↓ Skip to main content

A face versus non-face context influences amygdala responses to masked fearful eye whites

Overview of attention for article published in Social Cognitive & Affective Neuroscience, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
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.
Title
A face versus non-face context influences amygdala responses to masked fearful eye whites
Published in
Social Cognitive & Affective Neuroscience, August 2016
DOI 10.1093/scan/nsw110
Pubmed ID
Authors

M. Justin Kim, Kimberly M. Solomon, Maital Neta, F. Caroline Davis, Jonathan A. Oler, Emily C. Mazzulla, Paul J. Whalen

Abstract

The structure of the mask stimulus is crucial in backward masking studies and we recently demonstrated such an effect when masking faces. Specifically, we showed that activity of the amygdala is increased to fearful facial expressions masked with neutral faces and decreased to fearful expressions masked with a pattern mask - but critically both masked conditions discriminated fearful expressions from happy expressions. Given this finding, we sought to test whether masked fearful eye whites would produce a similar profile of amygdala response in a face vs. non-face context. During functional magnetic resonance imaging scanning sessions, 30 participants viewed fearful or happy eye whites masked with either neutral faces or pattern images. Results indicated amygdala activity was increased to fearful vs. happy eye whites in the face mask condition, but decreased to fearful vs. happy eye whites in the pattern mask condition - effectively replicating and expanding our previous report. Our data support the idea that the amygdala is responsive to fearful eye whites, but that the nature of this activity observed in a backward masking design depends on the mask stimulus.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 23%
Researcher 4 18%
Student > Bachelor 3 14%
Student > Postgraduate 2 9%
Student > Master 2 9%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 3 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 10 45%
Neuroscience 2 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 9%
Sports and Recreations 1 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 17 August 2016.
All research outputs
#7,295,970
of 14,537,474 outputs
Outputs from Social Cognitive & Affective Neuroscience
#906
of 1,464 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,329
of 265,623 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Social Cognitive & Affective Neuroscience
#40
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,537,474 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,464 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.1. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 265,623 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 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 58 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.