The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 |
Frequency-Unspecific Effects of θ-tACS Related to a Visuospatial Working Memory Task
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2017.00367 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Maria-Lisa Kleinert, Caroline Szymanski, Viktor Müller |
| Abstract |
Working memory (WM) is crucial for intelligent cognitive functioning, and synchronization phenomena in the fronto-parietal network have been suggested as an underlying neural mechanism. In an attempt to provide causal evidence for this assumption, we applied transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) at theta frequency over fronto-parietal sites during a visuospatial match-to-sample (MtS) task. Depending on the stimulation protocol, i.e., in-phase, anti-phase or sham, we anticipated a differential impact of tACS on behavioral WM performance as well as on the EEG (electroencephalography) during resting state before and after stimulation. We hypothesized that in-phase tACS of the fronto-parietal theta network (stimulation frequency: 5 Hz; intensity: 1 mA peak-to-peak) would result in performance enhancement, whereas anti-phase tACS would cause performance impairment. Eighteen participants (nine female) received in-phase, anti-phase, and sham stimulation in balanced order. While being stimulated, subjects performed the MtS task, which varied in executive demand (two levels: low and high). EEG analysis of power peaks within the delta (0.5-4 Hz), theta (4-8 Hz), alpha (8-12 Hz), and beta (12-30 Hz) frequency bands was carried out. No significant differences were observed between in-phase and anti-phase stimulation regarding both behavioral and EEG measurements. Yet, with regard to the alpha frequency band, we observed a statistically significant drop of peak power from pre to post in the sham condition, whereas alpha power remained on a similar level in the actively stimulated conditions. Our results indicate a frequency-unspecific modulation of neuronal oscillations by tACS. However, the closer participants' individual theta peak frequencies were to the stimulation frequency of 5 Hz after anti-phase tACS, the faster they responded in the MtS task. This effect did not reach statistical significance during in-phase tACS and was not present during sham. A lack of statistically significant behavioral results in the MtS task and frequency-unspecific effects on the electrophysiological level question the effectiveness of tACS in modulating cortical oscillations in a frequency-specific manner. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 139 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 139 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 25 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 21 | 15% |
| Researcher | 19 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 10% |
| Other | 16 | 12% |
| Unknown | 30 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 40 | 29% |
| Neuroscience | 29 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 6 | 4% |
| Engineering | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 7% |
| Unknown | 42 | 30% |
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 22 July 2017.
All research outputs
#18,556,449
of 22,982,639 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#6,087
of 7,182 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#239,300
of 312,615 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#139
of 151 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,982,639 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,182 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 8th percentile – i.e., 8% 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 312,615 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 151 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.