↓ Skip to main content

Motor imagery: lessons learned in movement science might be applicable for spaceflight

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 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
Motor imagery: lessons learned in movement science might be applicable for spaceflight
Published in
Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, May 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnsys.2015.00075
Pubmed ID
Authors

Otmar Bock, Nadja Schott, Charalambos Papaxanthis

Abstract

Before participating in a space mission, astronauts undergo parabolic-flight and underwater training to facilitate their subsequent adaptation to weightlessness. Unfortunately, similar training methods can't be used to prepare re-adaptation to planetary gravity. Here, we propose a quick, simple and inexpensive approach that could be used to prepare astronauts both for the absence and for the renewed presence of gravity. This approach is based on motor imagery (MI), a process in which actions are produced in working memory without any overt output. Training protocols based on MI have repeatedly been shown to modify brain circuitry and to improve motor performance in healthy young adults, healthy seniors and stroke victims, and are routinely used to optimize performance of elite athletes. We propose to use similar protocols preflight, to prepare for weightlessness, and late inflight, to prepare for landing.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 67 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 18%
Student > Bachelor 11 16%
Researcher 9 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Student > Master 5 7%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 19 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 9 13%
Psychology 8 12%
Sports and Recreations 7 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 9%
Other 10 15%
Unknown 21 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 03 January 2022.
All research outputs
#6,280,062
of 24,616,908 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
#482
of 1,400 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,929
of 270,270 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
#12
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,616,908 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,400 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 270,270 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.