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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Neural and Behavioral Evidence for an Intrinsic Cost of Self-Control
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0072626 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wouter Kool, Joseph T. McGuire, Gary J. Wang, Matthew M. Botvinick |
| Abstract |
The capacity for self-control is critical to adaptive functioning, yet our knowledge of the underlying processes and mechanisms is presently only inchoate. Theoretical work in economics has suggested a model of self-control centering on two key assumptions: (1) a division within the decision-maker between two 'selves' with differing preferences; (2) the idea that self-control is intrinsically costly. Neuroscience has recently generated findings supporting the 'dual-self' assumption. The idea of self-control costs, in contrast, has remained speculative. We report the first independent evidence for self-control costs. Through a neuroimaging meta-analysis, we establish an anatomical link between self-control and the registration of cognitive effort costs. This link predicts that individuals who strongly avoid cognitive demand should also display poor self-control. To test this, we conducted a behavioral experiment leveraging a measure of demand avoidance along with two measures of self-control. The results obtained provide clear support for the idea of self-control costs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 18% |
| United States | 4 | 18% |
| Spain | 1 | 5% |
| Brazil | 1 | 5% |
| Japan | 1 | 5% |
| Canada | 1 | 5% |
| France | 1 | 5% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 8 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 15 | 68% |
| Scientists | 5 | 23% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 261 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 8 | 3% |
| Switzerland | 2 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 248 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 70 | 27% |
| Researcher | 36 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 31 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 26 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 18 | 7% |
| Other | 49 | 19% |
| Unknown | 31 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 128 | 49% |
| Neuroscience | 21 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 16 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 8 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 3% |
| Other | 29 | 11% |
| Unknown | 51 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 101. 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 06 January 2018.
All research outputs
#389,299
of 24,143,470 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#5,591
of 207,525 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,990
of 204,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#126
of 4,887 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,143,470 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 207,525 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 204,900 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,887 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 97% of its contemporaries.