↓ Skip to main content

Informal coercion as a neglected form of communication in psychiatric settings in Germany and Switzerland

Overview of attention for article published in Psychiatry Research, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 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
Informal coercion as a neglected form of communication in psychiatric settings in Germany and Switzerland
Published in
Psychiatry Research, September 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.psychres.2017.09.014
Pubmed ID
Authors

Timon Elmer, Franziska Rabenschlag, Dominik Schori, Gianfranco Zuaboni, Bernd Kozel, Susanne Jaeger, Candelaria Mahlke, Kolja Heumann, Anastasia Theodoridou, Matthias Jaeger

Abstract

Informal coercion is a frequently used form of communication among mental health professionals to influence treatment outcomes. This study investigates the recognition, attitude, and application of different forms of informal coercion by mental health professionals. Mental health professionals of five psychiatric institutions in Germany and Switzerland (n = 424) took part in an online survey assessing the recognition of, attitudes towards, and application of different forms of informal coercion. Mental health professionals did not recognize the extent of informal coercion adequately; especially stronger forms were underestimated. Recognition and application of informal coercion was predicted by attitudes towards coercion. Furthermore, there were differences between profession of participants regarding the recognition and application of informal coercion. It is important to realize that the extent of applied informal coercion in therapeutic communication is often not recognized by practitioners, although it might interfere with a sound therapeutic relationship.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 41 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 22%
Student > Bachelor 6 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Researcher 3 7%
Other 8 20%
Unknown 8 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 17%
Psychology 7 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 15%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 7%
Arts and Humanities 3 7%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 9 22%
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 28 September 2017.
All research outputs
#14,477,297
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Psychiatry Research
#3,540
of 7,588 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,321
of 323,227 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychiatry Research
#65
of 191 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,588 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. 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 323,227 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 191 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 65% of its contemporaries.