↓ Skip to main content

An Event-related Potential Study on the Interaction between Lighting Level and Stimulus Spatial Location

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 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
An Event-related Potential Study on the Interaction between Lighting Level and Stimulus Spatial Location
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, November 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00637
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luis Carretié, Elisabeth Ruiz-Padial, María T. Mendoza

Abstract

Due to heterogeneous photoreceptor distribution, spatial location of stimulation is crucial to study visual brain activity in different light environments. This unexplored issue was studied through occipital event-related potentials (ERPs) recorded from 40 participants in response to discrete visual stimuli presented at different locations and in two environmental light conditions, low mesopic (L, 0.03 lux) and high mesopic (H, 6.5 lux), characterized by a differential photoreceptor activity balance: rod > cone and rod < cone, respectively. Stimuli, which were exactly the same in L and H, consisted of squares presented at fixation, at the vertical periphery (above or below fixation) or at the horizontal periphery (left or right). Analyses showed that occipital ERPs presented important L vs. H differences in the 100 to 450 ms window, which were significantly modulated by spatial location of stimulation: differences were greater in response to peripheral stimuli than to stimuli presented at fixation. Moreover, in the former case, significance of L vs. H differences was even stronger in response to stimuli presented at the horizontal than at the vertical periphery. These low vs. high mesopic differences may be explained by photoreceptor activation and their retinal distribution, and confirm that ERPs discriminate between rod- and cone-originated visual processing.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 25%
Researcher 3 25%
Student > Bachelor 2 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 8%
Lecturer 1 8%
Other 2 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 3 25%
Engineering 3 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 17%
Neuroscience 2 17%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 1 8%
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 24 November 2015.
All research outputs
#17,777,370
of 22,833,393 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#5,713
of 7,155 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#262,522
of 386,693 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#121
of 151 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,833,393 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,155 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 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 386,693 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 151 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.