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 |
A Critical Review of Habit Learning and the Basal Ganglia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, January 2011
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnsys.2011.00066 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carol A. Seger, Brian J. Spiering |
| Abstract |
The current paper briefly outlines the historical development of the concept of habit learning and discusses its relationship to the basal ganglia. Habit learning has been studied in many different fields of neuroscience using different species, tasks, and methodologies, and as a result it has taken on a wide range of definitions from these various perspectives. We identify five common but not universal, definitional features of habit learning: that it is inflexible, slow or incremental, unconscious, automatic, and insensitive to reinforcer devaluation. We critically evaluate for each of these how it has been defined, its utility for research in both humans and non-human animals, and the evidence that it serves as an accurate description of basal ganglia function. In conclusion, we propose a multi-faceted approach to habit learning and its relationship to the basal ganglia, emphasizing the need for formal definitions that will provide directions for future research. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 | 2 | 40% |
| Germany | 1 | 20% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 40% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 40% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 371 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 12 | 3% |
| Germany | 4 | 1% |
| France | 2 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Turkey | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Taiwan | 1 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 345 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 82 | 22% |
| Researcher | 70 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 47 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 40 | 11% |
| Professor | 19 | 5% |
| Other | 63 | 17% |
| Unknown | 50 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 96 | 26% |
| Neuroscience | 68 | 18% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 50 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 6% |
| Engineering | 12 | 3% |
| Other | 56 | 15% |
| Unknown | 66 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 27 May 2022.
All research outputs
#1,203,565
of 22,651,245 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
#90
of 1,339 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,429
of 180,239 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
#4
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,651,245 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,339 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. 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 180,239 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 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 90% of its contemporaries.