↓ Skip to main content

Self-efficacy and attributions for intellectual performance in young and elderly adults.

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Gerontology, September 1984
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Readers on

mendeley
20 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.
Article details
Title
Self-efficacy and attributions for intellectual performance in young and elderly adults.
Published in
Journal of Gerontology, September 1984
DOI 10.1093/geronj/39.5.577
Pubmed ID
Authors

M E Lachman, E Jelalian

Abstract

This study examined subjective assessments of intellectual performance in young (M age = 19.46) and elderly (M age = 75.13) adults. Male and female college students (n = 37) and senior citizens (n = 48) were asked to predict their performance before and after taking fluid and crystallized intelligence tests on two trials. Participants also made causal attributions for their test performance. Elderly participants scored significantly higher on the crystallized test, and young participants scored higher on the fluid test. Men's and women's actual performance did not differ, but the elderly women made lower performance predictions on the fluid test than the elderly men. Both the young and the elderly groups were more accurate in predicting their test performance for the test on which their performance was higher. Accuracy of performance predictions improved across the two trials. Both age groups were more likely to attribute successful performance to ability and unsuccessful performance to task difficulty.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 1 5%
Unknown 19 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 25%
Lecturer 3 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 10%
Student > Master 2 10%
Student > Postgraduate 2 10%
Other 3 15%
Unknown 3 15%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 8 40%
Sports and Recreations 2 10%
Arts and Humanities 1 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Other 3 15%
Unknown 4 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 01 January 2015.
All research outputs
#12,345,171
of 34,364,397 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Gerontology
#248
of 735 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,574
of 13,583 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Gerontology
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,364,397 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 735 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 13,583 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.