↓ Skip to main content

Individual Differences in the Accuracy of Judgments of Learning Are Related to the Gray Matter Volume and Functional Connectivity of the Left Mid-Insula

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 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
Individual Differences in the Accuracy of Judgments of Learning Are Related to the Gray Matter Volume and Functional Connectivity of the Left Mid-Insula
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, August 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2017.00399
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiao Hu, Zhaomin Liu, Wen Chen, Jun Zheng, Ningxin Su, Wenjing Wang, Chongde Lin, Liang Luo

Abstract

The judgment of learning (JOL) is an important form of prospective metamemory judgment, and the biological basis of the JOL process is an important topic in metamemory research. Although previous task-related functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies have examined the brain regions underlying the JOL process, the neural correlates of individual differences in JOL accuracy require further investigation. This study used structural and resting-state functional MRI to investigate whether individual differences in JOL accuracy are related to the gray matter (GM) volume and functional connectivity of the bilateral insula and medial Brodmann area (BA) 11, which are assumed to be related to JOL accuracy. We found that individual differences in JOL accuracy were related to the GM volume of the left mid-insula and to the functional connectivity between the left mid-insula and various other regions, including the left superior parietal lobule/precuneus, bilateral inferior parietal lobule/intraparietal sulcus, right frontal pole and left parahippocampal gyrus/fusiform gyrus/cerebellum. Further analyses indicated that the functional connectivity related to individual differences in JOL accuracy could be divided into two factors and might support information integration and selective attention processes underlying accurate JOLs. In addition, individual differences in JOL accuracy were not related to the GM volume or functional connectivity of the medial BA 11. Our findings provide novel evidence for the role of the left mid-insula and its functional connectivity in the JOL process.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 23%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 13%
Researcher 3 10%
Student > Master 3 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 6%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 7 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 52%
Neuroscience 3 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Unspecified 1 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 8 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 15 August 2017.
All research outputs
#15,332,207
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#4,987
of 7,319 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#190,051
of 318,658 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#115
of 145 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,319 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 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 318,658 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 145 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.