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 |
Risky decision-making is associated with residential choice in healthy older adults
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01192 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kendra L. Seaman, Chelsea M. Stillman, Darlene V. Howard, James H. Howard |
| Abstract |
As our society becomes more mobile and people reside farther away from their immediate families, competent decision-making has become critical for the older adults wishing to maintain their independence. However, very little is known about the relationship between residential choice and decision-making. Here we use the Balloon Analog Risk Task (BART) to examine risk-taking in two samples of older adults, one living in a retirement community and another living independently. We also used a cognitive model to gain insight into the cognitive factors underlying decision-making in these groups. We found that older adults living in a retirement community were more risk averse than their independent counterparts. Furthermore, this difference appeared to be motivated by group differences in initial perception of risk. This study suggests an intriguing difference between these two residential groups, and also points to the utility of using laboratory methods in research on real-world problems. |
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 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 22 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 17% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 9% |
| Researcher | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Unknown | 6 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 8 | 35% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 9% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 8 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 August 2015.
All research outputs
#18,422,065
of 22,821,814 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,149
of 29,780 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#190,419
of 264,425 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#460
of 558 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,821,814 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,780 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 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 264,425 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 558 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.