↓ Skip to main content

Bridging Exercise Science, Cognitive Psychology, and Medical Practice: Is “Cognitive Fatigue” a Remake of “The Emperor’s New Clothes”?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
14 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
68 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
174 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
Bridging Exercise Science, Cognitive Psychology, and Medical Practice: Is “Cognitive Fatigue” a Remake of “The Emperor’s New Clothes”?
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, September 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01246
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nathalie Pattyn, Jeroen Van Cutsem, Emilie Dessy, Olivier Mairesse

Abstract

Fatigue is such a multifaceted construct it has sprouted specific research fields and experts in domains as different as exercise physiology, cognitive psychology, human factors and engineering, and medical practice. It lacks a consensus definition: it is an experimental concept, a symptom, a risk, a cause (e.g., of performance decrement) and a consequence (e.g., of sleep deprivation). This fragmentation of knowledge leads to slower dissemination of novel insights, and thus to a poorer research. Indeed, what may seem as a novel result in one field, may very well be old news in another, hence leading to this "innovation" being a scientific equivalent to the emperor's new clothes. The current paper aims to describe the common denominator in the different areas of expertise where fatigue is investigated. Indeed, rather than focusing on the differences in semantics and conceptualization, we hope that identifying common concepts may be inductive of easier multidisciplinary research. Considering the vastness of fatigue research in all areas identified as relevant-cognitive science, exercise physiology, and medical practice, this analysis has not the ambition to be an exhaustive review in all domains. We have reviewed the fatigue concepts and research in these areas and report the ones that are used to describe the proposed common model to be further investigated. The most promising common feature to cognitive science, exercise physiology and clinical practice is the notion of "perceived effort." This allows to account for interindividual differences, as well as for the situational variations in fatigue. It is applicable to both mental and physical constructs. It integrates motivational and emotional dimensions. It overcomes current polemics in various research fields, and it does not draw on any semantic ambiguity. We thus suggest a new model of fatigue and performance, whether this performance is mental or physical; and whether it is in a clinical range or relates to optimal functioning.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 174 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 174 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 17%
Student > Bachelor 19 11%
Student > Master 17 10%
Researcher 12 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 5%
Other 24 14%
Unknown 64 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 31 18%
Psychology 24 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 7%
Neuroscience 9 5%
Engineering 8 5%
Other 19 11%
Unknown 71 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 October 2023.
All research outputs
#1,871,412
of 24,653,581 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#3,796
of 33,260 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,879
of 341,925 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#118
of 744 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,653,581 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,260 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 341,925 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 744 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.