↓ Skip to main content

Separate neural representations for physical pain and social rejection

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Communications, November 2014
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 (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
7 news outlets
blogs
9 blogs
twitter
104 X users
weibo
1 weibo user
facebook
8 Facebook pages
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
252 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
462 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
Separate neural representations for physical pain and social rejection
Published in
Nature Communications, November 2014
DOI 10.1038/ncomms6380
Pubmed ID
Authors

Choong-Wan Woo, Leonie Koban, Ethan Kross, Martin A. Lindquist, Marie T. Banich, Luka Ruzic, Jessica R. Andrews-Hanna, Tor D. Wager

Abstract

Current theories suggest that physical pain and social rejection share common neural mechanisms, largely by virtue of overlapping functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) activity. Here we challenge this notion by identifying distinct multivariate fMRI patterns unique to pain and rejection. Sixty participants experience painful heat and warmth and view photos of ex-partners and friends on separate trials. FMRI pattern classifiers discriminate pain and rejection from their respective control conditions in out-of-sample individuals with 92% and 80% accuracy. The rejection classifier performs at chance on pain, and vice versa. Pain- and rejection-related representations are uncorrelated within regions thought to encode pain affect (for example, dorsal anterior cingulate) and show distinct functional connectivity with other regions in a separate resting-state data set (N = 91). These findings demonstrate that separate representations underlie pain and rejection despite common fMRI activity at the gross anatomical level. Rather than co-opting pain circuitry, rejection involves distinct affective representations in humans.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 104 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 462 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 12 3%
Netherlands 2 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Other 4 <1%
Unknown 435 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 105 23%
Researcher 66 14%
Student > Master 66 14%
Student > Bachelor 54 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 34 7%
Other 87 19%
Unknown 50 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 212 46%
Neuroscience 73 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 24 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 4%
Computer Science 8 2%
Other 38 8%
Unknown 90 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 174. 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 11 August 2022.
All research outputs
#234,045
of 25,559,053 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#3,394
of 57,618 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,471
of 368,912 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#22
of 706 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,559,053 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 57,618 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 55.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 368,912 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 706 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.