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 |
Expected Hierarchical Integration Reduces Perceptions of a Low Status Group as Less Competent than a High Status Group While Maintaining the Same Level of Perception of Warmth
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.02068 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jianning Dang, Li Liu, Yuan Liang, Deyun Ren |
| Abstract |
The compensation effect, namely people's tendency to judge one group more positively on some dimensions and the other group more positively on other dimensions, has been validated using real social categories and experimentally created groups. However, less attention has been paid to whether and how changes in social structure affect the emergence of the compensation effect. The present research first replicated the compensation effect using Chinese participants (Study 1). Then, two studies were conducted to examine the effects of group boundary permeability (Study 2) and the legitimacy of the social hierarchy (Study 3) on the emergence of the compensation effect. The results demonstrated that the compensation effect was more likely to emerge when the group boundary was impermeable and when the social hierarchy was legitimate. The implications of these findings and the effect of social change on intergroup perception are discussed. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 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 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 16 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 38% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 13% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 6% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 5 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 6 | 38% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 19% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 5 | 31% |
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 24 December 2016.
All research outputs
#20,370,282
of 22,919,505 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#24,273
of 30,067 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#356,218
of 421,158 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#353
of 414 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,919,505 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,067 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 421,158 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 414 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.