↓ Skip to main content

Are diverse societies less cohesive? Testing contact and mediated contact theories

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS ONE, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
25 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
Are diverse societies less cohesive? Testing contact and mediated contact theories
Published in
PLoS ONE, March 2018
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0193337
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarah McKenna, Eunro Lee, Kathleen A. Klik, Andrew Markus, Miles Hewstone, Katherine J. Reynolds

Abstract

Previous research has demonstrated that there is a negative relationship between ethnic diversity in a local community and social cohesion. Often the way social cohesion is assessed, though, varies across studies and only some aspects of the construct are included (e.g., trust). The current research explores the relationship between diversity and social cohesion across a number of indicators of social cohesion including neighbourhood social capital, safety, belonging, generalized trust, and volunteering. Furthermore, social psychological theories concerning the role of positive contact and its impact on feelings of threat are investigated. Using a sample of 1070 third generation 'majority' Australians and structural equation modelling (SEM), findings suggest ethnic diversity is related to positive intergroup contact, and that contact showed beneficial impacts for some indicators of social cohesion both directly and indirectly through reducing perceived threat. When interethnic contact and perceived threat are included in the model there is no direct negative effect between diversity and social cohesion. The theoretical implications of these findings are outlined including the importance of facilitating opportunities for positive contact in diverse communities.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 16%
Student > Master 4 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 12%
Researcher 2 8%
Other 7 28%
Unknown 2 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 8 32%
Social Sciences 6 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 8%
Unspecified 1 4%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 3 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 08 January 2020.
All research outputs
#3,520,065
of 14,143,447 outputs
Outputs from PLoS ONE
#42,560
of 147,821 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,802
of 276,521 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS ONE
#992
of 2,612 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,143,447 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 147,821 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 276,521 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2,612 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 61% of its contemporaries.