↓ Skip to main content

Identifying when choice helps: clarifying the relationships between choice making, self-construal, and pain

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Behavioral Medicine, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
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.
Title
Identifying when choice helps: clarifying the relationships between choice making, self-construal, and pain
Published in
Journal of Behavioral Medicine, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10865-015-9708-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jacob Fox, Shane R. Close, Jason P. Rose, Andrew L. Geers

Abstract

Prior research indicates that making choices before a painful task can sometimes reduce pain. We examined the possibility that independent and interdependent self-construals moderate the effect of choice on pain. Further, we tested between two types of choice: instrumental and non-instrumental. Healthy normotensive undergraduates were randomly assigned to one of three conditions prior to the cold pressor task. Participants in an instrumental choice condition selected which hand to immerse in the water and were told this choice might help reduce their pain. Non-instrumental choice participants selected which hand to immerse but were given no information about potential pain reduction. Control participants were given no choice or additional instructions. Low interdependence individuals reported less pain than high interdependence individuals-but only when given an instrumental choice. These data indicate that not all forms of choice reduce pain and not all individuals benefit from choice. Instead, individuals low in interdependence exhibit pain relief from instrumental choices.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 20%
Student > Bachelor 3 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 8%
Other 4 16%
Unknown 4 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 10 40%
Social Sciences 3 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Decision Sciences 1 4%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 5 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 18 May 2016.
All research outputs
#15,353,264
of 22,837,982 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Behavioral Medicine
#806
of 1,071 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#230,763
of 393,726 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Behavioral Medicine
#14
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,837,982 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,071 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 393,726 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.