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 |
Event-Related Potentials in Relation to Risk-Taking: A Systematic Review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnbeh.2018.00111 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dilushi Chandrakumar, Daniel Feuerriegel, Stefan Bode, Megan Grech, Hannah A. D. Keage |
| Abstract |
Event-related potentials (ERPs) have been used to investigate neural mechanisms underlying risk-related decisions over the last 16 years. We aimed to systematically evaluate associations between risk-taking and ERP components elicited during decisions and following feedback. A total of 79 articles identified from PsychINFO and PubMed databases met the inclusion criteria. Selected articles assessed early ERP components (feedback-related negativity/FRN, error-related negativity/ERN, and medial frontal negativity/MFN) and the mid-latency P3 component, all using gambling paradigms that involved selecting between choices of varying risk (e.g., Iowa Gambling Task, Balloon Analogue Risk Task, and two-choice gambling tasks). The P3 component was consistently enhanced to the selection of risky options and when positive feedback (as compared to negative feedback) was provided. Also consistently, the early negative components were found to be larger following feedback indicating monetary losses as compared to gains. In the majority of studies reviewed here, risk was conceptualized in the context of simple economical decisions in gambling tasks. As such, this narrow concept of risk might not capture the diversity of risky decisions made in other areas of everyday experience, for example, social, health, and recreational risk-related decisions. It therefore remains to be seen whether the risk-sensitivity of the ERP components reviewed here generalizes to other domains of life. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 17% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 17% |
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 98 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 17 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 8% |
| Researcher | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 11% |
| Unknown | 31 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 22 | 22% |
| Neuroscience | 14 | 14% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 5% |
| Engineering | 4 | 4% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 13 | 13% |
| Unknown | 36 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 25 June 2018.
All research outputs
#13,597,340
of 23,052,509 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#1,636
of 3,204 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,862
of 327,967 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#48
of 80 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,052,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,204 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 327,967 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 80 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.