↓ Skip to main content

Individual differences in approach-avoidance aptitude: some clues from research on Parkinson’s disease

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
33 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
Individual differences in approach-avoidance aptitude: some clues from research on Parkinson’s disease
Published in
Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, March 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnsys.2015.00043
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alberto Costa, Carlo Caltagirone

Abstract

Approach and avoidance are two basic behavioral aptitudes of humans whose correct balance is critical for successful adaptation to the environment. As the expression of approach and avoidance tendencies may differ significantly between healthy individuals, different psychobiological factors have been posited to account for such variability. In this regard, two main issues are still open that refers to (i) the role played by dopamine neurotransmission; and (ii) the possible influence of cognitive characteristics, particularly executive functioning. The aim of the present paper was to highlight the contribution of research on Parkinson's disease (PD) to our understanding of the above issues. In particular, we here reviewed PD literature to clarify whether neurobiological and neuropsychological modifications due to PD are associated to changes in approach-avoidance related personality features. Available data indicate that PD patients may show and approach-avoidance imbalance as documented by lower novelty-seeking and higher harm-avoidance behaviors, possibly suggesting a relationship with neurobiological and neurocognitive PD-related changes. However, the literature that directly investigated this issue is still sparse and much more work is needed to better clarify it.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 3%
Unknown 32 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 27%
Student > Bachelor 5 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Researcher 3 9%
Student > Master 3 9%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 6 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 14 42%
Neuroscience 5 15%
Engineering 2 6%
Social Sciences 2 6%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 5 15%
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 09 April 2015.
All research outputs
#17,750,476
of 22,794,367 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
#1,053
of 1,342 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,046
of 263,355 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
#39
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,794,367 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,342 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 263,355 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 58 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.