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.
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 |
Control Group Paradigms in Studies Investigating Acute Effects of Exercise on Cognitive Performance–An Experiment on Expectation-Driven Placebo Effects
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2017.00600 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Max Oberste, Philipp Hartig, Wilhelm Bloch, Benjamin Elsner, Hans-Georg Predel, Bernhard Ernst, Philipp Zimmer |
| Abstract |
Introduction: Many studies report improvements in cognitive performance following acute endurance exercise compared to control group treatment. These cognitive benefits are interpreted as a result of a physiological response to exercise. However, it was also hypothesized that expectation-driven placebo effects account for these positive effects. The purpose of this study was to investigate the differences between expectations for cognitive benefits toward acute endurance exercise and multiple control group treatments. Methods: Healthy individuals (N = 247, 24.26 ± 3.88 years) were randomized to eight different groups watching videos of a moderate, a vigorous exercise treatment or one control group treatment (waiting, reading, video-watching, stretching, myofascial release workout, and very light exercise). Then, they were introduced to three commonly used cognitive test procedures in acute exercise-cognition research (Stroop-test, Trail-Making-test, Free-recall-task). Participants rated the effect they would expect on their performance in those tasks, if they had received the treatment shortly before the task, on an 11-point Likert scale. Results: No significantly different expectations for cognitive benefits toward acute moderate exercise and control group treatments could be revealed. Participants expected significantly worse performance following vigorous exercise compared to following waiting and stretching for all cognitive tests. Significantly worse performance after vigorous exercise compared to after very light exercise was expected for Stroop and Free-recall. For Free-recall, participants expected worse performance after vigorous exercise compared to myofascial release training as well. Conclusion: Our results indicate that expectation-driven placebo effects are unlikely to cause the reported greater cognitive improvements following acute moderate and vigorous endurance exercise compared to following common control group treatments. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 20% |
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 60 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 15% |
| Researcher | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 13% |
| Unknown | 18 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 7 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 10% |
| Sports and Recreations | 6 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 18% |
| Unknown | 21 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 21 December 2017.
All research outputs
#13,498,925
of 23,008,860 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#3,994
of 7,190 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#215,007
of 439,751 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#91
of 157 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,008,860 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,190 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 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 439,751 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 157 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.