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 |
Effects of a 7-Day Meditation Retreat on the Brain Function of Meditators and Non-Meditators During an Attention Task
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2018.00222 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elisa H. Kozasa, Joana B. Balardin, João Ricardo Sato, Khallil Taverna Chaim, Shirley S. Lacerda, João Radvany, Luiz Eugênio A. M. Mello, Edson Amaro |
| Abstract |
Meditation as a cognitive enhancement technique is of growing interest in the field of health and research on brain function. The Stroop Word-Color Task (SWCT) has been adapted for neuroimaging studies as an interesting paradigm for the understanding of cognitive control mechanisms. Performance in the SWCT requires both attention and impulse control, which is trained in meditation practices. We presented SWCT inside the MRI equipment to measure the performance of meditators compared with non-meditators before and after a meditation retreat. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of a 7-day Zen intensive meditation training (a retreat) on meditators and non-meditators in this task on performance level and neural mechanisms. Nineteen meditators and 14 non-meditators were scanned before and after a 7-day Zen meditation retreat. No significant differences were found between meditators and non-meditators in the number of the correct responses and response time (RT) during SWCT before and after the retreat. Probably, due to meditators training in attention, their brain activity in the contrast incongruent > neutral during the SWCT in the anterior cingulate, ventromedial prefrontal cortex/anterior cingulate, caudate/putamen/pallidum/temporal lobe (center), insula/putamen/temporal lobe (right) and posterior cingulate before the retreat, were reduced compared with non-meditators. After the meditation retreat, non-meditators had reduced activation in these regions, becoming similar to meditators before the retreat. This result could be interpreted as an increase in the brain efficiency of non-meditators (less brain activation in attention-related regions and same behavioral response) promoted by their intensive training in meditation in only 7 days. On the other hand, meditators showed an increase in brain activation in these regions after the same training. Intensive meditation training (retreat) presented distinct effects on the attention-related regions in meditators and non-meditators probably due to differences in expertise, attention processing as well as neuroplasticity. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 8% |
| Canada | 1 | 8% |
| France | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 10 | 77% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 85% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 15% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 103 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 16 | 16% |
| Unknown | 25 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 29 | 28% |
| Neuroscience | 20 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 4% |
| Sports and Recreations | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 10 | 10% |
| Unknown | 29 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 71. 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 June 2024.
All research outputs
#627,719
of 26,192,167 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#274
of 7,805 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,271
of 344,162 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#2
of 133 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,192,167 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,805 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
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 344,162 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 133 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.