| Title |
Physiological threat responses predict number processing
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Psychological Research, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00426-015-0719-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Annika Scholl, Korbinian Moeller, Daan Scheepers, Hans-Christoph Nuerk, Kai Sassenberg |
| Abstract |
Being able to adequately process numbers is a key competency in everyday life. Yet, self-reported negative affective responses towards numbers are known to deteriorate numerical performance. Here, we investigated how physiological threat responses predict numerical performance. Physiological responses reflect whether individuals evaluate a task as exceeding or matching their resources and in turn experience either threat or challenge, which influences subsequent performance. We hypothesized that, the more individuals respond to a numerical task with physiological threat, the worse they would perform. Results of an experiment with cardiovascular indicators of threat/challenge corroborated this expectation. The findings thereby contribute to our understanding of the physiological mechanism underlying the influence of negative affective responses towards numbers on numerical performance. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 35 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 17% |
| Researcher | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 11% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 17% |
| Unknown | 7 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 12 | 34% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 12 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 19 February 2017.
All research outputs
#13,887,613
of 23,018,998 outputs
Outputs from Psychological Research
#441
of 972 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#140,737
of 285,245 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychological Research
#8
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,018,998 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 972 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 285,245 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.