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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Comparing the Neural Correlates of Conscious and Unconscious Conflict Control in a Masked Stroop Priming Task
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00297 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jun Jiang, Kira Bailey, Ling Xiang, Li Zhang, Qinglin Zhang |
| Abstract |
Although previous studies have suggested that conflict control can occur in the absence of consciousness, the brain mechanisms underlying unconscious and conscious conflict control remain unclear. The current study used a rapid event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging design to collect data from 24 participants while they performed a masked Stroop priming task under both conscious and unconscious conditions. The results revealed that the fronto-parietal conflict network, including medial frontal cortex (MFC), left and right dorsal lateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), and posterior parietal cortex (PPC), was activated by both conscious and unconscious Stroop priming, even though in MFC and left DLPFC the activations elicited by unconscious Stroop priming were smaller than conscious Stroop priming. The findings provide evidence for the existence of quantitative differences between the neural substrates of conscious and unconscious conflict control. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chile | 1 | 20% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 32 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 25% |
| Researcher | 6 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 5 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 12 | 38% |
| Psychology | 11 | 34% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 3% |
| Design | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 6 | 19% |
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 06 July 2016.
All research outputs
#13,237,826
of 22,875,477 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#3,847
of 7,168 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#182,828
of 353,749 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#108
of 193 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,875,477 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,168 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 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 353,749 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.