↓ Skip to main content

Subjecting Elite Athletes to Inspiratory Breathing Load Reveals Behavioral and Neural Signatures of Optimal Performers in Extreme Environments

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
8 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
85 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
169 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
Subjecting Elite Athletes to Inspiratory Breathing Load Reveals Behavioral and Neural Signatures of Optimal Performers in Extreme Environments
Published in
PLOS ONE, January 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0029394
Pubmed ID
Authors

Martin P. Paulus, Taru Flagan, Alan N. Simmons, Kristine Gillis, Sante Kotturi, Nathaniel Thom, Douglas C. Johnson, Karl F. Van Orden, Paul W. Davenport, Judith L. Swain

Abstract

It is unclear whether and how elite athletes process physiological or psychological challenges differently than healthy comparison subjects. In general, individuals optimize exercise level as it relates to differences between expected and experienced exertion, which can be conceptualized as a body prediction error. The process of computing a body prediction error involves the insular cortex, which is important for interoception, i.e. the sense of the physiological condition of the body. Thus, optimal performance may be related to efficient minimization of the body prediction error. We examined the hypothesis that elite athletes, compared to control subjects, show attenuated insular cortex activation during an aversive interoceptive challenge.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 169 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Unknown 165 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 38 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 32 19%
Student > Master 16 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 8%
Student > Bachelor 13 8%
Other 34 20%
Unknown 23 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 41 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 12%
Sports and Recreations 18 11%
Neuroscience 18 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 7%
Other 31 18%
Unknown 28 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 04 March 2023.
All research outputs
#1,541,962
of 23,485,204 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#19,802
of 201,019 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,406
of 249,168 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#235
of 3,289 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,485,204 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 201,019 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 249,168 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,289 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 92% of its contemporaries.