↓ Skip to main content

Processing of multi-digit additions in high math-anxious individuals: psychophysiological evidence

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
60 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
Processing of multi-digit additions in high math-anxious individuals: psychophysiological evidence
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01268
Pubmed ID
Authors

María Isabel Núñez-Peña, Macarena Suárez-Pellicioni

Abstract

We investigated the time course of neural processing of multi-digit additions in high- (HMA) and low-math anxious (LMA) individuals. Seventeen HMA and 17 LMA individuals were presented with two-digit additions and were asked to perform a verification task. Behavioral data showed that HMA individuals were slower and more error prone than their LMA peers, and that incorrect solutions were solved more slowly and less accurately than correct ones. Moreover, HMA individuals tended to need more time and commit more errors when having to verify incorrect solutions than correct ones. ERPs time-locked to the presentation of the addends (calculation phase) and to the presentation of the proposed solution (verification phase) were also analyzed. In both phases, a P2 component of larger amplitude was found for HMA individuals than for their LMA peers. Because the P2 component is considered to be a biomarker of the mobilization of attentional resources toward emotionally negative stimuli, these results suggest that HMA individuals may have invested more attentional resources both when processing the addends (calculation phase) and when they had to report whether the proposed solution was correct or not (verification phase), as compared to their LMA peers. Moreover, in the verification phase, LMA individuals showed a larger late positive component (LPC) for incorrect solutions at parietal electrodes than their HMA counterparts. The smaller LPC shown by HMA individuals when verifying incorrect solutions suggests that these solutions may have been appeared more plausible to them than to their LMA counterparts.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 58 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 15%
Student > Bachelor 6 10%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Other 11 18%
Unknown 8 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 27 45%
Social Sciences 8 13%
Neuroscience 5 8%
Mathematics 3 5%
Engineering 3 5%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 10 17%
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 04 June 2016.
All research outputs
#18,423,683
of 22,824,164 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,155
of 29,793 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#191,960
of 266,184 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#457
of 554 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,824,164 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,793 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 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 266,184 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 554 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.