↓ Skip to main content

Repeated exposure to vicarious pain alters electrocortical processing of pain expressions

Overview of attention for article published in Experimental Brain Research, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
Title
Repeated exposure to vicarious pain alters electrocortical processing of pain expressions
Published in
Experimental Brain Research, May 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00221-016-4671-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michel-Pierre Coll, Mathieu Grégoire, Kenneth M. Prkachin, Philip L. Jackson

Abstract

Repeated exposure to others in pain has been shown to bias vicarious pain perception, but the neural correlates of this effect are currently not known. The current study therefore aimed at measuring electrocortical responses to facial expressions of pain following exposure to expressions of pain. To this end, a between-subject design was adopted. Participants in the Exposure group were exposed to facial expressions of intense pain, while the participants in the Control group were exposed to neutral expressions before performing the same pain detection task. As in previous studies, participants in the Exposure group showed a significantly more conservative bias when judging facial expressions pain, meaning that they were less inclined to judge moderate pain expressions as painful compared to participants in the Control group. Event-related potential analyses in response to pain or neutral expressions indicated that this effect was related to a relative decrease in the central late positive potential responses to pain expressions. Furthermore, while the early N170 response was not influenced by repeated exposure to pain expressions, the P100 component showed an adaptation effect in the Control group only. These results suggest that repeated exposure to vicarious pain do not influence early event-related potential responses to pain expressions but decreases the late central positive potential. These results are discussed in terms of changes in the perceived saliency of pain expressions following repeated exposure.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Unknown 29 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 20%
Student > Master 4 13%
Researcher 4 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Other 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 9 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 10 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Physics and Astronomy 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 11 37%
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 27 May 2016.
All research outputs
#17,802,399
of 22,870,727 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#2,389
of 3,232 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#204,972
of 298,988 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#25
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,870,727 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,232 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 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 298,988 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.