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 |
Single-Session Attention Bias Modification Training in Victims of Work-Related Accidents
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, September 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01619 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Giulia Buodo, Elisabetta Patron, Simone Messerotti Benvenuti, Daniela Palomba |
| Abstract |
Individuals who experienced traumatic work-related accidents frequently show cognitive deficits and biased processing of trauma-relevant information, which, in turn, could increase the risk of further accidents. The attention bias modification training (ABMT) is designed to reduce hypervigilance toward and enhance attentional disengagement from threat stimuli. The aim of the present study was to assess whether it is possible to implicitly reduce the attentional bias toward trauma-related stimuli through a single session of ABMT in individuals who experienced a traumatic occupational accident. Nineteen individuals who had experienced a traumatic work-related accident and 11 workers who never experienced a work accident (control group) underwent a preliminary assessment of cognitive performance (executive functions and sustained attention) and an evaluation of the attentional bias toward accident-related pictures by means of a dot-probe task. The results showed that injured workers performed more poorly than controls in tasks of executive functions and concentration abilities. Also, injured workers showed an attentional bias toward trauma reminders (i.e., faster reaction times to probes replacing trauma-related pictures). Injured workers were then randomly allocated to a single-session of ABMT (N = 10) or to an Attention Control Condition (ACC; N = 9). After the training, the dot-probe task was administered again to assess changes in the attentional bias toward trauma-relevant pictures. Injured workers who underwent the ABMT, but not those who underwent the ACC, showed a significant reduction of the attentional bias from pre- to post-training. Overall, these results support previous findings reporting an association between traumatic occupational accidents and cognitive dysfunctions. More importantly, these preliminary findings add to a growing body of evidence suggesting the effectiveness of a short ABMT in reducing the attentional bias after a traumatic workplace accident. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| India | 1 | 17% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 43 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 14% |
| Researcher | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Unknown | 19 | 44% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 14 | 33% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 5% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 2% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 2% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 22 | 51% |
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 18 May 2020.
All research outputs
#13,624,398
of 23,099,576 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#13,572
of 30,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,163
of 335,376 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#418
of 737 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,099,576 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,499 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 53% 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 335,376 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 737 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.