↓ Skip to main content

What Makes a Pattern? Matching Decoding Methods to Data in Multivariate Pattern Analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
177 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
What Makes a Pattern? Matching Decoding Methods to Data in Multivariate Pattern Analysis
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2012.00162
Pubmed ID
Authors

Philip A. Kragel, R. McKell Carter, Scott A. Huettel

Abstract

Research in neuroscience faces the challenge of integrating information across different spatial scales of brain function. A promising technique for harnessing information at a range of spatial scales is multivariate pattern analysis (MVPA) of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data. While the prevalence of MVPA has increased dramatically in recent years, its typical implementations for classification of mental states utilize only a subset of the information encoded in local fMRI signals. We review published studies employing multivariate pattern classification since the technique's introduction, which reveal an extensive focus on the improved detection power that linear classifiers provide over traditional analysis techniques. We demonstrate using simulations and a searchlight approach, however, that non-linear classifiers are capable of extracting distinct information about interactions within a local region. We conclude that for spatially localized analyses, such as searchlight and region of interest, multiple classification approaches should be compared in order to match fMRI analyses to the properties of local circuits.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 177 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 7 4%
Netherlands 3 2%
Germany 2 1%
United Kingdom 2 1%
Canada 2 1%
France 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Other 2 1%
Unknown 155 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 71 40%
Researcher 21 12%
Student > Master 20 11%
Student > Bachelor 11 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 5%
Other 30 17%
Unknown 15 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 83 47%
Neuroscience 25 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 5%
Engineering 8 5%
Other 13 7%
Unknown 21 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 30 November 2012.
All research outputs
#20,655,488
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#9,456
of 11,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#203,876
of 250,087 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#121
of 154 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,538 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 250,087 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 154 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.