The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 |
Cortical responses elicited by luminance and compound stimuli modulated by pseudo-random sequences: comparison between normal trichromats and congenital red-green color blinds
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00053 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bárbara B. O. Risuenho, Letícia Miquilini, Eliza Maria C. B. Lacerda, Luiz Carlos L. Silveira, Givago S. Souza |
| Abstract |
Conventional pattern-reversal visual evoked cortical potential (VECP) shows positivity for luminance and chromatic equiluminant stimuli while conventional pattern-onset VECP shows positivity for luminance pattern-onset and negativity for chromatic pattern-onset. We evaluated how the presentation mode affects VECPs elicited by luminance and compound (luminance plus chromatic) pseudo-random stimulation. Eleven normal trichromats and 17 red-green color-blinds were studied. Pattern-reversal and pattern-onset luminance and compound (luminance plus red-green) gratings were temporally modulated by m-sequence. We used a cross-correlation routine to extract the first order kernel (K1) and the first and second slices of the second order kernel (K2.1 and K2.2, respectively) from the VECP response. We integrated the amplitude of VECP components as a function of time in order to estimate its magnitude for each stimulus condition. We also used a normalized cross-correlation method in order to test the similarity of the VECP components. The VECP components varied with the presentation mode and the presence of red-green contrast in the stimuli. In trichromats, for compound conditions, pattern-onset K1, K2.1, and K2.2, and pattern-reversal K2.1 and K2.2 had negative-dominated waveforms at 100 ms. Small negativity or small positivity were observed in dichromats. Trichromats had larger VECP magnitude than color-blinds for compound pattern-onset K1 (with large variability across subjects), compound pattern-onset and pattern-reversal K2.1, and compound pattern-reversal K2.2. Trichromats and color-blinds had similar VECP amplitude for compound pattern-reversal K1 and compound pattern-onset K2.2, as well as for all luminance conditions. The cross-correlation analysis showed high similarity between waveforms of compound pattern-onset K2.1 and pattern-reversal K2.2 as well as pattern-reversal K2.1 and K2.2. We suggest that compound pattern-reversal K2.1 is an appropriate response to study red-green color-opponent activity. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 22 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 27% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 9% |
| Professor | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 8 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 5 | 23% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 14% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 8 | 36% |
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 28 January 2015.
All research outputs
#20,251,805
of 22,780,967 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#24,007
of 29,693 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#296,715
of 352,970 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#370
of 402 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,780,967 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,693 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 352,970 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 402 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.