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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Navigating the complex path between the oxytocin receptor gene (OXTR) and cooperation: an endophenotype approach
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00801 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Brian W. Haas, Ian W. Anderson, Jessica M. Smith |
| Abstract |
Although cooperation represents a core facet of human social behavior there exists considerable variability across people in terms of the tendency to cooperate. One factor that may contribute to individual differences in cooperation is a key gene within the oxytocin (OT) system, the OT reception gene (OXTR). In this article, we aim to bridge the gap between the OXTR gene and cooperation by using an endophenotype approach. We present evidence that the association between the OXTR gene and cooperation may in part be due to how the OXTR gene affects brain systems involved in emotion recognition, empathy/theory of mind, social communication and social reward seeking. There is evidence that the OXTR gene is associated with the functional anatomy of the amygdala, visual cortex (VC), anterior cingulate and superior temporal gyrus (STG). However, it is currently unknown how the OXTR gene may be linked to the functional anatomy of other relevant brain regions that include the fusiform gyrus (FG), superior temporal sulcus (STS), ventromedial prefrontal cortex (VMPFC), temporoparietal junction (TPJ) and nucleus accumbens (NAcc). We conclude by highlighting potential future research directions that may elucidate the path between OXTR and complex behaviors such as cooperation. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Denmark | 2 | 2% |
| Unknown | 83 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 18% |
| Researcher | 15 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 9% |
| Other | 18 | 21% |
| Unknown | 4 | 5% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 27 | 31% |
| Neuroscience | 14 | 16% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 13 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 11% |
| Unknown | 13 | 15% |
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 01 May 2014.
All research outputs
#15,286,644
of 22,733,113 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#5,257
of 7,136 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#181,576
of 280,780 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#681
of 862 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,733,113 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 7,136 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 280,780 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 862 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.