↓ Skip to main content

Single trial decoding of belief decision making from EEG and fMRI data using independent components features

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
wikipedia
5 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
79 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Single trial decoding of belief decision making from EEG and fMRI data using independent components features
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00392
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pamela K. Douglas, Edward Lau, Ariana Anderson, Austin Head, Wesley Kerr, Margalit Wollner, Daniel Moyer, Wei Li, Mike Durnhofer, Jennifer Bramen, Mark S. Cohen

Abstract

The complex task of assessing the veracity of a statement is thought to activate uniquely distributed brain regions based on whether a subject believes or disbelieves a given assertion. In the current work, we present parallel machine learning methods for predicting a subject's decision response to a given propositional statement based on independent component (IC) features derived from EEG and fMRI data. Our results demonstrate that IC features outperformed features derived from event related spectral perturbations derived from any single spectral band, yet were similar to accuracy across all spectral bands combined. We compared our diagnostic IC spatial maps with our conventional general linear model (GLM) results, and found that informative ICs had significant spatial overlap with our GLM results, yet also revealed unique regions like amygdala that were not statistically significant in GLM analyses. Overall, these results suggest that ICs may yield a parsimonious feature set that can be used along with a decision tree structure for interpretation of features used in classifying complex cognitive processes such as belief and disbelief across both fMRI and EEG neuroimaging modalities.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 %
United States 2 3%
Australia 1 1%
Malaysia 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 73 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 25%
Student > Master 14 18%
Researcher 10 13%
Student > Postgraduate 5 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 6%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 14 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 15 19%
Engineering 10 13%
Neuroscience 8 10%
Computer Science 6 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 8%
Other 15 19%
Unknown 19 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 March 2024.
All research outputs
#6,580,856
of 24,340,143 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#2,566
of 7,459 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,202
of 289,409 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#354
of 860 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,340,143 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,459 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 289,409 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 860 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 58% of its contemporaries.