↓ Skip to main content

Differential effects of socioeconomic status on working and procedural memory systems

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
2 Redditors

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
140 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
Differential effects of socioeconomic status on working and procedural memory systems
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, October 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00554
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julia A. Leonard, Allyson P. Mackey, Amy S. Finn, John D. E. Gabrieli

Abstract

While prior research has shown a strong relationship between socioeconomic status (SES) and working memory performance, the relation between SES and procedural (implicit) memory remains unknown. Convergent research in both animals and humans has revealed a fundamental dissociation, both behaviorally and neurally, between a working memory system that depends on medial temporal-lobe structures and the dorsal lateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) vs. a procedural memory system that depends on the basal ganglia. Here, we measured performance in adolescents from lower- and higher-SES backgrounds on tests of working memory capacity (complex working memory span) and procedural memory (probabilistic classification) and their hippocampal, DLPFC, and caudate volumes. Lower-SES adolescents had worse working memory performance and smaller hippocampal and DLPFC volumes than their higher-SES peers, but there was no significant difference between the lower- and higher-SES groups on the procedural memory task or in caudate volumes. These findings suggest that SES may have a selective influence on hippocampal-prefrontal-dependent working memory and little influence on striatal-dependent procedural memory.

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 140 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 139 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 24 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 16%
Student > Master 15 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 10%
Student > Bachelor 13 9%
Other 21 15%
Unknown 30 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 43 31%
Neuroscience 25 18%
Social Sciences 9 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Linguistics 3 2%
Other 11 8%
Unknown 45 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 02 July 2020.
All research outputs
#7,339,862
of 23,864,690 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#3,045
of 7,360 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#87,239
of 280,671 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#60
of 157 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,864,690 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,360 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 280,671 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 157 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 60% of its contemporaries.