↓ Skip to main content

Neural Differences between Covert and Overt Attention Studied using EEG with Simultaneous Remote Eye Tracking

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
182 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
Neural Differences between Covert and Overt Attention Studied using EEG with Simultaneous Remote Eye Tracking
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, November 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00592
Pubmed ID
Authors

Louisa V. Kulke, Janette Atkinson, Oliver Braddick

Abstract

Research on neural mechanisms of attention has generally instructed subjects to direct attention covertly while maintaining a fixed gaze. This study combined simultaneous eye tracking and electroencephalogram (EEG) to measure neural attention responses during exogenous cueing in overt attention shifts (with saccadic eye movements to a target) and compared these with covert attention shifts (responding manually while maintaining central fixation). EEG analysis of the period preceding the saccade latency showed similar occipital response amplitudes for overt and covert shifts, although response latencies differed. However, a frontal positivity was greater during covert attention shifts, possibly reflecting saccade inhibition to maintain fixation. The results show that combined EEG and eye tracking can be successfully used to study natural overt shifts of attention (applicable to non-verbal infants) and that requiring inhibition of saccades can lead to additional frontal responses. Such data can be used to refine current neural models of attention that have been mainly based on covert shifts.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 180 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 36 20%
Student > Master 30 16%
Student > Bachelor 29 16%
Researcher 22 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 5%
Other 23 13%
Unknown 32 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 52 29%
Neuroscience 33 18%
Computer Science 13 7%
Engineering 13 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 4%
Other 22 12%
Unknown 42 23%
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 25 July 2017.
All research outputs
#8,572,391
of 26,154,612 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#3,358
of 7,797 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#138,656
of 419,552 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#79
of 166 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,154,612 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,797 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. 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 419,552 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 166 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.