The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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.
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 |
Computer Mediated Social Comparative Feedback Does Not Affect Metacognitive Regulation of Memory Reports
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01433 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Joanne Rechdan, James D. Sauer, Lorraine Hope, Melanie Sauerland, James Ost, Harald Merckelbach |
| Abstract |
In two experiments, we investigated how social comparative feedback affects the metacognitive regulation of eyewitness memory reports. In Experiment 1, 87 participants received negative, positive, or no feedback about a co-witness's performance on a task querying recall of a crime video. Participants then completed the task individually. There were no significant differences between negative and positive feedback groups on any measure. However, participants in both of these conditions volunteered more fine-grain details than participants in the control condition. In Experiment 2, 90 participants answered questions about a crime video. Participants in the experimental groups received either positive or negative feedback, which compared their performance to that of others. Participants then completed a subsequent recall task, for which they were told their performance would not be scored. Feedback did not significantly affect participants' confidence, accuracy, or the level of detail they reported in comparison to a no feedback control group. These findings advance our understanding of the boundary conditions for social feedback effects on meta-memory. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 33% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Scientists | 2 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 14 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 14% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 7% |
| Researcher | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 14% |
| Unknown | 4 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 6 | 43% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 7% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 7% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 4 | 29% |
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 25 August 2017.
All research outputs
#7,731,121
of 23,655,983 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#11,164
of 31,547 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,137
of 317,562 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#306
of 590 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,655,983 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 31,547 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 317,562 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 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 590 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.