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 |
The juggling paradigm: a novel social neuroscience approach to identify neuropsychophysiological markers of team mental models
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00799 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Edson Filho, Maurizio Bertollo, Claudio Robazza, Silvia Comani |
| Abstract |
Since the discovery of the mirror neuron system in the 1980s, little, if any, research has been devoted to the study of interactive motor tasks (Goldman, 2012). Scientists interested in the neuropsychophysiological markers of joint motor action have relied on observation paradigms and passive tasks rather than dynamic paradigms and interactive tasks (Konvalinka and Roepstorff, 2012). Within this research scenario, we introduce a novel research paradigm that uses cooperative juggling as a platform to capture peripheral (e.g., skin conductance, breathing and heart rates, electromyographic signals) and central neuropsychophysiological (e.g., functional connectivity within and between brains) markers underlying the notion of team mental models (TMM). We discuss the epistemological and theoretical grounds of a cooperative juggling paradigm, and propose testable hypotheses on neuropsychophysiological markers underlying TMM. Furthermore, we present key methodological concerns that may influence peripheral responses as well as single and hyperbrain network configurations during joint motor action. Preliminary findings of the paradigm are highlighted. We conclude by delineating avenues for future research. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | 50% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Portugal | 1 | 3% |
| Hong Kong | 1 | 3% |
| Austria | 1 | 3% |
| Argentina | 1 | 3% |
| Spain | 1 | 3% |
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 34 | 85% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 10% |
| Other | 9 | 23% |
| Unknown | 7 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 13 | 33% |
| Sports and Recreations | 6 | 15% |
| Engineering | 4 | 10% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 8% |
| Design | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 8 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 July 2015.
All research outputs
#14,226,014
of 22,807,037 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#15,083
of 29,724 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#138,253
of 266,832 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#339
of 526 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,807,037 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,724 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 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 266,832 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 526 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.