↓ Skip to main content

Affective Flexibility

Overview of attention for article published in Psychological Science, February 2008
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 (97th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
225 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
331 Mendeley
Title
Affective Flexibility
Published in
Psychological Science, February 2008
DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02061.x
Pubmed ID
Authors

William A. Cunningham, Jay J. Van Bavel, Ingrid R. Johnsen

Abstract

Although early research implicated the amygdala in automatic processing of negative information, more recent research suggests that it plays a more general role in processing the motivational relevance of various stimuli, suggesting that the relation between valence and amygdala activation may depend on contextual goals. This study provides experimental evidence that the relation between valence and amygdala activity is dynamically modulated by evaluative goals. During functional magnetic resonance imaging, participants evaluated the positive, negative, or overall (positive plus negative) aspects of famous people. When participants were providing overall evaluations, both positive and negative names were associated with amygdala activation. When they were evaluating positivity, positive names were associated with amygdala activity, and when they were evaluating negativity, negative names were associated with amygdala activity. Evidence for a negativity bias was found; modulation was more pronounced for positive than for negative information. These data suggest that the amygdala flexibly processes motivationally relevant evaluative information in accordance with current processing goals, but processes negative information less flexibly than positive information.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 331 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 18 5%
Canada 6 2%
United Kingdom 4 1%
Italy 2 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 295 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 91 27%
Researcher 52 16%
Student > Bachelor 32 10%
Student > Master 31 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 23 7%
Other 70 21%
Unknown 32 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 206 62%
Neuroscience 23 7%
Social Sciences 16 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 3%
Other 16 5%
Unknown 46 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. 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 30 September 2016.
All research outputs
#1,069,013
of 22,727,570 outputs
Outputs from Psychological Science
#1,768
of 4,196 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,418
of 156,667 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychological Science
#11
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,727,570 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,196 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 80.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 156,667 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 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 72% of its contemporaries.