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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Independence of Valence and Reward in Emotional Word Processing: Electrophysiological Evidence
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00168 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Laura Kaltwasser, Stephanie Ries, Werner Sommer, Robert T. Knight, Roel M. Willems |
| Abstract |
BOTH EMOTION AND REWARD ARE PRIMARY MODULATORS OF COGNITION: emotional word content enhances word processing, and reward expectancy similarly amplifies cognitive processing from the perceptual up to the executive control level. Here, we investigate how these primary regulators of cognition interact. We studied how the anticipation of gain or loss modulates the neural time course (event-related potentials, ERPs) related to processing of emotional words. Participants performed a semantic categorization task on emotional and neutral words, which were preceded by a cue indicating that performance could lead to monetary gain or loss. Emotion-related and reward-related effects occurred in different time windows, did not interact statistically, and showed different topographies. This speaks for an independence of reward expectancy and the processing of emotional word content. Therefore, privileged processing given to emotionally valenced words seems immune to short-term modulation of reward. Models of language comprehension should be able to incorporate effects of reward and emotion on language processing, and the current study argues for an architecture in which reward and emotion do not share a common neurobiological mechanism. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 71 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 26% |
| Researcher | 12 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 10% |
| Professor | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 14 | 19% |
| Unknown | 9 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 40 | 55% |
| Neuroscience | 7 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Engineering | 3 | 4% |
| Linguistics | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 13 | 18% |
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 20 May 2013.
All research outputs
#15,272,611
of 22,711,242 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#18,483
of 29,498 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#181,507
of 280,734 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#721
of 969 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,711,242 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,498 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 280,734 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 969 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.