↓ Skip to main content

Galvanic vestibular stimulation increases novelty in free selection of manual actions

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
32 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
Galvanic vestibular stimulation increases novelty in free selection of manual actions
Published in
Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fnint.2013.00074
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elisa R. Ferrè, Kobbina Arthur, Patrick Haggard

Abstract

Making optimal choices in changing environments implies the ability to balance routine, exploitative patterns of behavior with novel, exploratory ones. We investigated whether galvanic vestibular stimulation (GVS) interferes with the balance between exploratory and exploitative behaviors in a free action selection task. Brief right-anodal and left-cathodal GVS or left-anodal and right-cathodal GVS were delivered at random to activate sensorimotor circuits in the left and right hemisphere, respectively. A sham stimulation condition was included. Participants endogenously generated sequences of possible actions, by freely choosing successive movements of the index or middle finger of the left or right hand. Left-anodal and right-cathodal GVS, which preferentially activates the vestibular projections in the right cerebral hemisphere, increased the novelty in action sequences, as measured by the number of runs in the sequences. In contrast, right-anodal and left-cathodal GVS decreased the number of runs. There was no evidence of GVS-induced spatial bias in action choices. Our results confirm previous reports showing a polarity-dependent effect of GVS on the balance between novel and routine responses, and thus between exploratory and exploitative behaviors.

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 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Korea, Republic of 1 3%
Italy 1 3%
United Kingdom 1 3%
Canada 1 3%
China 1 3%
Unknown 27 84%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 25%
Researcher 4 13%
Student > Master 4 13%
Professor 3 9%
Lecturer 3 9%
Other 6 19%
Unknown 4 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 25%
Neuroscience 7 22%
Psychology 5 16%
Engineering 2 6%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 5 16%
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 21 October 2013.
All research outputs
#20,972,772
of 25,759,158 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
#752
of 919 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#231,013
of 291,038 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
#77
of 90 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,759,158 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 919 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. 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 291,038 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 90 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.