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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Cerebral Asymmetries: Complementary and Independent Processes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, March 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0009682 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gjurgjica Badzakova-Trajkov, Isabelle S. Häberling, Reece P. Roberts, Michael C. Corballis |
| Abstract |
Most people are right-handed and left-cerebrally dominant for speech, leading historically to the general notion of left-hemispheric dominance, and more recently to genetic models proposing a single lateralizing gene. This hypothetical gene can account for higher incidence of right-handers in those with left cerebral dominance for speech. It remains unclear how this dominance relates to the right-cerebral dominance for some nonverbal functions such as spatial or emotional processing. Here we use functional magnetic resonance imaging with a sample of 155 subjects to measure asymmetrical activation induced by speech production in the frontal lobes, by face processing in the temporal lobes, and by spatial processing in the parietal lobes. Left-frontal, right-temporal, and right-parietal dominance were all intercorrelated, suggesting that right-cerebral biases may be at least in part complementary to the left-hemispheric dominance for language. However, handedness and parietal asymmetry for spatial processing were uncorrelated, implying independent lateralizing processes, one producing a leftward bias most closely associated with handedness, and the other a rightward bias most closely associated with spatial attention. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 172 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 2% |
| Australia | 2 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Israel | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| China | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 159 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 37 | 22% |
| Researcher | 30 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 23 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 13 | 8% |
| Other | 28 | 16% |
| Unknown | 28 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 61 | 35% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 12% |
| Neuroscience | 19 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 18 | 10% |
| Unknown | 33 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 07 May 2014.
All research outputs
#5,555,287
of 22,678,224 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#67,403
of 193,568 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,867
of 93,761 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#271
of 662 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,678,224 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,568 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 93,761 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 662 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.