↓ Skip to main content

Aging specifically impairs switching to an allocentric navigational strategy

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
95 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
162 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
Aging specifically impairs switching to an allocentric navigational strategy
Published in
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fnagi.2012.00029
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mathew A. Harris, Jan M. Wiener, Thomas Wolbers

Abstract

Navigation abilities decline with age, partly due to deficits in numerous component processes. Impaired switching between these various processes (i.e., switching navigational strategies) is also likely to contribute to age-related navigational impairments. We tested young and old participants on a virtual plus maze task (VPM), expecting older participants to exhibit a specific strategy switching deficit, despite unimpaired learning of allocentric (place) and egocentric (response) strategies following reversals within each strategy. Our initial results suggested that older participants performed worse during place trial blocks but not response trial blocks, as well as in trial blocks following a strategy switch but not those following a reversal. However, we then separated trial blocks by both strategy and change type, revealing that these initial results were due to a more specific deficit in switching to the place strategy. Place reversals and switches to response, as well as response reversals, were unaffected. We argue that this specific "switch-to-place" deficit could account for apparent impairments in both navigational strategy switching and allocentric processing and contributes more generally to age-related decline in navigation.

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 162 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 1%
Switzerland 2 1%
Canada 2 1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Unknown 155 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 42 26%
Researcher 22 14%
Student > Master 22 14%
Student > Bachelor 19 12%
Professor 11 7%
Other 20 12%
Unknown 26 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 53 33%
Neuroscience 28 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 4%
Computer Science 6 4%
Other 20 12%
Unknown 31 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 November 2012.
All research outputs
#7,149,401
of 25,806,763 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#2,920
of 5,575 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,459
of 252,076 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#5
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,806,763 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,575 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 252,076 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.