The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 |
Measurements of Rationality: Individual Differences in Information Processing, the Transitivity of Preferences and Decision Strategies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01844 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Patrycja Sleboda, Joanna Sokolowska |
| Abstract |
The first goal of this study was to validate the Rational-Experiential Inventory (REI) and the Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) through checking their relation to the transitivity axiom. The second goal was to test the relation between decision strategies and cognitive style as well as the relation between decision strategies and the transitivity of preferences. The following characteristics of strategies were investigated: requirements for trade-offs, maximization vs. satisficing and option-wise vs. attribute-wise information processing. Respondents were given choices between two multi-attribute options. The options were designed so that the choice indicated which strategy was applied. Both the REI-R and the CRT were found to be good predictors of the transitivity of preferences. Respondents who applied compensatory strategies and the maximization criterion scored highly on the REI-R and in the CRT, whereas those who applied the satisficing rule scored highly on the REI-R but not in the CRT. Attribute-wise information processing was related to low scores in both measurements. Option-wise information processing led to a high transitivity of preferences. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 37 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 16% |
| Researcher | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 14% |
| Professor | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 8 | 22% |
| Unknown | 6 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 12 | 32% |
| Decision Sciences | 6 | 16% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 14% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 8% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 9 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 October 2017.
All research outputs
#16,906,795
of 25,637,545 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#18,196
of 34,719 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#204,835
of 337,399 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#430
of 610 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,637,545 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,719 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 337,399 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 610 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.