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 |
No Effect of Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Over the Motor Cortex on Response-Related ERPs during a Conflict Task
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00384 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alexander C. Conley, W. R. Fulham, Jodie L. Marquez, Mark W. Parsons, Frini Karayanidis |
| Abstract |
Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the motor cortex is considered a potential treatment for motor rehabilitation following stroke and other neurological pathologies. However, both the context under which this stimulation is effective and the underlying mechanisms remain to be determined. In this study, we examined the mechanisms by which anodal tDCS may affect motor performance by recording event-related potentials (ERPs) during a cued go/nogo task after anodal tDCS over dominant primary motor cortex (M1) in young adults (Experiment 1) and both dominant and non-dominant M1 in older adults (Experiment 2). In both experiments, anodal tDCS had no effect on either response time (RT) or response-related ERPs, including the cue-locked contingent negative variation (CNV) and both target-locked and response-locked lateralized readiness potentials (LRP). Bayesian model selection analyses showed that, for all measures, the null effects model was stronger than a model including anodal tDCS vs. sham. We conclude that anodal tDCS has no effect on RT or response-related ERPs during a cued go/nogo task in either young or older adults. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | 25% |
| Australia | 1 | 25% |
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 73 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 17% |
| Researcher | 12 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 8 | 11% |
| Unknown | 17 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 17 | 23% |
| Psychology | 16 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Unknown | 24 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 23 August 2016.
All research outputs
#13,985,702
of 22,880,691 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#4,310
of 7,170 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#210,245
of 366,894 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#100
of 164 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,691 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,170 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 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 366,894 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 164 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.