↓ Skip to main content

Evidence from neuroimaging for the role of the menstrual cycle in the interplay of emotion and cognition

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
58 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
178 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
Evidence from neuroimaging for the role of the menstrual cycle in the interplay of emotion and cognition
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00374
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julia Sacher, Hadas Okon-Singer, Arno Villringer

Abstract

Women show increased predisposition for certain psychiatric disorders, such as depression, that are associated with disturbances in the integration of emotion and cognition. While this suggests that sex hormones need to be considered as modulating factors in the regulation of emotion, we still lack a sound understanding of how the menstrual cycle impacts emotional states and cognitive function. Though signals for the influence of the menstrual cycle on the integration of emotion and cognition have appeared as secondary findings in numerous behavioral and neuroimaging studies, this has only very rarely been the primary research goal. This review summarizes evidence: (1) that the menstrual cycle modulates the integration of emotional and cognitive processing on a behavioral level, and (2) that this change in behavior can be associated with functional, molecular and structural changes in the brain during a specific menstrual cycle phase. The growing evidence for menstrual cycle-specific differences suggests a modulating role for sex hormones on the neural networks supporting the integration of emotional and cognitive information. It will further be discussed what methodological aspects need to be considered to capture the role of the menstrual cycle in the emotion-cognition interplay more systematically.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 178 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Unknown 175 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 16%
Student > Master 25 14%
Researcher 21 12%
Student > Bachelor 21 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 18 10%
Other 36 20%
Unknown 28 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 71 40%
Neuroscience 26 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 2%
Social Sciences 4 2%
Other 19 11%
Unknown 39 22%
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 25 August 2023.
All research outputs
#19,948,962
of 25,391,471 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#6,027
of 7,677 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#216,848
of 283,942 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#720
of 861 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,391,471 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,677 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 283,942 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 861 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.