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 |
Individual Differences in the Neural and Cognitive Mechanisms of Single Word Reading
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2018.00271 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Simon Fischer-Baum, Jeong Hwan Kook, Yoseph Lee, Aurora Ramos-Nuñez, Marina Vannucci |
| Abstract |
Written language is a human invention that our brains did not evolve for. Yet, most research has focused on finding a single theory of reading, identifying the common set of cognitive and neural processes shared across individuals, neglecting individual differences. In contrast, we investigated variation in single word reading. Using a novel statistical method for analyzing heterogeneity in multi-subject task-based functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), we clustered readers based on their brain's response to written stimuli. Separate behavioral testing and neuroimaging analysis shows that these clusters differed in the role of the sublexical pathway in processing written language, but not in reading skill. Taken together, these results suggest that individuals vary in the cognitive and neural mechanisms involved in word reading. In general, neurocognitive theories need to account not only for what tends to be true of the population, but also the types of variation that exist, even within a neurotypical population. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 4 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 51 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 31% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 10% |
| Researcher | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 14% |
| Unknown | 10 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 15 | 29% |
| Neuroscience | 9 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 18 | 35% |
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 10 August 2021.
All research outputs
#14,760,258
of 25,626,416 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#3,937
of 7,738 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,837
of 341,568 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#82
of 128 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,626,416 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,738 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 341,568 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 128 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.