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.
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 |
Impulsivity links reward and threat sensitivities to substance use: a functional model
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01194 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
George B. Richardson, Jonathan M. Freedlander, Elizabeth C. Katz, Chia-Liang Dai, Ching-Chen Chen |
| Abstract |
This study used structural equations modeling and undergraduate student data to examine the effects of reward and threat sensitivities on substance use, along with the extent to which impulsivity explained these effects. Our results suggest that impulsivity may translate inversely related reward and threat sensitivities into substance use, completely mediate the effect between threat sensitivity and substance use, and partially mediate the effect between reward sensitivity and substance use. Our results also suggest that individuals with a combination of higher levels on both reward and threat sensitivities may be most impulsive and vulnerable to heightened substance use. We discuss implications for research at the interface of personality and substance use and also substance abuse prevention and treatment. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 28 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Unknown | 5 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 13 | 46% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 7% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 06 February 2018.
All research outputs
#14,788,263
of 22,768,097 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#16,062
of 29,681 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#143,800
of 260,282 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#288
of 380 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,768,097 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,681 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 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 260,282 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 380 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.