↓ Skip to main content

N400 ERPs for actions: building meaning in context

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
googleplus
4 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
96 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
184 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
N400 ERPs for actions: building meaning in context
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00057
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lucía Amoruso, Carlos Gelormini, Francisco Aboitiz, Miguel Alvarez González, Facundo Manes, Juan F. Cardona, Agustín Ibanez

Abstract

Converging neuroscientific evidence suggests the existence of close links between language and sensorimotor cognition. Accordingly, during the comprehension of meaningful actions, our brain would recruit semantic-related operations similar to those associated with the processing of language information. Consistent with this view, electrophysiological findings show that the N400 component, traditionally linked to the semantic processing of linguistic material, can also be elicited by action-related material. This review outlines recent data from N400 studies that examine the understanding of action events. We focus on three specific domains, including everyday action comprehension, co-speech gesture integration, and the semantics involved in motor planning and execution. Based on the reviewed findings, we suggest that both negativities (the N400 and the action-N400) reflect a common neurocognitive mechanism involved in the construction of meaning through the expectancies created by previous experiences and current contextual information. To shed light on how this process is instantiated in the brain, a testable contextual fronto-temporo-parietal model is proposed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 184 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 3%
Germany 2 1%
Italy 2 1%
India 1 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 171 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 46 25%
Researcher 33 18%
Student > Master 24 13%
Student > Bachelor 17 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 7%
Other 33 18%
Unknown 18 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 74 40%
Neuroscience 29 16%
Linguistics 14 8%
Engineering 8 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 4%
Other 20 11%
Unknown 32 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 06 May 2015.
All research outputs
#4,150,929
of 25,182,110 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#1,846
of 7,638 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,178
of 293,942 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#272
of 860 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,182,110 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,638 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 293,942 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 860 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.