The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 32 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.
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 |
Rationality and the illusion of choice
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00104 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jonathan St. B. T. Evans |
| Abstract |
The psychology of reasoning and decision making (RDM) shares the methodology of cognitive psychology in that researchers assume that participants are doing their best to solve the problems according to the instruction. Unlike other cognitive researchers, however, they often view erroneous answers evidence of irrationality rather than limited efficiency in the cognitive systems studied. Philosophers and psychologists also talk of people being irrational in a special sense that does not apply to other animals, who are seen as having no choice in their own behavior. I argue here that (a) RDM is no different from other fields of cognitive psychology and should be subject to the same kind of scientific inferences, and (b) the special human sense of irrationality derives from folk psychology and the illusory belief that there are conscious people in charge of their minds and decisions. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 7 | 22% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 6% |
| Norway | 1 | 3% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 3% |
| Italy | 1 | 3% |
| Comoros | 1 | 3% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 3% |
| Mexico | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 17 | 53% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 22 | 69% |
| Scientists | 7 | 22% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 6% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 3% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 1% |
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Italy | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 71 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 21 | 27% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 9% |
| Researcher | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 15 | 19% |
| Unknown | 11 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 29 | 38% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 6 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 15 | 19% |
| Unknown | 12 | 16% |
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 26 July 2022.
All research outputs
#2,041,996
of 26,198,325 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#4,185
of 35,079 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,053
of 322,267 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#34
of 181 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,198,325 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 35,079 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.7. 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 322,267 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 181 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.