↓ Skip to main content

Impaired Contingent Attentional Capture Predicts Reduced Working Memory Capacity in Schizophrenia

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, November 2012
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
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 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
Impaired Contingent Attentional Capture Predicts Reduced Working Memory Capacity in Schizophrenia
Published in
PLOS ONE, November 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0048586
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jutta S. Mayer, Keisuke Fukuda, Edward K. Vogel, Sohee Park

Abstract

Although impairments in working memory (WM) are well documented in schizophrenia, the specific factors that cause these deficits are poorly understood. In this study, we hypothesized that a heightened susceptibility to attentional capture at an early stage of visual processing would result in working memory encoding problems. 30 patients with schizophrenia and 28 demographically matched healthy participants were presented with a search array and asked to report the orientation of the target stimulus. In some of the trials, a flanker stimulus preceded the search array that either matched the color of the target (relevant-flanker capture) or appeared in a different color (irrelevant-flanker capture). Working memory capacity was determined in each individual using the visual change detection paradigm. Patients needed considerably more time to find the target in the no-flanker condition. After adjusting the individual exposure time, both groups showed equivalent capture costs in the irrelevant-flanker condition. However, in the relevant-flanker condition, capture costs were increased in patients compared to controls when the stimulus onset asynchrony between the flanker and the search array was high. Moreover, the increase in relevant capture costs correlated negatively with working memory capacity. This study demonstrates preserved stimulus-driven attentional capture but impaired contingent attentional capture associated with low working memory capacity in schizophrenia. These findings suggest a selective impairment of top-down attentional control in schizophrenia, which may impair working memory encoding.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 67 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 23%
Student > Master 15 21%
Researcher 7 10%
Professor 5 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 10 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 33 47%
Neuroscience 7 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 7%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 13 19%
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 12 November 2012.
All research outputs
#15,256,044
of 22,685,926 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#129,941
of 193,650 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,046
of 179,649 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,896
of 4,751 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,685,926 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,650 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 179,649 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,751 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.