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 |
Differences in Inhibitory Control between Impulsive and Premeditated Aggression in Juvenile Inmates
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2017.00373 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zhuo Zhang, Qianglong Wang, Xu Liu, Ping Song, Bo Yang |
| Abstract |
Inhibitory control dysfunction was considered a universal characteristic of violent offenders. The aim of this study was to examine differences in inhibitory control between two subtypes of violent youth; those displaying predominantly impulsive and those presenting predominantly premeditated aggression (PM). Forty-four juvenile offenders, defined on the basis of the Procedures for the Classification of Aggressive/Violent Acts (Stanford and Barratt, 2001) participated (N = 23: impulsive; N = 21 premeditated). A visual Go/NoGo task was used to compare behavioral responses and event-related potentials (ERPs) between groups. The task contained two letters (W and M), W was the Go stimulus and M the NoGo stimulus. The impulsive youth showed a significantly greater decrease in N2 latency for Go relative to NoGo trials than the premeditated aggressive youth. The differentiation in N2 amplitude between Go and NoGo (N2d) was negatively correlated with impulsivity of aggression. Both groups showed no significant central NoGo P3. Our findings suggest that impulsive violent youth show stronger prepotent responses and impaired conflict monitoring during early inhibitory control processing relative to premeditated aggressive youth. Both impulsive and premeditated violent youth may show impaired response inhibition at the late processing stage of inhibitory control. |
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% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 14% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 1 | 14% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 100% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 50 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 24% |
| Researcher | 9 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 15 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 18 | 36% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 10% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 2% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 2% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 10% |
| Unknown | 19 | 38% |
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 31 August 2017.
All research outputs
#7,666,915
of 23,339,727 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#3,320
of 7,273 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#121,120
of 317,326 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#83
of 147 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,339,727 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,273 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 52% 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 317,326 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 54% of its contemporaries.
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 is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.