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 |
Development and assessment of brief versions of the Penn State Worry Questionnaire and the Ruminative Response Scale
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
British Journal of Clinical Psychology, May 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1111/bjc.12052 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Maurice Topper, Paul M. G. Emmelkamp, Ed Watkins, Thomas Ehring |
| Abstract |
Worry and depressive rumination have been found to be involved in the onset and maintenance of a range of psychological disorders. The development of brief screening measures for excessive worry and depressive rumination is therefore desirable to facilitate the assessment of worry and rumination in prevention and treatment settings where routine administration of full questionnaires is not practical due to time-related constraints. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 Kingdom | 3 | 50% |
| Colombia | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 177 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Trinidad and Tobago | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 173 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 36 | 20% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 22 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 11% |
| Researcher | 18 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 16 | 9% |
| Other | 27 | 15% |
| Unknown | 39 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 90 | 51% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 2% |
| Unspecified | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 9 | 5% |
| Unknown | 49 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 21 November 2014.
All research outputs
#7,859,615
of 24,558,777 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of Clinical Psychology
#385
of 689 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,995
of 232,695 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of Clinical Psychology
#9
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,558,777 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 689 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 232,695 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.