↓ Skip to main content

A Time Series Approach to Random Number Generation: Using Recurrence Quantification Analysis to Capture Executive Behavior

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 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
A Time Series Approach to Random Number Generation: Using Recurrence Quantification Analysis to Capture Executive Behavior
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00319
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wouter Oomens, Joseph H. R. Maes, Fred Hasselman, Jos I. M. Egger

Abstract

The concept of executive functions plays a prominent role in contemporary experimental and clinical studies on cognition. One paradigm used in this framework is the random number generation (RNG) task, the execution of which demands aspects of executive functioning, specifically inhibition and working memory. Data from the RNG task are best seen as a series of successive events. However, traditional RNG measures that are used to quantify executive functioning are mostly summary statistics referring to deviations from mathematical randomness. In the current study, we explore the utility of recurrence quantification analysis (RQA), a non-linear method that keeps the entire sequence intact, as a better way to describe executive functioning compared to traditional measures. To this aim, 242 first- and second-year students completed a non-paced RNG task. Principal component analysis of their data showed that traditional and RQA measures convey more or less the same information. However, RQA measures do so more parsimoniously and have a better interpretation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 43 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 24%
Student > Master 9 20%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Researcher 5 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 7 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 20 44%
Neuroscience 4 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 8 18%
Unknown 10 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 11 January 2019.
All research outputs
#12,930,368
of 22,816,807 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#3,674
of 7,148 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,276
of 266,872 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#92
of 191 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,816,807 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,148 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 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 266,872 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 191 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.