The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 |
Resting and Initial Beta Amplitudes Predict Learning Ability in Beta/Theta Ratio Neurofeedback Training in Healthy Young Adults
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00677 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wenya Nan, Feng Wan, Mang I Vai, Agostinho C. Da Rosa |
| Abstract |
Neurofeedback (NF) training has been proved beneficial in cognitive and behavioral performance improvement in healthy individuals. Unfortunately, the NF learning ability shows large individual difference and in a number of NF studies there are even some non-learners who cannot successfully self-regulate their brain activity by NF. This study aimed to find out the neurophysiological predictor of the learning ability in up-regulating beta-1 (15-18 Hz)/theta (4-7 Hz) ratio (BTR) training in healthy young adults. Eighteen volunteers finished five training sessions in successive 5 days. We found that low beta (12-15 Hz) amplitude in a 1-min eyes-open resting baseline measured before training and the beta-1 amplitude in the first training block with 4.5-min duration could predict the BTR learning ability across sessions. The results provide a low cost, convenient and easy way to predict the learning ability in up-regulating BTR training, and would be helpful in avoiding potential frustration and adjusting training protocol for the participants with poor learning ability. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chile | 1 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Germany | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| China | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 81 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 17% |
| Researcher | 9 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 9% |
| Other | 16 | 20% |
| Unknown | 13 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 22 | 27% |
| Neuroscience | 15 | 18% |
| Engineering | 6 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 6% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 12 | 15% |
| Unknown | 17 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 21 December 2015.
All research outputs
#13,827,359
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#4,053
of 7,319 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#190,083
of 392,857 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#76
of 141 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,319 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 392,857 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 141 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.