↓ Skip to main content

The psychology of volition

Overview of attention for article published in Experimental Brain Research, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
63 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
218 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
The psychology of volition
Published in
Experimental Brain Research, January 2013
DOI 10.1007/s00221-013-3407-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chris Frith

Abstract

Volition can be studied from two perspectives. From the third-person view, volitional behaviour is internally generated, rather than being determined by the immediate environmental context, and is therefore, to some extent, unpredictable. Such behaviour is not unique to humans, since it is seen in many other species including invertebrates. From the first-person view, our experience of volitional behaviour includes a vivid sense of agency. We feel that, through our intentions, we can cause things to happen and we can choose between different actions. Our experience of agency is not direct. It depends on sub-personal inferences derived from prior expectations and sensations associated with movement. As a result, our experiences and intuitions about volition can be unreliable and uncertain. Nevertheless, our experience of agency is not a mere epiphenomenon. Anticipation of the regret we might feel after making the wrong choice can alter behaviour. Furthermore, the strong sense of responsibility, associated with agency, has a critical role in creating social cohesion and group benefits. We can only study the experience of agency in humans who can describe their experiences. The discussion of the experience of volition, that introspection and communication make possible, can change our experience of volitional actions. As a result, agency, regret and responsibility are cultural phenomena that are unique to humans.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 218 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 <1%
United States 2 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Unknown 209 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 43 20%
Researcher 35 16%
Student > Master 24 11%
Student > Bachelor 15 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 6%
Other 48 22%
Unknown 41 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 76 35%
Neuroscience 30 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 4%
Linguistics 7 3%
Other 38 17%
Unknown 47 22%
Attention Score in Context

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 December 2020.
All research outputs
#7,851,563
of 25,145,981 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#840
of 3,400 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,399
of 293,625 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#8
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,145,981 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 3,400 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 293,625 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.