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 |
Mapping the Parameter Space of tDCS and Cognitive Control via Manipulation of Current Polarity and Intensity
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, December 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00665 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elisabeth A. Karuza, Zuzanna Z. Balewski, Roy H. Hamilton, John D. Medaglia, Nathan Tardiff, Sharon L. Thompson-Schill |
| Abstract |
In the cognitive domain, enormous variation in methodological approach prompts questions about the generalizability of behavioral findings obtained from studies of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). To determine the impact of common variations in approach, we systematically manipulated two key stimulation parameters-current polarity and intensity-and assessed their impact on a task of inhibitory control (the Eriksen Flanker). Ninety participants were randomly assigned to one of nine experimental groups: three stimulation conditions (anode, sham, cathode) crossed with three intensity levels (1.0, 1.5, 2.0 mA). As participants performed the Flanker task, stimulation was applied over left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC; electrode montage: F3-RSO). The behavioral impact of these manipulations was examined using mixed effects linear regression. Results indicate a significant effect of stimulation condition (current polarity) on the magnitude of the interference effect during the Flanker; however, this effect was specific to the comparison between anodal and sham stimulation. Inhibitory control was therefore improved by anodal stimulation over the DLPFC. In the present experimental context, no reliable effect of stimulation intensity was observed, and we found no evidence that inhibitory control was impeded by cathodal stimulation. Continued exploration of the stimulation parameter space, particularly with more robustly powered sample sizes, is essential to facilitating cross-study comparison and ultimately working toward a reliable model of tDCS effects. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 57% |
| Japan | 1 | 14% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 1 | 14% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 86% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 89 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 16 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 11% |
| Professor | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 15 | 16% |
| Unknown | 22 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 25 | 27% |
| Neuroscience | 17 | 19% |
| Engineering | 5 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 10% |
| Unknown | 29 | 32% |
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 19 January 2017.
All research outputs
#12,787,113
of 22,912,409 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#3,495
of 7,175 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#196,325
of 420,807 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#91
of 182 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,912,409 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,175 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 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 420,807 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 182 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.