↓ Skip to main content

Data-Driven Extraction of a Nested Model of Human Brain Function

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neuroscience, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
52 X users

Readers on

mendeley
86 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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.
Article details
Title
Data-Driven Extraction of a Nested Model of Human Brain Function
Published in
Journal of Neuroscience, June 2017
DOI 10.1523/jneurosci.0323-17.2017
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Decades of cognitive neuroscience research have revealed two basic facts regarding task-driven brain activation patterns. First, distinct patterns of activation occur in response to different task demands. Second, a superordinate, dichotomous pattern of activation/de-activation, is common across a variety of task demands. We explore the possibility that a hierarchical model incorporates these two observed brain activation phenomena into a unifying framework. We apply a latent variable approach, exploratory bi-factor analysis, to a large set of human (both sexes) brain activation maps (n = 108) encompassing cognition, perception, action and emotion behavioral domains, to determine the potential existence of a nested structure of factors that underlies a variety of commonly observed activation patterns. We find that a general factor, associated with a superordinate brain activation/de-activation pattern, explained the majority of the variance (52.37%) in brain activation patterns. The bi-factor analysis also revealed several sub-factors that explained an additional 31.02% of variance in brain activation patterns, associated with different manifestations of the superordinate brain activation/de-activation pattern, each emphasizing different contexts in which the task demands occurred. Importantly, this nested factor structure provided better overall fit to the data compared with a non-nested factor structure model. These results point to a domain-general psychological process, representing a 'focused awareness' process or 'attentional episode' that is variously manifested according to the sensory modality of the stimulus and degree of cognitive processing. This novel model provides the basis for constructing a biologically-informed, data-driven taxonomy of psychological processes.Significance StatementA crucial step in identifying how the brain supports various psychological processes is a well-defined categorization or taxonomy of psychological processes and their interrelationships. We hypothesized that a nested structure of cognitive function, in terms of a canonical domain-general cognitive process, and various sub-factors representing different manifestations of the canonical process, is a fundamental organization of human cognition, and tested this hypothesis using fMRI task-activation patterns. Using a data-driven latent-variable approach, we demonstrate that a nested factor structure underlies a large sample of brain activation patterns across a variety of task domains.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 52 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 86 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 21%
Researcher 16 19%
Student > Master 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Professor 6 7%
Other 17 20%
Unknown 16 19%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 21 24%
Psychology 14 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 8%
Engineering 6 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 5%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 20 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. 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 30 July 2024.
All research outputs
#1,392,382
of 34,400,738 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neuroscience
#1,775
of 23,401 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,104
of 363,670 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neuroscience
#41
of 259 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,400,738 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 23,401 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 363,670 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 259 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.