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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Does cognitive flexibility predict treatment gains in Internet-delivered psychological treatment of social anxiety disorder, depression, or tinnitus?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PeerJ, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.7717/peerj.1934 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Philip Lindner, Per Carlbring, Erik Flodman, Amanda Hebert, Stephanie Poysti, Filip Hagkvist, Robert Johansson, Vendela Zetterqvist Westin, Thomas Berger, Gerhard Andersson |
| Abstract |
Little is known about the individual factors that predict outcomes in Internet-administered psychological treatments. We hypothesized that greater cognitive flexibility (i.e. the ability to simultaneously consider several concepts and tasks and switch effortlessly between them in response to changes in environmental contingencies) would provide a better foundation for learning and employing the cognitive restructuring techniques taught and exercised in therapy, leading to greater treatment gains. Participants in three trials featuring Internet-administered psychological treatments for depression (n = 36), social anxiety disorder (n = 115) and tinnitus (n = 53) completed the 64-card Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST) prior to treatment. We found no significant associations between perseverative errors on the WCST and treatment gains in any group. We also found low accuracy in the classification of treatment responders. We conclude that lower cognitive flexibility, as captured by perseverative errors on the WCST, should not impede successful outcomes in Internet-delivered psychological treatments. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 3 | 43% |
| Chile | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 71% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 14% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 126 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Argentina | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 124 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 18 | 14% |
| Researcher | 17 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 8% |
| Professor | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 23 | 18% |
| Unknown | 34 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 49 | 39% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 6% |
| Sports and Recreations | 4 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 10 | 8% |
| Unknown | 41 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 24 April 2016.
All research outputs
#2,946,161
of 23,294,050 outputs
Outputs from PeerJ
#3,182
of 13,609 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,187
of 300,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PeerJ
#82
of 329 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,294,050 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,609 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 300,171 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 329 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 74% of its contemporaries.