↓ Skip to main content

Culture meets collective action: Exciting synergies and some lessons to learn for the future

Overview of attention for article published in Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 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
Culture meets collective action: Exciting synergies and some lessons to learn for the future
Published in
Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, May 2017
DOI 10.1177/1368430217690238
Pubmed ID
Authors

Martijn van Zomeren, Winnifred R. Louis

Abstract

In this introduction to the special issue of Group Processes & Intergroup Relations on "Culture and Collective Action" we emphasize the importance of the special issue topic for the development of the field. Specifically, we highlight the globalization of collective action and the internationalization of the social-psychological study of collective action, both of which point to culture as a missing link for this field. We thus propose that the next step is to move toward a proper cultural psychology of collective action-a social psychology in which culture is an integral part. This special issue provides a first step toward such a broad and integrative psychological understanding of collective action, but comes with promises as well as problems. We discuss both the exciting synergies and some lessons to learn for the future, and conclude that a focus on culture will facilitate the development of the rich and fascinating field of the social psychology of collective action.

X Demographics

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 63 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 16%
Student > Master 10 16%
Student > Bachelor 6 10%
Researcher 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Other 15 24%
Unknown 12 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 30 48%
Social Sciences 10 16%
Unspecified 1 2%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 13 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 03 July 2017.
All research outputs
#8,740,777
of 25,874,560 outputs
Outputs from Group Processes & Intergroup Relations
#531
of 888 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#127,397
of 328,365 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Group Processes & Intergroup Relations
#5
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,874,560 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 888 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.1. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 328,365 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.