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.
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 |
Monitoring the Right Collection: The Central Cholinergic Neurons as an Instructive Example
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neural Circuits, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fncir.2017.00031 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Katalin Sviatkó, Balázs Hangya |
| Abstract |
Some neurons are more equal than others: neuroscience relies heavily on the notion that there is a division of labor among different subtypes of brain cells. Therefore, it is important to recognize groups of neurons that participate in the same computation or share similar tasks. However, what the best ways are to identify such collections is not yet clear. Here, we argue that monitoring the activity of genetically defined cell types will lead to new insights about neural mechanisms and improve our understanding of disease vulnerability. Through highlighting how central cholinergic neurons encode reward and punishment that can be captured by a unified framework of reinforcement surprise, we hope to provide an instructive example of how studying a genetically defined cell type may further our understanding of neural function. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Chile | 1 | 33% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 25 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 36% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 12% |
| Researcher | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 12% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 3 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 11 | 44% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 16% |
| Psychology | 3 | 12% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 3 | 12% |
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 15 May 2017.
All research outputs
#14,934,072
of 22,968,808 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neural Circuits
#700
of 1,221 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#183,677
of 309,827 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neural Circuits
#13
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,968,808 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 1,221 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 309,827 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.