↓ Skip to main content

The ‘Real-World Approach’ and Its Problems: A Critique of the Term Ecological Validity

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, April 2020
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
16 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
181 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
361 Mendeley
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.
Title
The ‘Real-World Approach’ and Its Problems: A Critique of the Term Ecological Validity
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, April 2020
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00721
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gijs A. Holleman, Ignace T. C. Hooge, Chantal Kemner, Roy S. Hessels

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 361 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 361 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 65 18%
Student > Master 41 11%
Researcher 34 9%
Student > Bachelor 27 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 18 5%
Other 46 13%
Unknown 130 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 87 24%
Neuroscience 20 6%
Engineering 16 4%
Social Sciences 14 4%
Computer Science 10 3%
Other 65 18%
Unknown 149 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 11 August 2024.
All research outputs
#1,791,448
of 26,559,802 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#3,715
of 35,503 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,053
of 412,943 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#91
of 633 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,559,802 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 35,503 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 412,943 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 633 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.