↓ Skip to main content

Intention understanding over T: a neuroimaging study on shared representations and tennis return predictions

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, October 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 (79th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
113 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
Intention understanding over T: a neuroimaging study on shared representations and tennis return predictions
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, October 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00781
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephanie Cacioppo, Frederic Fontang, Nisa Patel, Jean Decety, George Monteleone, John T. Cacioppo

Abstract

Studying the way athletes predict actions of their peers during fast-ball sports, such as a tennis, has proved to be a valuable tool for increasing our knowledge of intention understanding. The working model in this area is that the anticipatory representations of others' behaviors require internal predictive models of actions formed from pre-established and shared representations between the observer and the actor. This model also predicts that observers would not be able to read accurately the intentions of a competitor if the competitor were to perform the action without prior knowledge of their intention until moments before the action. To test this hypothesis, we recorded brain activity from 25 male tennis players while they performed a novel behavioral tennis intention inference task, which included two conditions: (i) one condition in which they viewed video clips of a tennis athlete who knew in advance where he was about to act/serve (initially intended serves) and (ii) one condition in which they viewed video clips of that same athlete when he did not know where he was to act/serve until the target was specified after he had tossed the ball into the air to complete his serve (non-initially intended serves). Our results demonstrated that (i) tennis expertise is related to the accuracy in predicting where another server intends to serve when that server knows where he intends to serve before (but not after) he tosses the ball in the air; and (ii) accurate predictions are characterized by the recruitment of both cortical areas within the human mirror neuron system (that is known to be involved in higher-order (top-down) processes of embodied cognition and shared representation) and subcortical areas within brain regions involved in procedural memory (caudate nucleus). Interestingly, inaccurate predictions instead recruit areas known to be involved in low-level (bottom-up) computational processes associated with the sense of agency and self-other distinction.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Turkey 1 <1%
Unknown 111 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 20%
Student > Master 13 12%
Researcher 12 11%
Student > Bachelor 12 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Other 19 17%
Unknown 26 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 17 15%
Sports and Recreations 17 15%
Neuroscience 11 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 4%
Other 21 19%
Unknown 36 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 07 March 2015.
All research outputs
#5,182,595
of 25,342,911 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#2,174
of 7,662 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,378
of 262,013 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#96
of 247 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,342,911 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,662 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 262,013 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 247 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 61% of its contemporaries.