as contextual cueing (Chun & Jiang, 1998). A range of neuroscientific methods have provided evidence that incidental statistical learning relies on subcortical neural structures associated with long-term memory, such as the hippocampus. Functional neuroimaging studies have also implicated the prefrontal cortex (PFC) and posterior parietal cortex (PPC) in contextual cueing. However, the extent to which these cortical regions are causally involved in statistical learning remains unclear. Here, we delivered anodal, cathodal, or sham transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to the left PFC and left PPC online while participants performed a contextual cueing task. Cathodal stimulation of both PFC and PPC disrupted the early cuing effect, relative to sham and anodal stimulation. These findings causally implicate frontoparietal regions in incidental statistical learning that acts on visual configural information. We speculate that contextual cueing may rely on the availability of cognitive control resources in frontal and parietal regions.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 67 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 19%
Student > Bachelor 13 19%
Student > Master 9 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 13%
Other 3 4%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 14 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 26 39%
Neuroscience 14 21%
Arts and Humanities 2 3%
Engineering 2 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 3%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 18 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 06 June 2018.
All research outputs
#17,292,294
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Cortex: A Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System & Behavior
#2,270
of 3,041 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#279,616
of 445,683 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cortex: A Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System & Behavior
#42
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,041 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.6. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 445,683 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.