↓ Skip to main content

Electrophysiological and information processing variability predicts memory decrements associated with normal age-related cognitive decline and Alzheimer's disease (AD)

Overview of attention for article published in Brain Research, November 2006
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 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
Electrophysiological and information processing variability predicts memory decrements associated with normal age-related cognitive decline and Alzheimer's disease (AD)
Published in
Brain Research, November 2006
DOI 10.1016/j.brainres.2006.08.075
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael J. Hogan, Leigh Carolan, Richard A.P. Roche, Paul M. Dockree, Jochen Kaiser, Brendan P. Bunting, Ian H. Robertson, Brian A. Lawlor

Abstract

Recent theoretical models of cognitive aging have implicated increased intra-individual variability as a critical marker of decline. The current study examined electrophysiological and information processing variability and memory performance in normal younger and older controls, and older adults with Alzheimer's disease (AD). It was hypothesized that higher levels of variability would be indicative of age-related and disease-related memory deficits. Results indicated both implicit and explicit memory deficits associated with AD. Consistent with previous research, behavioral speed and variability emerged as sensitive to age- and disease-related change. Amplitude variability of P3 event-related potentials was a unique component of electrophysiological activity and accounted for significant variance in reaction time (RT) mean and RT standard deviation, which in turn accounted for significant variance in memory function. Results are discussed in light of theoretical and applied issues in the field of cognitive aging.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 6%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 47 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 16%
Student > Master 5 10%
Other 4 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 8%
Other 12 24%
Unknown 9 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 14%
Neuroscience 7 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 9 18%

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 03 August 2013.
All research outputs
#9,780,017
of 12,239,559 outputs
Outputs from Brain Research
#6,092
of 7,067 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,589
of 149,235 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brain Research
#20
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,239,559 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,067 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% 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 149,235 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.