Lars E. Olsson, Tommy Gärling, Dick Ettema, Margareta Friman, Michael Ståhl
Abstract
Events in a sequence may each be evaluated as good or bad. We propose that such good-bad evaluations evoke emotional responses that change current mood. A model of recurrent updating of current mood is developed and compared to a model of how a sequence of events evoking emotional responses is evaluated retrospectively. In Experiment 1, 149 undergraduates are presented sequences of lottery outcomes with a fixed probability of losing or winning different amounts of money. Ratings of current mood are made after the sequence. Retrospective evaluations are either made after the ratings of current mood or, in a control condition, when no ratings of current mood are made. The results show an expected effect on current mood of the valence of the end of the sequence. The results are less clear in showing an expected beginning effect on the retrospective evaluations. An expected beginning effect on retrospective evaluations is found in Experiment 2 in which 41 undergraduates are first asked to remember the different amounts of money, then to evaluate the sequence as lottery outcomes.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 12 January 2017.
All research outputs
#12,884,160
of 22,931,367 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#11,738
of 30,074 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#196,880
of 418,717 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#241
of 433 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,931,367 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,074 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 60% 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 418,717 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 433 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
