↓ Skip to main content

Accessing forgotten memory traces from long-term memory via visual movements

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 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
Accessing forgotten memory traces from long-term memory via visual movements
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, November 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00930
Pubmed ID
Authors

Estela Càmara, Lluís Fuentemilla

Abstract

Because memory retrieval often requires overt responses, it is difficult to determine to what extend forgetting occurs as a problem in explicit accessing of long-term memory traces. In this study, we used eye-tracking measures in combination with a behavioral task that favored high forgetting rates to investigate the existence of memory traces from long-term memory in spite of failure in accessing them consciously. In two experiments, participants were encouraged to encode a large set of sound-picture-location associations. In a later test, sounds were presented and participants were instructed to visually scan, before a verbal memory report, for the correct location of the associated pictures in an empty screen. We found the reactivation of associated memories by sound cues at test biased oculomotor behavior towards locations congruent with memory representations, even when participants failed to consciously provide a memory report of it. These findings reveal the emergence of a memory-guided behavior that can be used to map internal representations of forgotten memories from long-term memory.

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 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 4%
United States 1 4%
Unknown 21 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 26%
Student > Master 5 22%
Researcher 5 22%
Professor 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 3 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 9 39%
Neuroscience 4 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 9%
Sports and Recreations 1 4%
Linguistics 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 5 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 24 January 2015.
All research outputs
#7,203,348
of 22,769,322 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#3,111
of 7,139 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,580
of 362,487 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#106
of 208 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,769,322 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th 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 55% 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 362,487 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 208 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.