↓ Skip to main content

Advice Taking from Humans and Machines: An fMRI and Effective Connectivity Study

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
patent
2 patents

Readers on

mendeley
108 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
Advice Taking from Humans and Machines: An fMRI and Effective Connectivity Study
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, November 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00542
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kimberly Goodyear, Raja Parasuraman, Sergey Chernyak, Poornima Madhavan, Gopikrishna Deshpande, Frank Krueger

Abstract

With new technological advances, advice can come from different sources such as machines or humans, but how individuals respond to such advice and the neural correlates involved need to be better understood. We combined functional MRI and multivariate Granger causality analysis with an X-ray luggage-screening task to investigate the neural basis and corresponding effective connectivity involved with advice utilization from agents framed as experts. Participants were asked to accept or reject good or bad advice from a human or machine agent with low reliability (high false alarm rate). We showed that unreliable advice decreased performance overall and participants interacting with the human agent had a greater depreciation of advice utilization during bad advice compared to the machine agent. These differences in advice utilization can be perceivably due to reevaluation of expectations arising from association of dispositional credibility for each agent. We demonstrated that differences in advice utilization engaged brain regions that may be associated with evaluation of personal characteristics and traits (precuneus, posterior cingulate cortex, temporoparietal junction) and interoception (posterior insula). We found that the right posterior insula and left precuneus were the drivers of the advice utilization network that were reciprocally connected to each other and also projected to all other regions. Our behavioral and neuroimaging results have significant implications for society because of progressions in technology and increased interactions with machines.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 108 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 20%
Student > Master 15 14%
Researcher 12 11%
Student > Bachelor 9 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 31 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 26 24%
Business, Management and Accounting 13 12%
Neuroscience 7 6%
Engineering 6 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 3%
Other 12 11%
Unknown 41 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 March 2022.
All research outputs
#5,711,906
of 23,390,392 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#2,281
of 7,282 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,077
of 312,937 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#50
of 160 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,390,392 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,282 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 68% 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 312,937 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 160 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 68% of its contemporaries.