↓ Skip to main content

Spatial pattern completion deficits in older adults

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Spatial pattern completion deficits in older adults
Published in
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fnagi.2013.00003
Pubmed ID
Authors

Meera Paleja, Julia Spaniol

Abstract

Aging may have an impact on the CA3 autoassociative network of the hippocampus, posited by computational models as supporting pattern completion. Twenty-five young (YAs) and 25 older adults (OAs) performed a spatial pattern completion task using a computerized navigational paradigm analogous to a rodent pattern completion task reliant on the CA3. Participants identified a previously seen goal location, and the availability of distal cues in the environment was manipulated such that 0, 2, or 4 cues were missing. Performance in both groups declined as a function of decreased cue availability. However, controlling for age differences in task performance during a pre-experimental baseline task, OAs performed equivalently to YAs when all cues were available, but worse than YAs as the number of cues decreased. These findings suggest spatial pattern completion may be impaired in OAs. We discuss these findings in the context of a growing body of literature suggesting age-related imbalances in pattern separation vs. pattern completion.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 1 2%
France 1 2%
India 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 59 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 22%
Student > Master 9 14%
Researcher 8 13%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 12 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 24 38%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 13%
Neuroscience 7 11%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 15 23%
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 20 February 2013.
All research outputs
#14,745,370
of 22,696,971 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#3,320
of 4,725 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#175,243
of 280,682 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#47
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,696,971 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 4,725 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 280,682 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.