↓ Skip to main content

Challenge to promote change: both young and older adults benefit from contextual interference

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Readers on

mendeley
79 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
Challenge to promote change: both young and older adults benefit from contextual interference
Published in
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, August 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnagi.2015.00157
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lisa Pauwels, Kathleen Vancleef, Stephan P. Swinnen, Iseult A. M. Beets

Abstract

Current society has to deal with major challenges related to our constantly increasing population of older adults. Since, motor performance generally deteriorates at older age, research investigating the effects of different types of training on motor improvement is particularly important. Here, we tested the effects of contextual interference (CI) while learning a bimanual coordination task in both young and older subjects. Both age groups acquired a low and high complexity task variant following either a blocked or random practice schedule. Typical CI effects, i.e., better overall performance during acquisition but detrimental effects during retention for the blocked compared with the random groups, were found for the low complexity task variant in both age groups. With respect to the high complexity task variant, no retention differences between both practice schedules were found. However, following random practice, better skill persistence (i.e., from end of acquisition to retention) over a 1 week time interval was observed for both task complexity variants and in both age groups. The current study provides clear evidence that the effects of different practice schedules on learning a complex bimanual task are not modulated by age.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 1%
Unknown 78 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 27%
Researcher 9 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 10%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 21 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 15 19%
Sports and Recreations 10 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 9%
Psychology 6 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 6%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 25 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 06 October 2015.
All research outputs
#7,220,469
of 22,821,814 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#2,583
of 4,775 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,097
of 264,425 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#24
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,821,814 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,775 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 264,425 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 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 55% of its contemporaries.