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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Females in the forefront: time-based intervention effects on impulsive choice and interval timing in female rats
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Animal Cognition, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10071-018-1208-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sarah L. Stuebing, Andrew T. Marshall, Ashton Triplett, Kimberly Kirkpatrick |
| Abstract |
Impulsive choice has been implicated in substance abuse, gambling, obesity, and other maladaptive behaviors. Deficits in interval timing may increase impulsive choices, and therefore, could serve as an avenue through which suboptimal impulsive choices can be moderated. Temporal interventions have successfully attenuated impulsive choices in male rats, but the efficacy of a temporal intervention has yet to be assessed in female rats. As such, this experiment examined timing and choice behavior in female rats, and evaluated the ability of a temporal intervention to mitigate impulsive choice behavior. The temporal intervention administered in this study was successful in reducing impulsive choices compared to a control group. Results of a temporal bisection task indicated that the temporal intervention increased long responses at the shorter durations. Further, results from the peak trials within the choice task combined with the progressive interval task suggest that the intervention increased sensitivity to delay and enhanced timing confidence. Overall, these results indicate that a temporal intervention can be a successful avenue for reducing impulsive choice behavior in female rats, and could contribute to the development of behavioral interventions to prevent impulsive choice and maladaptive behaviors that can be applied to both sexes. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 11% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 11% |
| United States | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 6 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 22% |
| Scientists | 2 | 22% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 22% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 30 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 17% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 13% |
| Professor | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 7% |
| Researcher | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 6 | 20% |
| Unknown | 8 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 11 | 37% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 9 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 October 2018.
All research outputs
#6,771,010
of 24,140,950 outputs
Outputs from Animal Cognition
#885
of 1,522 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#112,506
of 334,706 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Cognition
#10
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,140,950 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,522 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.2. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 334,706 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.