↓ Skip to main content

Physical and neural entrainment to rhythm: human sensorimotor coordination across tasks and effector systems

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
143 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
Physical and neural entrainment to rhythm: human sensorimotor coordination across tasks and effector systems
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, August 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00576
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jessica Marie Ross, Ramesh Balasubramaniam

Abstract

The human sensorimotor system can be readily entrained to environmental rhythms, through multiple sensory modalities. In this review, we provide an overview of theories of timekeeping that make this neuroentrainment possible. First, we present recent evidence that contests the assumptions made in classic timekeeper models. The role of state estimation, sensory feedback and movement parameters on the organization of sensorimotor timing are discussed in the context of recent experiments that examined simultaneous timing and force control. This discussion is extended to the study of coordinated multi-effector movements and how they may be entrained.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 143 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 3%
Ireland 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 135 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 36 25%
Researcher 23 16%
Student > Master 23 16%
Student > Bachelor 9 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 6%
Other 17 12%
Unknown 27 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 39 27%
Neuroscience 35 24%
Arts and Humanities 6 4%
Engineering 6 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 4%
Other 20 14%
Unknown 31 22%
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 09 January 2015.
All research outputs
#14,783,695
of 22,761,738 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#4,909
of 7,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,173
of 229,519 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#186
of 253 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,761,738 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 7,138 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 229,519 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 253 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.