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 |
Ten Minutes of α-tACS and Ambient Illumination Independently Modulate EEG α-Power
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2017.00257 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Heiko I. Stecher, Tania M. Pollok, Daniel Strüber, Fabian Sobotka, Christoph S. Herrmann |
| Abstract |
Transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) sees increased use in neurosciences as a tool for the exploration of brain oscillations. It has been shown that tACS stimulation in specific frequency bands can result in aftereffects of modulated oscillatory brain activity that persist after the stimulation has ended. The general relationship between persistency of the effect and duration of stimulation is sparsely investigated but previous research has shown that the occurrence of tACS aftereffects depends on the brain state before and during stimulation. Early alpha neurofeedback research suggests that particularly in the alpha band the responsiveness to a manipulation depends on the ambient illumination during measurement. Therefore, in the present study we assessed the brain's susceptibility to tACS at the individual alpha frequency during darkness compared to ambient illumination. We measured alpha power after 10 min of stimulation in 30 participants while they continuously performed a visual vigilance task. Our results show that immediately after stimulation, the alpha power in the illumination condition for both the stimulated and sham group has increased by only about 7%, compared to about 20% in both groups in the 'dark' condition. For the group that did not receive stimulation, the power in darkness remained stable after stimulation, whereas the power in light increased by an additional 10% during the next 30 min. For the group that did receive stimulation, alpha power during these 30 min increased by another 11% in light and 22% in darkness. Since alpha power already increased by about 10% without stimulation, the effect of illumination does not seem to have interacted with the effect of stimulation. Instead, both effects seem to have added up linearly. Although our findings do not show that illumination-induced differences in oscillatory activity influence the susceptibility toward tACS, they stress the importance of controlling for factors like ambient light that might add an independent increase or decrease to the power of brain oscillations during periods, where possible persistent effects of stimulation are explored. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 92 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 | 90 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 18% |
| Researcher | 15 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 14% |
| Unknown | 22 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 27 | 29% |
| Psychology | 17 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 4% |
| Engineering | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 3% |
| Unknown | 33 | 36% |
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 15 June 2017.
All research outputs
#14,344,573
of 22,968,808 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#4,593
of 7,181 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#175,224
of 313,766 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#145
of 193 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,968,808 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,181 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 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 313,766 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 193 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.