↓ Skip to main content

Sex Differences in the Neural Correlates of Specific and General Autobiographical Memory

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
74 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
Sex Differences in the Neural Correlates of Specific and General Autobiographical Memory
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00285
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laurie Compère, Marco Sperduti, Thierry Gallarda, Adèle Anssens, Stéphanie Lion, Marion Delhommeau, Pénélope Martinelli, Anne-Dominique Devauchelle, Catherine Oppenheim, Pascale Piolino

Abstract

Autobiographical memory (AM) underlies the formation and temporal continuity over time of personal identity. The few studies on sex-related differences in AM suggest that men and women adopt different cognitive or emotional strategies when retrieving AMs. However, none of the previous works has taken into account the distinction between episodic autobiographical memory (EAM), consisting in the retrieval of specific events by means of mental time travel, and semantic autobiographical memory (SAM), which stores general personal events. Thus, it remains unclear whether differences in these strategies depend on the nature of the memory content to be retrieved. In the present study we employed functional MRI to examine brain activity underlying potential sex differences in EAM and SAM retrieval focusing on the differences in strategies related to the emotional aspects of memories while controlling for basic cognitive strategies. On the behavioral level, there was no significant sex difference in memory performances or subjective feature ratings of either type of AM. Activations common to men and women during AM retrieval were observed in a typical bilateral network comprising medial and lateral temporal regions, precuneus, occipital cortex as well as prefrontal cortex. Contrast analyses revealed that there was no difference between men and women in the EAM condition. In the SAM condition, women showed an increased activity, compared to men, in the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex, inferior parietal and precentral gyrus. Overall, these findings suggest that differential neural activations reflect sex-specific strategies related to emotional aspects of AMs, particularly regarding SAM. We propose that this pattern of activation during SAM retrieval reflects the cognitive cost linked to emotion regulation strategies recruited by women compared to men. These sex-related differences have interesting implications for understanding psychiatric disorders with differential sex prevalence and in which one of key features is overgenerality in AM.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Sweden 1 1%
France 1 1%
Unknown 72 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 26%
Researcher 12 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 15%
Student > Bachelor 4 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 12 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 38 51%
Neuroscience 8 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 1%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 16 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 19 February 2020.
All research outputs
#3,946,737
of 22,877,793 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#1,831
of 7,169 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,455
of 353,751 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#36
of 193 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,877,793 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,169 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 74% 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 353,751 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 193 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.