↓ Skip to main content

Optimal feedback control and the long-latency stretch response

Overview of attention for article published in Experimental Brain Research, February 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
237 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
320 Mendeley
Title
Optimal feedback control and the long-latency stretch response
Published in
Experimental Brain Research, February 2012
DOI 10.1007/s00221-012-3041-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. Andrew Pruszynski, Stephen H. Scott

Abstract

There has traditionally been a separation between voluntary control processes and the fast feedback responses which follow mechanical perturbations (i.e., stretch "reflexes"). However, a recent theory of motor control, based on optimal control, suggests that voluntary motor behavior involves the sophisticated manipulation of sensory feedback. We have recently proposed that one implication of this theory is that the long-latency stretch "reflex", like voluntary control, should support a rich assortment of behaviors because these two processes are intimately linked through shared neural circuitry including primary motor cortex. In this review, we first describe the basic principles of optimal feedback control related to voluntary motor behavior. We then explore the functional properties of upper-limb stretch responses, with a focus on how the sophistication of the long-latency stretch response rivals voluntary control. And last, we describe the neural circuitry that underlies the long-latency stretch response and detail the evidence that primary motor cortex participates in sophisticated feedback responses to mechanical perturbations.

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 320 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 1%
Japan 4 1%
Canada 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 306 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 77 24%
Student > Master 46 14%
Student > Bachelor 40 13%
Researcher 34 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 21 7%
Other 57 18%
Unknown 45 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 75 23%
Engineering 58 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 38 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 26 8%
Sports and Recreations 20 6%
Other 41 13%
Unknown 62 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 13 March 2012.
All research outputs
#13,360,185
of 22,663,150 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#1,601
of 3,217 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#87,297
of 155,494 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#11
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,663,150 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,217 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 155,494 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 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 57% of its contemporaries.