↓ Skip to main content

Dynamical predictions of insular hubs for social cognition and their application to stroke

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 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
Dynamical predictions of insular hubs for social cognition and their application to stroke
Published in
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, November 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnbeh.2014.00380
Pubmed ID
Authors

Roberto Limongi, Ailin Tomio, Agustin Ibanez

Abstract

The insular cortex (IC) is considered a rich hub for context-sensitive emotions/social cognition. Patients with focal IC stroke provide unique opportunities to study socio-emotional processes. Nevertheless, Couto et al. (2013b) have recently reported controversial results regarding IC involvement in emotion and social cognition. Similarly, patients with similar lesions show high functional variability, ranging from almost totally preserved to strongly impaired behavior. Critical evidence suggests that the variability of these patients in the above domains can be explained by enhanced neuroplasticity, compensatory processes, and functional remapping after stroke. Therefore, socio-emotional processes would depend on long-distance connections between the IC and frontotemporal regions. We propose that predictive coding and effective connectivity represent a novel approach to explore functional connectivity and assess compensatory, contralateral, and subsidiary network differences among focal stroke patients. This approach would help explain why socio-emotional performance is so variable within this population.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 53 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 20%
Researcher 9 16%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 9%
Student > Master 5 9%
Other 4 7%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 12 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 29%
Neuroscience 7 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 7%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Computer Science 2 4%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 16 29%
Attention Score in Context

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 15 November 2014.
All research outputs
#15,310,081
of 22,770,070 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#2,216
of 3,161 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#152,819
of 262,194 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#56
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,770,070 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 3,161 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 262,194 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 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.