↓ Skip to main content

Mental Health Problems in Adolescence and the Interpretation of Unambiguous Threat

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Mental Health Problems in Adolescence and the Interpretation of Unambiguous Threat
Published in
PLOS ONE, June 2015
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0127167
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julie D. Henry, Ernestina Moses, Julieta Castellini, James Scott

Abstract

Aberrant threat perception has been linked to paranoia, anxiety and other mental health problems, and is widely considered to be a core, transdiagnostic feature of psychopathology. However, to date there has been only limited investigation of whether mental health problems are associated with a biased interpretation of stimuli that have explicit (as opposed to ambiguous) connotations of threat. In the present study, 41 adolescents diagnosed with a mental illness and 45 demographically matched controls were asked to provide danger ratings of stimuli normatively rated as being either low or high in potential threat. All participants were also asked to complete background measures of cognitive function, mental health and wellbeing. The results indicated that the two groups did not differ in their capacity to discriminate between low and high threat stimuli, nor did they differ in the absolute level of threat that they attributed to these stimuli. However, for the control group, the overall level of threat perceived in facial stimuli was correlated with two important indices of mental health (depression and anxiety). No associations emerged in the clinical group. These data are discussed in relation to their potential implications for the role of aberrant threat perception in transdiagnostic models of mental health.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 68 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 13%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Researcher 6 9%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 16 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 29 42%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 9%
Social Sciences 4 6%
Linguistics 1 1%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 18 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 04 June 2015.
All research outputs
#15,867,545
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#138,034
of 202,084 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,953
of 268,596 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#4,309
of 6,837 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 202,084 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 268,596 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6,837 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.