↓ Skip to main content

Dissociating Long and Short-term Memory in Three-Month-Old Infants Using the Mismatch Response to Voice Stimuli

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 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
Dissociating Long and Short-term Memory in Three-Month-Old Infants Using the Mismatch Response to Voice Stimuli
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00031
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katharina Zinke, Leonie Thöne, Elaina M. Bolinger, Jan Born

Abstract

Auditory event-related potentials (ERPs) have been successfully used in adults as well as in newborns to discriminate recall of longer-term and shorter-term memories. Specifically the Mismatch Response (MMR) to deviant stimuli of an oddball paradigm is larger if the deviant stimuli are highly familiar (i.e., retrieved from long-term memory) than if they are unfamiliar, representing an immediate change to the standard stimuli kept in short-term memory. Here, we aimed to extend previous findings indicating a differential MMR to familiar and unfamiliar deviants in newborns (Beauchemin et al., 2011), to 3-month-old infants who are starting to interact more with their social surroundings supposedly based on forming more (social) long-term representations. Using a voice discrimination paradigm, each infant was repeatedly presented with the word "baby" (400 ms, interstimulus interval: 600 ms, 10 min overall duration) pronounced by three different female speakers. One voice that was unfamiliar to the infants served as the frequently presented "standard" stimulus, whereas another unfamiliar voice served as the "unfamiliar deviant" stimulus, and the voice of the infant's mother served as the "familiar deviant." Data collection was successful for 31 infants (mean age = 100 days). The MMR was determined by the difference between the ERP to standard stimuli and the ERP to the unfamiliar and familiar deviant, respectively. The MMR to the familiar deviant (mother's voice) was larger, i.e., more positive, than that to the unfamiliar deviant between 100 and 400 ms post-stimulus over the frontal and central cortex. However, a genuine MMR differentiating, as a positive deflection, between ERPs to familiar deviants and standard stimuli was only found in the 300-400 ms interval. On the other hand, a genuine MMR differentiating, as a negative deflection, between ERPs to unfamiliar deviants from ERPs to standard stimuli was revealed for the 200-300 ms post-stimulus interval. Overall results confirm a differential MMR response to unfamiliar and familiar deviants in 3-month-olds, with the earlier negative MMR to unfamiliar deviants likely reflecting change detection based on comparison processes in short-term memory, and the later positive MMR to familiar deviants reflecting subsequent long-term memory-based processing of stimulus relevance.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 15%
Researcher 4 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 10 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 7 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 11%
Neuroscience 3 11%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Linguistics 1 4%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 10 37%
Attention Score in Context

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 30 January 2018.
All research outputs
#14,964,325
of 23,016,919 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#16,273
of 30,271 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#255,697
of 440,317 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#381
of 529 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,016,919 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,271 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 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 440,317 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 529 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.