↓ Skip to main content

Poverty Impedes Cognitive Function

Overview of attention for article published in Science, August 2013
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 (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
1386 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
2714 Mendeley
citeulike
11 CiteULike
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
Poverty Impedes Cognitive Function
Published in
Science, August 2013
DOI 10.1126/science.1238041
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anandi Mani, Sendhil Mullainathan, Eldar Shafir, Jiaying Zhao

Abstract

The poor often behave in less capable ways, which can further perpetuate poverty. We hypothesize that poverty directly impedes cognitive function and present two studies that test this hypothesis. First, we experimentally induced thoughts about finances and found that this reduces cognitive performance among poor but not in well-off participants. Second, we examined the cognitive function of farmers over the planting cycle. We found that the same farmer shows diminished cognitive performance before harvest, when poor, as compared with after harvest, when rich. This cannot be explained by differences in time available, nutrition, or work effort. Nor can it be explained with stress: Although farmers do show more stress before harvest, that does not account for diminished cognitive performance. Instead, it appears that poverty itself reduces cognitive capacity. We suggest that this is because poverty-related concerns consume mental resources, leaving less for other tasks. These data provide a previously unexamined perspective and help explain a spectrum of behaviors among the poor. We discuss some implications for poverty policy.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 1,846 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 2,714 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 47 2%
United Kingdom 18 <1%
Germany 9 <1%
Canada 8 <1%
China 5 <1%
Hungary 4 <1%
South Africa 4 <1%
New Zealand 4 <1%
Netherlands 4 <1%
Other 35 1%
Unknown 2576 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 634 23%
Student > Master 399 15%
Researcher 333 12%
Student > Bachelor 284 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 196 7%
Other 510 19%
Unknown 358 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 643 24%
Social Sciences 451 17%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 372 14%
Business, Management and Accounting 146 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 114 4%
Other 508 19%
Unknown 480 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3006. 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 22 September 2022.
All research outputs
#1,760
of 22,120,510 outputs
Outputs from Science
#108
of 77,243 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6
of 178,479 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#2
of 865 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,120,510 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 77,243 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 61.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 178,479 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 865 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 99% of its contemporaries.