↓ Skip to main content

Computational Models of Anterior Cingulate Cortex: At the Crossroads between Prediction and Effort

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
41 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
200 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
Computational Models of Anterior Cingulate Cortex: At the Crossroads between Prediction and Effort
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, June 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2017.00316
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eliana Vassena, Clay B. Holroyd, William H. Alexander

Abstract

In the last two decades the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) has become one of the most investigated areas of the brain. Extensive neuroimaging evidence suggests countless functions for this region, ranging from conflict and error coding, to social cognition, pain and effortful control. In response to this burgeoning amount of data, a proliferation of computational models has tried to characterize the neurocognitive architecture of ACC. Early seminal models provided a computational explanation for a relatively circumscribed set of empirical findings, mainly accounting for EEG and fMRI evidence. More recent models have focused on ACC's contribution to effortful control. In parallel to these developments, several proposals attempted to explain within a single computational framework a wider variety of empirical findings that span different cognitive processes and experimental modalities. Here we critically evaluate these modeling attempts, highlighting the continued need to reconcile the array of disparate ACC observations within a coherent, unifying framework.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 41 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 200 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 200 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 56 28%
Researcher 33 17%
Student > Master 24 12%
Student > Bachelor 18 9%
Student > Postgraduate 11 6%
Other 29 14%
Unknown 29 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 60 30%
Neuroscience 54 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 5%
Engineering 6 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 3%
Other 14 7%
Unknown 50 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 26 October 2020.
All research outputs
#1,623,638
of 25,550,333 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#799
of 11,611 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,257
of 332,054 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#18
of 196 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,550,333 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,611 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 332,054 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 196 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.