↓ Skip to main content

Comparing brain activity patterns during spontaneous exploratory and cue-instructed learning using single photon-emission computed tomography (SPECT) imaging of regional cerebral blood flow in freely…

Overview of attention for article published in Brain Structure and Function, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
Title
Comparing brain activity patterns during spontaneous exploratory and cue-instructed learning using single photon-emission computed tomography (SPECT) imaging of regional cerebral blood flow in freely behaving rats
Published in
Brain Structure and Function, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00429-017-1605-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

A. Mannewitz, J. Bock, S. Kreitz, A. Hess, J. Goldschmidt, H. Scheich, Katharina Braun

Abstract

Learning can be categorized into cue-instructed and spontaneous learning types; however, so far, there is no detailed comparative analysis of specific brain pathways involved in these learning types. The aim of this study was to compare brain activity patterns during these learning tasks using the in vivo imaging technique of single photon-emission computed tomography (SPECT) of regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF). During spontaneous exploratory learning, higher levels of rCBF compared to cue-instructed learning were observed in motor control regions, including specific subregions of the motor cortex and the striatum, as well as in regions of sensory pathways including olfactory, somatosensory, and visual modalities. In addition, elevated activity was found in limbic areas, including specific subregions of the hippocampal formation, the amygdala, and the insula. The main difference between the two learning paradigms analyzed in this study was the higher rCBF observed in prefrontal cortical regions during cue-instructed learning when compared to spontaneous learning. Higher rCBF during cue-instructed learning was also observed in the anterior insular cortex and in limbic areas, including the ectorhinal and entorhinal cortexes, subregions of the hippocampus, subnuclei of the amygdala, and the septum. Many of the rCBF changes showed hemispheric lateralization. Taken together, our study is the first to compare partly lateralized brain activity patterns during two different types of learning.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 14%
Researcher 2 14%
Student > Master 2 14%
Professor 1 7%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 3 21%
Neuroscience 3 21%
Computer Science 1 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 36%
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 18 January 2018.
All research outputs
#21,697,638
of 24,217,893 outputs
Outputs from Brain Structure and Function
#1,524
of 1,725 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#386,436
of 449,771 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brain Structure and Function
#31
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,217,893 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,725 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 449,771 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.