↓ Skip to main content

The VWFA: it's not just for words anymore

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
121 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
239 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
The VWFA: it's not just for words anymore
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, March 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00088
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alecia C. Vogel, Steven E. Petersen, Bradley L. Schlaggar

Abstract

Reading is an important but phylogenetically new skill. While neuroimaging studies have identified brain regions used in reading, it is unclear to what extent these regions become specialized for use predominantly in reading vs. other tasks. Over the past several years, our group has published three studies addressing this question, particularly focusing on whether the putative visual word form area (VWFA) is used predominantly in reading, or whether it is used more generally in a number of tasks. Our three studies utilize a range of neuroimaging techniques, including task based fMRI experiments, a seed based resting state functional connectivity (RSFC) experiment, and a network based RSFC experiment. Overall, our studies indicate that the VWFA is not used specifically or even predominantly for reading. Rather the VWFA is a general use region that has processing properties making it particularly useful for reading, though it continues to be used in any task that requires its general processing properties. Our network based RSFC analysis extends this finding to other regions typically thought to be used predominantly for reading. Here, we review these findings and describe how the three studies complement each other. Then, we argue that conceptualizing the VWFA as a brain region with specific processing characteristics rather than a brain region devoted to a specific stimulus class, allows us to better explain the activity seen in this region during a variety of tasks. Having this type of conceptualization not only provides a better understanding of the VWFA but also provides a framework for understanding other brain regions, as it affords an explanation of function that is in keeping with the long history of studying the brain in terms of the type of information processing performed (Posner, 1978).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 239 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 3%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 229 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 51 21%
Researcher 40 17%
Student > Master 30 13%
Student > Bachelor 30 13%
Professor 17 7%
Other 42 18%
Unknown 29 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 80 33%
Neuroscience 39 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 6%
Social Sciences 11 5%
Linguistics 10 4%
Other 33 14%
Unknown 52 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 09 November 2019.
All research outputs
#4,651,025
of 22,753,345 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#2,124
of 7,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,656
of 223,366 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#61
of 126 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,753,345 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,138 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 223,366 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 126 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 51% of its contemporaries.