↓ Skip to main content

Proximity of Substantia Nigra Microstimulation to Putative GABAergic Neurons Predicts Modulation of Human Reinforcement Learning

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Readers on

mendeley
28 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
Proximity of Substantia Nigra Microstimulation to Putative GABAergic Neurons Predicts Modulation of Human Reinforcement Learning
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, May 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2017.00200
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ashwin G. Ramayya, Isaac Pedisich, Deborah Levy, Anastasia Lyalenko, Paul Wanda, Daniel Rizzuto, Gordon H. Baltuch, Michael J. Kahana

Abstract

Neuronal firing in the substantia nigra (SN) immediately following reward is thought to play a crucial role in human reinforcement learning. As in Ramayya et al. (2014a) we applied microstimulation in the SN of patients undergoing deep brain stimulation (DBS) for the treatment of Parkinson's disease as they engaged in a two-alternative reinforcement learning task. We obtained microelectrode recordings to assess the proximity of the electrode tip to putative dopaminergic and GABAergic SN neurons and applied stimulation to assess the functional importance of these neuronal populations for learning. We found that the proximity of SN microstimulation to putative GABAergic neurons predicted the degree of stimulation-related changes in learning. These results extend previous work by supporting a specific role for SN GABA firing in reinforcement learning. Stimulation near these neurons appears to dampen the reinforcing effect of rewarding stimuli.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 18%
Student > Master 3 11%
Student > Postgraduate 2 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 5 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 10 36%
Computer Science 3 11%
Psychology 3 11%
Engineering 3 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 4%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 6 21%
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 14 May 2017.
All research outputs
#12,838,700
of 22,962,258 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#3,498
of 7,180 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#145,203
of 310,666 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#110
of 186 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,962,258 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 7,180 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 310,666 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 186 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.