↓ Skip to main content

Implicit and Explicit Routes to Recognize the Own Body: Evidence from Brain Damaged Patients

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Readers on

mendeley
50 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
Implicit and Explicit Routes to Recognize the Own Body: Evidence from Brain Damaged Patients
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, August 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00405
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michela Candini, Marina Farinelli, Francesca Ferri, Stefano Avanzi, Daniela Cevolani, Vittorio Gallese, Georg Northoff, Francesca Frassinetti

Abstract

Much research suggested that recognizing our own body-parts and attributing a body-part to our physical self-likely involve distinct processes. Accordingly, facilitation for self-body-parts was found when an implicit, but not an explicit, self-recognition was required. Here, we assess whether implicit and explicit bodily self-recognition is mediated by different cerebral networks and can be selectively impaired after brain lesion. To this aim, right- (RBD) and left- (LBD) brain damaged patients and age-matched controls were presented with rotated pictures of either self- or other-people hands. In the Implicit task participants were submitted to hand laterality judgments. In the Explicit task they had to judge whether the hand belonged, or not, to them. In the Implicit task, controls and LBD patients, but not RBD patients, showed an advantage for self-body stimuli. In the Explicit task a disadvantage emerged for self-compared to others' body stimuli in controls as well as in patients. Moreover, when we directly compared the performance of patients and controls, we found RBD, but not LBD, patients to be impaired in both the implicit and explicit recognition of self-body-part stimuli. Conversely, no differences were found for others' body-part stimuli. Crucially, 40% RBD patients showed a selective deficit for implicit processing of self-body-part stimuli, whereas 27% of them showed a selective deficit in the explicit recognition of their own body. Additionally, we provide anatomical evidence revealing the neural basis of this dissociation. Based on both behavioral and anatomical data, we suggest that different areas of the right hemisphere underpin implicit and explicit self-body knowledge.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 2%
Unknown 49 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 30%
Student > Postgraduate 6 12%
Other 3 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 10 20%
Unknown 10 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 13 26%
Neuroscience 9 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 6%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 14 28%
Attention Score in Context

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 22 September 2016.
All research outputs
#13,241,425
of 22,881,964 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#3,842
of 7,170 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#175,978
of 337,487 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#62
of 147 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,881,964 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 7,170 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 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 337,487 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 147 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 56% of its contemporaries.