↓ Skip to main content

fNIRS: An Emergent Method to Document Functional Cortical Activity during Infant Movements

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 Mendeley
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.
Title
fNIRS: An Emergent Method to Document Functional Cortical Activity during Infant Movements
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, April 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00533
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ryota Nishiyori

Abstract

The neural basis underlying the emergence of goal-directed actions in infants has been severely understudied, with minimal empirical evidence for hypotheses proposed. This was largely due to the technological constraints of traditional neuroimaging techniques. Recently, functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) technology has emerged as a tool developmental scientists are finding useful to examine cortical activity, particularly in young children and infants due to its greater tolerance to movements than other neuroimaging techniques. fNIRS provides an opportunity to finally begin to examine the neural underpinnings as infants develop goal-directed actions. In this methodological paper, I will outline the utility, challenges, and outcomes of using fNIRS to measure the changes in cortical activity as infants reach for an object. I will describe the advantages and limitations of the technology, the setup I used to study primary motor cortex activity during infant reaching, and example steps in the analyses processes. I will present exemplar data to illustrate the feasibility of this technique to quantify changes in hemodynamic activity as infants move. The viability of this research method opens the door to expanding studies of the development of neural activity related to goal-directed actions in infants. I encourage others to share details of techniques used, as well, including analyticals, to help this neuroimaging technology grow as others, such as EEG and fMRI have.

X Demographics

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 99 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 23%
Student > Master 14 14%
Student > Bachelor 14 14%
Researcher 13 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 16 16%
Unknown 13 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 24 24%
Neuroscience 18 18%
Engineering 12 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 6%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 17 17%
Attention Score in Context

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 June 2016.
All research outputs
#18,449,393
of 22,858,915 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,223
of 29,902 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,091
of 299,327 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#363
of 430 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,858,915 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 29,902 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 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 299,327 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 430 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.