The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 |
I Am as Incompetent as the Prototypical Group Member: An Investigation of Naturally Occurring Golem Effects in Work Groups
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, September 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01581 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alex Leung, Thomas Sy |
| Abstract |
Over four decades, research has demonstrated Pygmalion and Galatea effects (positive expectations leading to high performance) across various settings. In contrast, research on the parallel notion of Golem effects (negative expectations leading to low performance) has been largely overlooked. This study is the first to examine the relationship between group-level Implicit Followership Theories (GIFTs) and naturally occurring Golem effects. Integrating the literature on Implicit Followership Theories, self-fulfilling prophecies, and social identity, we propose that negative GIFTs can serve as proxies of expectations for followers that trigger Golem effects in workgroups. Data from 202 followers and 101 leaders provide support for our hypothesized multi-level model, revealing a top-down relationship between negative GIFTs and follower performance through their self-efficacy and effort. Findings highlight the importance of GIFTs in the Golem process, showing that followers' cognitions and behaviors are shaped by the group's prototypical attributes. Suggestions for future research are offered, including interpersonal Golem effects, negative GIFTs and negative outcomes, and influence of organizational culture. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
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 > Master | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Unknown | 16 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Business, Management and Accounting | 7 | 19% |
| Psychology | 4 | 11% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 16 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 28 July 2022.
All research outputs
#2,266,681
of 22,979,862 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#4,431
of 30,150 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,773
of 337,224 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#149
of 753 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,979,862 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,150 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 done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 337,224 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 753 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.