↓ Skip to main content

Inconsistencies in the drawing and interpretation of smiley faces: an observational study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, January 2018
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 (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
18 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
9 Mendeley
Title
Inconsistencies in the drawing and interpretation of smiley faces: an observational study
Published in
BMC Research Notes, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13104-018-3185-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mike Clarke, Helen McAneney, Fiona Chan, Lisa Maguire

Abstract

Pre-prepared smiley face symbols are used widely to gather information on, for example, satisfaction with services or health and well-being. We investigated how women and men of different ages respond when asked to draw a smiley face for themselves. Our objectives were to investigate how they differ by generating a unique set of data to explore this simple human behaviour and to illustrate the importance of considering gender and age mix in any study. We collected 723 drawings, in a variety of settings. Gender and age were provided for 676 drawings (women: 511; men: 165; ≤ 30 years: 335; > 30 years: 341). Although similar proportions of women and men drew some features, such as closed mouths; women and those aged ≤ 30 were less likely to draw noses and outlines around the faces, and more likely to draw a classic smiley face. Our analyses provide a novel way to highlight that whenever self-reported outcomes are compared between groups, the group composition for characteristics such as gender and age may need to be considered carefully to explore whether differences in outcomes might simply arise from imbalances in those characteristics.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 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 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 9 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 2 22%
Student > Bachelor 1 11%
Lecturer 1 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 11%
Student > Master 1 11%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 2 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 11%
Psychology 1 11%
Neuroscience 1 11%
Design 1 11%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 27 November 2023.
All research outputs
#1,854,670
of 24,880,704 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#217
of 4,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,088
of 451,888 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#10
of 127 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,880,704 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,468 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 451,888 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 127 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.