↓ Skip to main content

Truth, control, and value motivations: the “what,” “how,” and “why” of approach and avoidance

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, October 2014
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 (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 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
Truth, control, and value motivations: the “what,” “how,” and “why” of approach and avoidance
Published in
Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, October 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnsys.2014.00194
Pubmed ID
Authors

James F. M. Cornwell, Becca Franks, E. Tory Higgins

Abstract

The hedonic principle-the desire to approach pleasure and avoid pain-is frequently presumed to be the fundamental principle upon which motivation is built. In the past few decades, researchers have enriched our understanding of how approaching pleasure and avoiding pain differ from each other. However, more recent empirical and theoretical work delineating the principles of motivation in humans and non-human animals has shown that not only can approach/avoidance motivations themselves be further distinguished into promotion approach/avoidance and prevention approach/avoidance, but that approaching pleasure and avoiding pain requires the functioning of additional distinct motivations-the motivation to establish what is real (truth) and the motivation to manage what happens (control). Considering these additional motivations in the context of moral psychology and animal welfare science suggests that these less-examined motives may themselves be fundamental to a comprehensive understanding of motivation, with major implications for the study of the "what," "how," and "why" of human and non-human approach and avoidance behavior.

X Demographics

X Demographics

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.
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 %
United Kingdom 2 2%
Switzerland 1 1%
Unknown 96 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 20%
Student > Master 17 17%
Researcher 14 14%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Other 19 19%
Unknown 15 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 43 43%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 12%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 3%
Linguistics 2 2%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 25 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 11 May 2018.
All research outputs
#1,341,195
of 22,769,322 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
#102
of 1,341 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,382
of 255,840 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
#8
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,769,322 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,341 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 255,840 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.