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 |
Normative Emotional Responses to Behavior Analysis Jargon or How Not to Use Words to Win Friends and Influence People
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Behavior Analysis in Practice, February 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40617-016-0161-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Thomas S. Critchfield, Karla J. Doepke, L. Kimberly Epting, Amel Becirevic, Derek D. Reed, Daniel M. Fienup, Jamie L. Kremsreiter, Cheryl L. Ecott |
| Abstract |
It has been suggested that non-experts regard the jargon of behavior analysis as abrasive, harsh, and unpleasant. If this is true, excessive reliance on jargon could interfere with the dissemination of effective services. To address this often discussed but rarely studied issue, we consulted a large, public domain list of English words that have been rated by members of the general public for the emotional reactions they evoke. Selected words that behavior analysts use as technical terms were compared to selected words that are commonly used to discuss general science, general clinical work, and behavioral assessment. There was a tendency for behavior analysis terms to register as more unpleasant than other kinds of professional terms and also as more unpleasant than English words generally. We suggest possible reasons for this finding, discuss its relevance to the challenge of deciding how to communicate with consumers who do not yet understand or value behavior analysis, and advocate for systematic research to guide the marketing of behavior analysis. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 40% |
| Canada | 1 | 10% |
| Brazil | 1 | 10% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 90% |
| Scientists | 1 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 56 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 7% |
| Professor | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 16% |
| Unknown | 19 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 21 | 38% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 13% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 4% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 19 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 05 June 2023.
All research outputs
#4,210,247
of 23,937,668 outputs
Outputs from Behavior Analysis in Practice
#135
of 578 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,026
of 314,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavior Analysis in Practice
#2
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,937,668 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 578 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. 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 314,538 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 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.