↓ Skip to main content

The Risky Side of Creativity: Domain Specific Risk Taking in Creative Individuals

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
36 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 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
The Risky Side of Creativity: Domain Specific Risk Taking in Creative Individuals
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, February 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00145
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vaibhav Tyagi, Yaniv Hanoch, Stephen D. Hall, Mark Runco, Susan L. Denham

Abstract

Risk taking is often associated with creativity, yet little evidence exists to support this association. The present article aimed to systematically explore this association. In two studies, we investigated the relationship between five different domains of risk taking (financial, health and safety, recreational, ethical and social) and five different measures of creativity. Results from the first (laboratory-based) offline study suggested that creativity is associated with high risk taking tendencies in the social domain but not the other domains. Indeed, in the second study conducted online with a larger and diverse sample, the likelihood of social risk taking was the strongest predictor of creative personality and ideation scores. These findings illustrate the necessity to treat creativity and risk taking as multi-dimensional traits and the need to have a more nuanced framework of creativity and other related cognitive functions.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 36 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
Austria 1 2%
Unknown 48 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 14%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Researcher 5 10%
Other 12 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 25 50%
Social Sciences 7 14%
Unspecified 4 8%
Arts and Humanities 3 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 4%
Other 9 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 47. 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 December 2018.
All research outputs
#322,955
of 12,639,705 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#576
of 12,248 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,807
of 340,461 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#91
of 1,565 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,639,705 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,248 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 340,461 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,565 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.