The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 |
Epistemic motivation affects the processing of negative emotional stimuli in interpersonal decisions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01057 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zhenyu Wei, María Ruz, Zhiying Zhao, Yong Zheng |
| Abstract |
The present electrophysiological study investigated the role of the need for cognitive closure (NFC) in emotional processing. The NFC is conceptualized as an epistemic motive that is related to how and why people seek out information in social environments. Event-related potentials were recorded while individuals with high NFC (i.e., low epistemic motivation) or low NFC (i.e., high epistemic motivation) performed a modified Ultimatum Game, in which the emotions of happy or angry game agents were employed to predict their most likely offer. High-NFC participants more closely adhered to the decisions rules of the game than low-NFC individuals did. The electrophysiological results showed that the dispositional NFC modified early perceptual components (N170, N200, and P200). The potentials showed that high-NFC subjects had a processing bias to angry faces, whereas low-NFC individuals exhibited no such effects. These findings indicated that high-NFC individuals were more sensitive to negative emotional stimuli than low-NFC individuals in an interpersonal decision-making task. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 20 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 14% |
| Researcher | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 7 | 33% |
| Engineering | 2 | 10% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 10% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 8 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 29 September 2019.
All research outputs
#7,218,678
of 22,817,213 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#10,417
of 29,762 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,005
of 263,718 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#245
of 573 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,817,213 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,762 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 263,718 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 573 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.