↓ Skip to main content

Are There Gender Differences in Emotion Comprehension? Analysis of the Test of Emotion Comprehension

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Child and Family Studies, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
98 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
Are There Gender Differences in Emotion Comprehension? Analysis of the Test of Emotion Comprehension
Published in
Journal of Child and Family Studies, December 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10826-017-0956-5
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

This article examines whether there are gender differences in understanding the emotions evaluated by the Test of Emotion Comprehension (TEC). The TEC provides a global index of emotion comprehension in children 3-11 years of age, which is the sum of the nine components that constitute emotion comprehension: (1) recognition of facial expressions, (2) understanding of external causes of emotions, (3) understanding of desire-based emotions, (4) understanding of belief-based emotions, (5) understanding of the influence of a reminder on present emotional states, (6) understanding of the possibility to regulate emotional states, (7) understanding of the possibility of hiding emotional states, (8) understanding of mixed emotions, and (9) understanding of moral emotions. We used the answers to the TEC given by 172 English girls and 181 boys from 3 to 8 years of age. First, the nine components into which the TEC is subdivided were analysed for differential item functioning (DIF), taking gender as the grouping variable. To evaluate DIF, the Mantel-Haenszel method and logistic regression analysis were used applying the Educational Testing Service DIF classification criteria. The results show that the TEC did not display gender DIF. Second, when absence of DIF had been corroborated, it was analysed for differences between boys and girls in the total TEC score and its components controlling for age. Our data are compatible with the hypothesis of independence between gender and level of comprehension in 8 of the 9 components of the TEC. Several hypotheses are discussed that could explain the differences found between boys and girls in the belief component. Given that the Belief component is basically a false belief task, the differences found seem to support findings in the literature indicating that girls perform better on this task.

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

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 98 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 15%
Student > Bachelor 13 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Student > Postgraduate 3 3%
Other 8 8%
Unknown 40 41%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 38 39%
Social Sciences 8 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Arts and Humanities 1 1%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 1%
Other 6 6%
Unknown 42 43%
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 27 March 2018.
All research outputs
#19,400,321
of 23,867,274 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Child and Family Studies
#1,230
of 1,463 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#335,787
of 446,114 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Child and Family Studies
#24
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,867,274 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,463 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 446,114 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.