↓ Skip to main content

The cold reading technique

Overview of attention for article published in Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, April 1988
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
14 Wikipedia pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
Title
The cold reading technique
Published in
Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, April 1988
DOI 10.1007/bf01961271
Pubmed ID
Authors

D. L. Dutton

Abstract

For many people, belief in the paranormal derives from personal experience of face-to-face interviews with astrologers, palm readers, aura and Tarot readers, and spirit mediums. These encounters typically involve cold reading, a process in which a reader makes calculated guesses about a client's background and problems and, depending on the reaction, elaborates a reading which seems to the client so uniquely appropriate that it carries with it the illusion of having been produced by paranormal means. The cold reading process is shown to depend initially on the Barnum effect, the tendency for people to embrace generalized personality descriptions as idiosyncratically their own. Psychological research into the Barnum effect is critically reviewed, and uses of the effect by a professional magician are described. This is followed by detailed analysis of the cold reading performances of a spirit medium. Future research should investigate the degree to which cold readers may have convinced themselves that they actually possess psychic or paranormal abilities.

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 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Taiwan 1 3%
Unknown 31 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 16%
Researcher 4 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Student > Bachelor 4 13%
Lecturer 2 6%
Other 7 22%
Unknown 6 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 10 31%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 13%
Social Sciences 3 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 6%
Neuroscience 2 6%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 6 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. 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 07 June 2023.
All research outputs
#1,091,965
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
#96
of 5,877 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111
of 12,483 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
#1
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,877 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 12,483 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 99% 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 done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.