↓ Skip to main content

Emotional contagion and proto-organizing in human interaction dynamics

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, June 2015
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 (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
5 X users
reddit
1 Redditor

Readers on

mendeley
47 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
Emotional contagion and proto-organizing in human interaction dynamics
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, June 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00806
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

This paper combines the complexity notions of phase transitions and tipping points with recent advances in cognitive neuroscience to propose a general theory of human proto-organizing. It takes as a premise that a necessary prerequisite for organizing, or "proto-organizing," occurs through emotional contagion in subpopulations of human interaction dynamics in complex ecosystems. Emotional contagion is posited to engender emotional understanding and identification with others, a social process that acts as a mechanism that enables (or precludes) cooperative responses to opportunities and risks. Propositions are offered and further research is suggested.

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 5 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 47 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 %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 46 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 19%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 11%
Student > Postgraduate 5 11%
Other 4 9%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 10 21%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Business, Management and Accounting 15 32%
Psychology 9 19%
Social Sciences 5 11%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Linguistics 1 2%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 12 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 13 May 2023.
All research outputs
#2,685,616
of 32,250,385 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#5,340
of 41,049 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,037
of 296,317 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#93
of 531 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,250,385 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 41,049 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 296,317 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 531 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.