↓ Skip to main content

Explicit and implicit issues in the developmental cognitive neuroscience of social inequality

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
107 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
Explicit and implicit issues in the developmental cognitive neuroscience of social inequality
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00254
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amedeo D'Angiulli, Sebastian J. Lipina, Alice Olesinska

Abstract

The appearance of developmental cognitive neuroscience (DCN) in the socioeconomic status (SES) research arena is hugely transformative, but challenging. We review challenges rooted in the implicit and explicit assumptions informing this newborn field. We provide balanced theoretical alternatives on how hypothesized psychological processes map onto the brain (e.g., problem of localization) and how experimental phenomena at multiple levels of analysis (e.g., behavior, cognition and the brain) could be related. We therefore examine unclear issues regarding the existing perspectives on poverty and their relationships with low SES, the evidence of low-SES adaptive functioning, historical precedents of the "alternate pathways" (neuroplasticity) interpretation of learning disabilities related to low-SES and the notion of deficit, issues of "normativity" and validity in findings of neurocognitive differences between children from different SES, and finally alternative interpretations of the complex relationship between IQ and SES. Particularly, we examine the extent to which the available laboratory results may be interpreted as showing that cognitive performance in low-SES children reflects cognitive and behavioral deficits as a result of growing up in specific environmental or cultural contexts, and how the experimental findings should be interpreted for the design of different types of interventions-particularly those related to educational practices-or translated to the public-especially the media. Although a cautionary tone permeates many studies, still, a potential deficit attribution-i.e., low-SES is associated with cognitive and behavioral developmental deficits-seems almost an inevitable implicit issue with ethical implications. Finally, we sketch the agenda for an ecological DCN, suggesting recommendations to advance the field, specifically, to minimize equivocal divulgation and maximize ethically responsible translation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 105 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 13%
Student > Master 11 10%
Unspecified 8 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Other 23 21%
Unknown 26 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 32 30%
Unspecified 8 7%
Social Sciences 7 7%
Engineering 5 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 4%
Other 20 19%
Unknown 31 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 10 November 2014.
All research outputs
#2,956,702
of 23,054,359 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#1,495
of 7,202 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,072
of 245,564 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#89
of 294 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,054,359 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,202 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
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 245,564 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 294 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 70% of its contemporaries.