↓ Skip to main content

Implicit sequence learning in people with Parkinson’s disease

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
74 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
Implicit sequence learning in people with Parkinson’s disease
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, August 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00563
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katherine R. Gamble, Thomas J. Cummings Jr., Steven E. Lo, Pritha T. Ghosh, James H. Howard Jr., Darlene V. Howard

Abstract

Implicit sequence learning involves learning about dependencies in sequences of events without intent to learn or awareness of what has been learned. Sequence learning is related to striatal dopamine levels, striatal activation, and integrity of white matter connections. People with Parkinson's disease (PD) have degeneration of dopamine-producing neurons, leading to dopamine deficiency and therefore striatal deficits, and they have difficulties with sequencing, including complex language comprehension and postural stability. Most research on implicit sequence learning in PD has used motor-based tasks. However, because PD presents with motor deficits, it is difficult to assess whether learning itself is impaired in these tasks. The present study used an implicit sequence learning task with a reduced motor component, the Triplets Learning Task (TLT). People with PD and age- and education-matched healthy older adults completed three sessions (each consisting of 10 blocks of 50 trials) of the TLT. Results revealed that the PD group was able to learn the sequence, however, when learning was examined using a Half Blocks analysis (Nemeth et al., 2013), which compared learning in the 1st 25/50 trials of all blocks to that in the 2nd 25/50 trials, the PD group showed significantly less learning than Controls in the 2nd Half Blocks, but not in the 1st. Nemeth et al. (2013) hypothesized that the 1st Half Blocks involve recall and reactivation of the sequence learned, thus reflecting hippocampal-dependent learning, while the 2nd Half Blocks involve proceduralized behavior of learned sequences, reflecting striatal-based learning. The present results suggest that the PD group had intact hippocampal-dependent implicit sequence learning, but impaired striatal-dependent learning. Thus, sequencing deficits in PD are likely due to striatal impairments, but other brain systems, such as the hippocampus, may be able to partially compensate for striatal decline to improve performance.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Unknown 73 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 18%
Researcher 11 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 11 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 22 30%
Neuroscience 14 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 8%
Engineering 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 16 22%
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 August 2014.
All research outputs
#15,303,385
of 22,759,618 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#5,263
of 7,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#132,712
of 229,519 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#196
of 253 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,759,618 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 7,138 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 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 229,519 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 253 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.