↓ Skip to main content

Loss of agency in apraxia

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • 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 (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
90 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
Loss of agency in apraxia
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, September 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00751
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mariella Pazzaglia, Giulia Galli

Abstract

The feeling of acting voluntarily is a fundamental component of human behavior and social life and is usually accompanied by a sense of agency. However, this ability can be impaired in a number of diseases and disorders. An important example is apraxia, a disturbance traditionally defined as a disorder of voluntary skillful movements that often results from frontal-parietal brain damage. The first part of this article focuses on direct evidence of some core symptoms of apraxia, emphasizing those with connections to agency and free will. The loss of agency in apraxia is reflected in the monitoring of internally driven action, in the perception of specifically self-intended movements and in the neural intention to act. The second part presents an outline of the evidences supporting the functional and anatomical link between apraxia and agency. The available structural and functional results converge to reveal that the frontal-parietal network contributes to the sense of agency and its impairment in disorders such as apraxia. The current knowledge on the generation of motor intentions and action monitoring could potentially be applied to develop therapeutic strategies for the clinical rehabilitation of voluntary action.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Turkey 1 1%
Italy 1 1%
Unknown 88 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 21%
Student > Bachelor 15 17%
Student > Master 14 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 4%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 16 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 34 38%
Neuroscience 13 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 9%
Linguistics 5 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 4%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 14 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 09 October 2014.
All research outputs
#5,796,198
of 23,340,595 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#2,343
of 7,271 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,519
of 253,403 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#110
of 254 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,340,595 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 253,403 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 254 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 56% of its contemporaries.