↓ Skip to main content

The Effects of Two Types of Sleep Deprivation on Visual Working Memory Capacity and Filtering Efficiency

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, April 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 (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
82 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
236 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
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
The Effects of Two Types of Sleep Deprivation on Visual Working Memory Capacity and Filtering Efficiency
Published in
PLOS ONE, April 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0035653
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sean P. A. Drummond, Dane E. Anderson, Laura D. Straus, Edward K. Vogel, Veronica B. Perez

Abstract

Sleep deprivation has adverse consequences for a variety of cognitive functions. The exact effects of sleep deprivation, though, are dependent upon the cognitive process examined. Within working memory, for example, some component processes are more vulnerable to sleep deprivation than others. Additionally, the differential impacts on cognition of different types of sleep deprivation have not been well studied. The aim of this study was to examine the effects of one night of total sleep deprivation and 4 nights of partial sleep deprivation (4 hours in bed/night) on two components of visual working memory: capacity and filtering efficiency. Forty-four healthy young adults were randomly assigned to one of the two sleep deprivation conditions. All participants were studied: 1) in a well-rested condition (following 6 nights of 9 hours in bed/night); and 2) following sleep deprivation, in a counter-balanced order. Visual working memory testing consisted of two related tasks. The first measured visual working memory capacity and the second measured the ability to ignore distractor stimuli in a visual scene (filtering efficiency). Results showed neither type of sleep deprivation reduced visual working memory capacity. Partial sleep deprivation also generally did not change filtering efficiency. Total sleep deprivation, on the other hand, did impair performance in the filtering task. These results suggest components of visual working memory are differentially vulnerable to the effects of sleep deprivation, and different types of sleep deprivation impact visual working memory to different degrees. Such findings have implications for operational settings where individuals may need to perform with inadequate sleep and whose jobs involve receiving an array of visual information and discriminating the relevant from the irrelevant prior to making decisions or taking actions (e.g., baggage screeners, air traffic controllers, military personnel, health care providers).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 236 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
United States 2 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Singapore 1 <1%
Unknown 228 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 60 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 14%
Student > Master 32 14%
Researcher 12 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 5%
Other 39 17%
Unknown 48 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 92 39%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 8%
Neuroscience 17 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 5%
Sports and Recreations 10 4%
Other 33 14%
Unknown 52 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 09 February 2019.
All research outputs
#2,940,649
of 24,286,850 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#37,084
of 209,198 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,190
of 165,386 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#622
of 3,745 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,286,850 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 209,198 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 165,386 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,745 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.