↓ Skip to main content

Violations of newly-learned predictions elicit two distinct P3 components

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 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
Violations of newly-learned predictions elicit two distinct P3 components
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00374
Pubmed ID
Authors

Abigail Noyce, Robert Sekuler

Abstract

Sensitivity to the environment's sequential regularities makes it possible to predict upcoming sensory events. To investigate the mechanisms that monitor such predictions, we recorded scalp EEG as subjects learned to reproduce sequences of motions. Each sequence was seen and reproduced four successive times, with occasional deviant directions of motion inserted into otherwise-familiar and predictable sequences. To dissociate the neural activity associated with encoding new items from that associated with detecting sequence deviants, we measured ERPs to new, familiar, and deviant sequence items. Both new and deviant sequence items evoked enhanced P3 responses, with the ERP to deviant items encompassing both P300-like and Novelty P3-like subcomponents with distinct timing and topographies. These results confirm that the neural response to deviant items differs from that to new items, and that unpredicted events in newly-learned sequences are identified by processes similar to those monitoring stable sequential regularities.

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 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 4%
Belgium 1 4%
Unknown 24 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 19%
Researcher 5 19%
Student > Master 4 15%
Professor 3 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 8%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 4 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 7 27%
Neuroscience 4 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 8%
Linguistics 1 4%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 5 19%
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 01 December 2014.
All research outputs
#18,371,959
of 22,755,127 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#6,057
of 7,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,499
of 229,147 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#225
of 248 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,755,127 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,138 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 8th percentile – i.e., 8% 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 229,147 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 248 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.