↓ Skip to main content

Decoding Movement Goals from the Fronto-Parietal Reach Network

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 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
Decoding Movement Goals from the Fronto-Parietal Reach Network
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, February 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2017.00084
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hanna Gertz, Angelika Lingnau, Katja Fiehler

Abstract

During reach planning, fronto-parietal brain areas need to transform sensory information into a motor code. It is debated whether these areas maintain a sensory representation of the visual cue or a motor representation of the upcoming movement goal. Here, we present results from a delayed pro-/anti-reach task which allowed for dissociating the position of the visual cue from the reach goal. In this task, the visual cue was combined with a context rule (pro vs. anti) to infer the movement goal. Different levels of movement goal specification during the delay were obtained by presenting the context rule either before the delay together with the visual cue (specified movement goal) or after the delay (underspecified movement goal). By applying functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) multivoxel pattern analysis (MVPA), we demonstrate movement goal encoding in the left dorsal premotor cortex (PMd) and bilateral superior parietal lobule (SPL) when the reach goal is specified. This suggests that fronto-parietal reach regions (PRRs) maintain a prospective motor code during reach planning. When the reach goal is underspecified, only area PMd but not SPL represents the visual cue position indicating an incomplete state of sensorimotor integration. Moreover, this result suggests a potential role of PMd in movement goal selection.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Israel 1 2%
Unknown 41 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 21%
Student > Master 5 12%
Researcher 5 12%
Professor 5 12%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Other 7 17%
Unknown 7 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 11 26%
Psychology 10 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 10%
Sports and Recreations 2 5%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 9 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 01 March 2017.
All research outputs
#14,048,845
of 22,953,506 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#4,305
of 7,179 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#170,997
of 311,648 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#132
of 197 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,953,506 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,179 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 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 311,648 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 197 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.