↓ Skip to main content

A Computerized Version of the Scrambled Sentences Test

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
39 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
A Computerized Version of the Scrambled Sentences Test
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02310
Pubmed ID
Authors

Roberto Viviani, Lisa Dommes, Julia E. Bosch, Julia C. Stingl, Petra Beschoner

Abstract

The scrambled sentences test (SST), an experimental procedure that involves participants writing down their cognitions, has been used to elicit individual differences in depressiveness and vulnerability to depression. We describe here a modification of the SST to adapt it to computerized administration, with a particular view of its use in large samples and functional neuroimaging applications. In a first study with the computerized version, we reproduce the preponderance of positive cognitions in the healthy and the inverse association of these cognitions with individual measures of depressiveness. We also report a tendency of self-referential cognitions to elicit higher positive cognition rates. In a second study, we describe the patterns of neural activations elicited by emotional and neutral sentences in a functional neuroimaging study, showing that it replicates and extends previous findings obtained with the original version of the SST. During the formation of emotional cognitions, ventral areas such as the ventral anterior cingulus and the supramarginal gyrus were relatively activated. This activation pattern speaks for the recruitment of mechanisms coordinating motivational and associative processes in the formation of value-based decisions.

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 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 23%
Student > Master 6 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Student > Postgraduate 2 5%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 8 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 17 44%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Neuroscience 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 13 33%
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 09 January 2018.
All research outputs
#18,579,736
of 23,012,811 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,489
of 30,257 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#331,475
of 443,099 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#473
of 542 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,012,811 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 30,257 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 443,099 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 542 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.