↓ Skip to main content

Positive and negative emotional arousal increases duration of memory traces: common and independent mechanisms

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, January 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 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
Positive and negative emotional arousal increases duration of memory traces: common and independent mechanisms
Published in
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, January 2011
DOI 10.3389/fnbeh.2011.00086
Pubmed ID
Authors

F. Cruciani, A. Berardi, S. Cabib, D. Conversi

Abstract

We compared the ability of positive and negative emotional arousal to increase the duration of consolidated memory traces. Positive arousal was modulated by manipulating the motivational salience of the testing cage of an object recognition test. Negative emotional arousal was modulated by manipulating shock levels in a step-through inhibitory avoidance (IA). Mice trained in either a high (chocolate-associated) or a low (inedible object-associated) emotionally arousing cage showed discrimination of a novel object 24 h after training, but only mice trained in the more arousing cage showed retention 96 h after training. Mice trained with either low (0.35 mA) or high (0.7 mA) shock intensities showed increased step-through latencies when tested 24 h after training, but only mice trained with the higher shock intensity showed retention of the IA learning 1 week after training. Administration of the phosphodiesterase type IV inhibitor Rolipram immediately after training in the two low arousing conditions increases duration of both responses.

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 2 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 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 4%
Unknown 27 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 36%
Researcher 7 25%
Student > Master 4 14%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Professor 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 3 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 6 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 18%
Neuroscience 4 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 14%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 4%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 6 21%
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 11 January 2012.
All research outputs
#17,664,478
of 22,675,759 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#2,397
of 3,144 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,546
of 180,328 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#35
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,675,759 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,144 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 180,328 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.