↓ Skip to main content

Behavioral and multimodal neuroimaging evidence for a deficit in brain timing networks in stuttering: a hypothesis and theory

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
82 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
101 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
Behavioral and multimodal neuroimaging evidence for a deficit in brain timing networks in stuttering: a hypothesis and theory
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00467
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew C. Etchell, Blake W. Johnson, Paul F. Sowman

Abstract

The fluent production of speech requires accurately timed movements. In this article, we propose that a deficit in brain timing networks is one of the core neurophysiological deficits in stuttering. We first discuss the experimental evidence supporting the involvement of the basal ganglia and supplementary motor area (SMA) in stuttering and the involvement of the cerebellum as a possible mechanism for compensating for the neural deficits that underlie stuttering. Next, we outline the involvement of the right inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) as another putative compensatory locus in stuttering and suggest a role for this structure in an expanded core timing-network. Subsequently, we review behavioral studies of timing in people who stutter and examine their behavioral performance as compared to people who do not stutter. Finally, we highlight challenges to existing research and provide avenues for future research with specific hypotheses.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 98 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 22 22%
Student > Master 20 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 17%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 7%
Student > Postgraduate 5 5%
Other 12 12%
Unknown 18 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 19 19%
Neuroscience 18 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 8%
Linguistics 7 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 6%
Other 17 17%
Unknown 26 26%
Attention Score in Context

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 01 December 2014.
All research outputs
#14,287,221
of 23,344,526 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#4,358
of 7,271 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#118,535
of 229,223 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#175
of 256 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,344,526 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,271 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 229,223 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 256 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.