↓ Skip to main content

Sleep Deprivation and False Memories

Overview of attention for article published in Psychological Science (Sage Publications Inc.), July 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#12 of 3,624)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
42 news outlets
blogs
19 blogs
twitter
887 tweeters
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
weibo
4 weibo users
facebook
38 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
5 Google+ users
reddit
4 Redditors
video
3 video uploaders

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
268 Mendeley
Title
Sleep Deprivation and False Memories
Published in
Psychological Science (Sage Publications Inc.), July 2014
DOI 10.1177/0956797614534694
Pubmed ID
Authors

Steven J. Frenda, Lawrence Patihis, Elizabeth F. Loftus, Holly C. Lewis, Kimberly M. Fenn

Abstract

Many studies have investigated factors that affect susceptibility to false memories. However, few have investigated the role of sleep deprivation in the formation of false memories, despite overwhelming evidence that sleep deprivation impairs cognitive function. We examined the relationship between self-reported sleep duration and false memories and the effect of 24 hr of total sleep deprivation on susceptibility to false memories. We found that under certain conditions, sleep deprivation can increase the risk of developing false memories. Specifically, sleep deprivation increased false memories in a misinformation task when participants were sleep deprived during event encoding, but did not have a significant effect when the deprivation occurred after event encoding. These experiments are the first to investigate the effect of sleep deprivation on susceptibility to false memories, which can have dire consequences.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 887 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 268 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 7 3%
France 2 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Russia 1 <1%
Other 2 <1%
Unknown 250 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 72 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 48 18%
Student > Master 44 16%
Student > Postgraduate 20 7%
Researcher 20 7%
Other 56 21%
Unknown 8 3%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 157 59%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 8%
Neuroscience 16 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 4%
Social Sciences 9 3%
Other 41 15%
Unknown 12 4%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1131. 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 01 December 2018.
All research outputs
#3,253
of 13,986,163 outputs
Outputs from Psychological Science (Sage Publications Inc.)
#12
of 3,624 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34
of 150,922 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychological Science (Sage Publications Inc.)
#1
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,986,163 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,624 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 65.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 150,922 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.