| Title |
Pupillary correlates of lapses of sustained attention
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3758/s13415-016-0417-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nash Unsworth, Matthew K. Robison |
| Abstract |
The current study examined the extent to which pupillary responses (both pretrial baseline and phasic responses) would accurately track lapses of attention as predicted by theories of locus coeruleus norepinephrine (LC-NE) functioning. Participants performed a sustained attention task while pupil responses were continuously recorded. Periodically during the task, participants were presented with thought probes to determine if they were on or off task. The results suggested the pupillary responses accurately distinguished on from off-task states. Importantly, pretrial baseline pupil responses distinguished different types of lapses of attention, with inattentive and mind-wandering states being associated with small pretrial baseline pupil diameters on average and distracted states being associated with larger pretrial baseline pupil diameters on average compared to focused states. These results support the notion that pupil diameter is sensitive to different types of lapses of attention which may be associated with different LC-NE modes. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | 22% |
| United States | 2 | 22% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 11% |
| Japan | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 3 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 56% |
| Scientists | 3 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 255 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 2% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 249 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 60 | 24% |
| Researcher | 41 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 33 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 26 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 13 | 5% |
| Other | 35 | 14% |
| Unknown | 47 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 98 | 38% |
| Neuroscience | 47 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 24 | 9% |
| Unknown | 65 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 19 December 2019.
All research outputs
#2,542,330
of 24,003,070 outputs
Outputs from Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
#122
of 974 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,685
of 303,897 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
#4
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,003,070 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 974 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 303,897 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.