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.
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 |
Visual processing of multiple elements in the dyslexic brain: evidence for a superior parietal dysfunction
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, July 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00479 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Muriel A. Lobier, Carole Peyrin, Cédric Pichat, Jean-François Le Bas, Sylviane Valdois |
| Abstract |
The visual attention (VA) span deficit hypothesis of developmental dyslexia posits that impaired multiple element processing can be responsible for poor reading outcomes. In VA span impaired dyslexic children, poor performance on letter report tasks is associated with reduced parietal activations for multiple letter processing. While this hints towards a non-specific, attention-based dysfunction, it is still unclear whether reduced parietal activity generalizes to other types of stimuli. Furthermore, putative links between reduced parietal activity and reduced ventral occipito-temporal (vOT) in dyslexia have yet to be explored. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging, we measured brain activity in 12 VA span impaired dyslexic adults and 12 adult skilled readers while they carried out a categorization task on single or multiple alphanumeric or non-alphanumeric characters. While healthy readers activated parietal areas more strongly for multiple than single element processing (right-sided for alphanumeric and bilateral for non-alphanumeric), similar stronger multiple element right parietal activations were absent for dyslexic participants. Contrasts between skilled and dyslexic readers revealed significantly reduced right superior parietal lobule (SPL) activity for dyslexic readers regardless of stimuli type. Using a priori anatomically defined regions of interest, we showed that neural activity was reduced for dyslexic participants in both SPL and vOT bilaterally. Finally, we used multiple regressions to test whether SPL activity was related to vOT activity in each group. In the left hemisphere, SPL activity covaried with vOT activity for both normal and dyslexic readers. In contrast, in the right hemisphere, SPL activity covaried with vOT activity only for dyslexic readers. These results bring critical support to the VA interpretation of the VA Span deficit. In addition, they offer a new insight on how deficits in automatic vOT based word recognition could arise in developmental dyslexia. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 33% |
| Cuba | 1 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 83% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 129 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 123 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 23 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 20 | 16% |
| Researcher | 19 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 9% |
| Professor | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 27 | 21% |
| Unknown | 22 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 46 | 36% |
| Neuroscience | 17 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 5% |
| Linguistics | 5 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 22 | 17% |
| Unknown | 28 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 29 March 2018.
All research outputs
#6,395,472
of 22,764,165 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#2,722
of 7,139 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,343
of 225,744 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#124
of 252 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,764,165 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,139 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 61% 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 225,744 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 252 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 50% of its contemporaries.