↓ Skip to main content

On Elementary Affective Decisions: To Like Or Not to Like, That Is the Question

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 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
On Elementary Affective Decisions: To Like Or Not to Like, That Is the Question
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, November 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01836
Pubmed ID
Authors

Arthur Jacobs, Markus J. Hofmann, Annette Kinder

Abstract

Perhaps the most ubiquitous and basic affective decision of daily life is deciding whether we like or dislike something/somebody, or, in terms of psychological emotion theories, whether the object/subject has positive or negative valence. Indeed, people constantly make such liking decisions within a glimpse and, importantly, often without expecting any obvious benefit or knowing the exact reasons for their judgment. In this paper, we review research on such elementary affective decisions (EADs) that entail no direct overt reward with a special focus on Neurocognitive Poetics and discuss methods and models for investigating the neuronal and cognitive-affective bases of EADs to verbal materials with differing degrees of complexity. In line with evolutionary and appraisal theories of (aesthetic) emotions and data from recent neurocognitive studies, the results of a decision tree modeling approach simulating EADs to single words suggest that a main driving force behind EADs is the extent to which such high-dimensional stimuli are associated with the "basic" emotions joy/happiness and disgust.

X Demographics

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 43 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 24%
Researcher 9 20%
Student > Master 7 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Professor 2 4%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 9 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 35%
Neuroscience 5 11%
Linguistics 4 9%
Social Sciences 3 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 4%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 10 22%
Attention Score in Context

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 23 December 2016.
All research outputs
#17,825,154
of 22,899,952 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#20,603
of 30,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#286,309
of 415,130 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#313
of 420 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,899,952 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,036 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 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 415,130 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 420 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.