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.
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 |
Dissociation between Conceptual and Perceptual Implicit Memory: Evidence from Patients with Frontal and Occipital Lobe Lesions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00722 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Liang Gong, JiHua Wang, XuDong Yang, Lei Feng, Xiu Li, Cui Gu, MeiHong Wang, JiaYun Hu, Huaidong Cheng |
| Abstract |
The latest neuroimaging studies about implicit memory (IM) have revealed that different IM types may be processed by different parts of the brain. However, studies have rarely examined what subtypes of IM processes are affected in patients with various brain injuries. Twenty patients with frontal lobe injury, 25 patients with occipital lobe injury, and 29 healthy controls (HC) were recruited for the study. Two subtypes of IM were investigated by using structurally parallel perceptual (picture identification task) and conceptual (category exemplar generation task) IM tests in the three groups, as well as explicit memory (EM) tests. The results indicated that the priming of conceptual IM and EM tasks in patients with frontal lobe injury was poorer than that observed in HC, while perceptual IM was identical between the two groups. By contrast, the priming of perceptual IM in patients with occipital lobe injury was poorer than that in HC, whereas the priming of conceptual IM and EM was similar to that in HC. This double dissociation between perceptual and conceptual IM across the brain areas implies that occipital lobes may participate in perceptual IM, while frontal lobes may be involved in processing conceptual memory. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 20 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 30% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 15% |
| Researcher | 3 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 10% |
| Professor | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 4 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 12 | 60% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 10% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 4 | 20% |
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 24 December 2015.
All research outputs
#20,299,108
of 22,836,570 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#6,543
of 7,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#332,101
of 395,526 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#122
of 141 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,836,570 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,156 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 395,526 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.