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 |
Don’t Lose Your Brain at Work – The Role of Recurrent Novelty at Work in Cognitive and Brain Aging
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, February 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00117 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jan Oltmanns, Ben Godde, Axel H. Winneke, Götz Richter, Claudia Niemann, Claudia Voelcker-Rehage, Klaus Schömann, Ursula M. Staudinger |
| Abstract |
Cognitive and brain aging is strongly influenced by everyday settings such as work demands. Long-term exposure to low job complexity, for instance, has detrimental effects on cognitive functioning and regional gray matter (GM) volume. Brain and cognition, however, are also characterized by plasticity. We postulate that the experience of novelty (at work) is one important trigger of plasticity. We investigated the cumulative effect of recurrent exposure to work-task changes (WTC) at low levels of job complexity on GM volume and cognitive functioning of middle-aged production workers across a time window of 17 years. In a case-control study, we found that amount of WTC was associated with better processing speed and working memory as well as with more GM volume in brain regions that have been associated with learning and that show pronounced age-related decline. Recurrent novelty at work may serve as an 'in vivo' intervention that helps counteracting debilitating long-term effects of low job complexity. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 3 | 14% |
| United States | 2 | 10% |
| Australia | 2 | 10% |
| India | 2 | 10% |
| Belgium | 1 | 5% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 5% |
| Ghana | 1 | 5% |
| Japan | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 8 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 15 | 71% |
| Scientists | 5 | 24% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 5% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 72 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 15% |
| Researcher | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 10% |
| Other | 14 | 19% |
| Unknown | 13 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 17 | 23% |
| Neuroscience | 9 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 18% |
| Unknown | 18 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 52. 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 06 November 2023.
All research outputs
#793,444
of 24,985,232 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#1,639
of 33,738 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,645
of 430,843 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#36
of 466 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,985,232 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,738 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 430,843 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 466 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.