↓ Skip to main content

Associations between Feeling and Judging the Emotions of Happiness and Fear: Findings from a Large-Scale Field Experiment

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, May 2010
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 Mendeley
citeulike
1 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
Associations between Feeling and Judging the Emotions of Happiness and Fear: Findings from a Large-Scale Field Experiment
Published in
PLOS ONE, May 2010
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0010640
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tony W. Buchanan, David Bibas, Ralph Adolphs

Abstract

How do we recognize emotions from other people? One possibility is that our own emotional experiences guide us in the online recognition of emotion in others. A distinct but related possibility is that emotion experience helps us to learn how to recognize emotions in childhood.

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 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 3%
United States 2 3%
India 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
South Africa 1 1%
Luxembourg 1 1%
Unknown 70 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 24%
Researcher 15 19%
Student > Master 11 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Student > Postgraduate 5 6%
Other 17 22%
Unknown 4 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 33 42%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 6%
Computer Science 5 6%
Social Sciences 5 6%
Other 17 22%
Unknown 4 5%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 29 November 2018.
All research outputs
#17,643,954
of 22,647,730 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#146,076
of 193,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,073
of 95,091 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#630
of 694 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,647,730 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,359 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 95,091 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 694 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.