The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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.
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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The neural basis of deception in strategic interactions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00027 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kirsten G. Volz, Kai Vogeley, Marc Tittgemeyer, D. Yves von Cramon, Matthias Sutter |
| Abstract |
Communication based on informational asymmetries abounds in politics, business, and almost any other form of social interaction. Informational asymmetries may create incentives for the better-informed party to exploit her advantage by misrepresenting information. Using a game-theoretic setting, we investigate the neural basis of deception in human interaction. Unlike in most previous fMRI research on deception, the participants decide themselves whether to lie or not. We find activation within the right temporo-parietal junction (rTPJ), the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), the (pre)cuneus (CUN), and the anterior frontal gyrus (aFG) when contrasting lying with truth telling. Notably, our design also allows for an investigation of the neural foundations of sophisticated deception through telling the truth-when the sender does not expect the receiver to believe her (true) message. Sophisticated deception triggers activation within the same network as plain lies, i.e., we find activity within the rTPJ, the CUN, and aFG. We take this result to show that brain activation can reveal the sender's veridical intention to deceive others, irrespective of whether in fact the sender utters the factual truth or not. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 5 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 117 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Russia | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Slovakia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 112 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 19 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 15% |
| Researcher | 13 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 21 | 18% |
| Unknown | 17 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 41 | 35% |
| Neuroscience | 17 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 5% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 17 | 15% |
| Unknown | 23 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 08 November 2016.
All research outputs
#7,453,827
of 22,787,797 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#1,271
of 3,165 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,899
of 357,810 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#34
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,787,797 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,165 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its peers.
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 357,810 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.