↓ Skip to main content

Dynamic competition account of men’s perceptions of women’s sexual interest

Overview of attention for article published in Cognition, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
71 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
Dynamic competition account of men’s perceptions of women’s sexual interest
Published in
Cognition, February 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.cognition.2017.12.016
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

This work applies a dynamic competition framework of decision making to the domain of sexual perception, which is linked theoretically and empirically to college men's risk for exhibiting sexual coercion and aggression toward female acquaintances. Within a mouse-tracking paradigm, 152 undergraduate men viewed full-body photographs of women who varied in affect (sexual interest or rejection), clothing style (provocative or conservative), and attractiveness, and decided whether each woman currently felt sexually interested or rejecting. Participants' mouse movements were recorded to capture competition dynamics during online processing (throughout the decisional process), and as an index of the final categorical decision (endpoint of the decisional process). Participants completed a measure of Rape-Supportive Attitudes (RSA), a well-established correlate of male-initiated sexual aggression toward female acquaintances. Mixed-effects analyses revealed greater curvature toward the incorrect response on conceptually incongruent trials (e.g., rejecting and dressed provocatively) than on congruent trials (e.g., rejecting and dressed conservatively). This suggests that the two decision alternatives are simultaneously active and compete continuously over time, consistent with a dynamic competition account. Congruence effects also emerged at the decisional endpoint; accuracy was typically lower when stimulus features were incongruent, rather than congruent. RSA potentiated online congruence effects (intermediate states of behavior) but not offline congruence effects (endpoint states of behavior). In a hierarchical regression analysis, online processing indices accounted for unique variability in RSA above and beyond offline accuracy rates. The process-based account of men's sexual-interest judgments ultimately may point to novel targets for prevention strategies designed to reduce acquaintance-initiated sexual aggression on college campuses.

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.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 71 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 20%
Student > Master 8 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Researcher 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 27 38%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 26 37%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Engineering 3 4%
Arts and Humanities 1 1%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 28 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 2020.
All research outputs
#3,069,749
of 27,943,483 outputs
Outputs from Cognition
#875
of 3,490 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,862
of 453,111 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cognition
#15
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,943,483 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,490 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 453,111 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.