The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 |
Two Aspects of Activation: Arousal and Subjective Significance – Behavioral and Event-Related Potential Correlates Investigated by Means of a Modified Emotional Stroop Task
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2017.00608 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kamil Imbir, Tomasz Spustek, Gabriela Bernatowicz, Joanna Duda, Jarosław Żygierewicz |
| Abstract |
The arousal level of words presented in a Stroop task was found to affect their interference on the required naming of the words' color. Based on a dual-processes approach, we propose that there are two aspects to activation: arousal and subjective significance. Arousal is crucial for automatic processing. Subjective significance is specific to controlled processing. Based on this conceptual model, we predicted that arousal would enhance interference in a Stroop task, as attention would be allocated to the meaning of the inhibited word. High subjective significance should have the opposite effect, i.e., it should enhance the controlled and explicit part of Stroop task processing, which is color naming. We found that response latencies were modulated by the interaction between the arousal and subjective significance levels of words. The longest reaction times were observed for highly arousing words of medium subjective significance level. Arousal shaped event related potentials in the 150-290 ms time range, while effects of subjective significance were found for 50-150, 150-290, and 290-530 ms time ranges. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 44 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 16% |
| Researcher | 5 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Unknown | 16 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 16 | 36% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 9% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 2% |
| Linguistics | 1 | 2% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Unknown | 18 | 41% |
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 26 December 2017.
All research outputs
#16,048,407
of 25,466,764 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#4,797
of 7,706 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#249,545
of 444,346 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#112
of 158 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,466,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,706 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 444,346 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 158 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.