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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Navigating to new frontiers in behavioral neuroscience: traditional neuropsychological tests predict human performance on a rodent-inspired radial-arm maze
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnbeh.2014.00294 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sarah E. Mennenga, Leslie C. Baxter, Itamar S. Grunfeld, Gene A. Brewer, Leona S. Aiken, Elizabeth B. Engler-Chiurazzi, Bryan W. Camp, Jazmin I. Acosta, B. Blair Braden, Keley R. Schaefer, Julia E. Gerson, Courtney N. Lavery, Candy W. S. Tsang, Lauren T. Hewitt, Melissa L. Kingston, Stephanie V. Koebele, K. Jakob Patten, B. Hunter Ball, Michael K. McBeath, Heather A. Bimonte-Nelson |
| Abstract |
We constructed an 11-arm, walk-through, human radial-arm maze (HRAM) as a translational instrument to compare existing methodology in the areas of rodent and human learning and memory research. The HRAM, utilized here, serves as an intermediary test between the classic rat radial-arm maze (RAM) and standard human neuropsychological and cognitive tests. We show that the HRAM is a useful instrument to examine working memory ability, explore the relationships between rodent and human memory and cognition models, and evaluate factors that contribute to human navigational ability. One-hundred-and-fifty-seven participants were tested on the HRAM, and scores were compared to performance on a standard cognitive battery focused on episodic memory, working memory capacity, and visuospatial ability. We found that errors on the HRAM increased as working memory demand became elevated, similar to the pattern typically seen in rodents, and that for this task, performance appears similar to Miller's classic description of a processing-inclusive human working memory capacity of 7 ± 2 items. Regression analysis revealed that measures of working memory capacity and visuospatial ability accounted for a large proportion of variance in HRAM scores, while measures of episodic memory and general intelligence did not serve as significant predictors of HRAM performance. We present the HRAM as a novel instrument for measuring navigational behavior in humans, as is traditionally done in basic science studies evaluating rodent learning and memory, thus providing a useful tool to help connect and translate between human and rodent models of cognitive functioning. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 43 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 16% |
| Researcher | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 7% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 25% |
| Unknown | 6 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 16 | 36% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 7% |
| Engineering | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Unknown | 8 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 26 September 2014.
All research outputs
#15,306,466
of 22,764,165 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#2,213
of 3,160 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#138,070
of 238,628 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#50
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,764,165 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,160 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 238,628 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 84 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.