↓ Skip to main content

Cross-Cultural Differences and Similarities in Human Value Instantiation

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
13 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
194 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
Cross-Cultural Differences and Similarities in Human Value Instantiation
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, May 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00849
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paul H. P. Hanel, Gregory R. Maio, Ana K. S. Soares, Katia C. Vione, Gabriel L. de Holanda Coelho, Valdiney V. Gouveia, Appasaheb C. Patil, Shanmukh V. Kamble, Antony S. R. Manstead

Abstract

Previous research found that the within-country variability of human values (e.g., equality and helpfulness) clearly outweighs between-country variability. Across three countries (Brazil, India, and the United Kingdom), the present research tested in student samples whether between-nation differences reside more in the behaviors used to concretely instantiate (i.e., exemplify or understand) values than in their importance as abstract ideals. In Study 1 (N = 630), we found several meaningful between-country differences in the behaviors that were used to concretely instantiate values, alongside high within-country variability. In Study 2 (N = 677), we found that participants were able to match instantiations back to the values from which they were derived, even if the behavior instantiations were spontaneously produced only by participants from another country or were created by us. Together, these results support the hypothesis that people in different nations can differ in the behaviors that are seen as typical as instantiations of values, while holding similar ideas about the abstract meaning of the values and their importance.

Twitter Demographics

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 tweeters 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 194 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 194 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 30 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 13%
Student > Bachelor 21 11%
Researcher 10 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 5%
Other 38 20%
Unknown 60 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 44 23%
Social Sciences 20 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 15 8%
Arts and Humanities 7 4%
Computer Science 5 3%
Other 38 20%
Unknown 65 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 June 2023.
All research outputs
#1,325,863
of 24,276,163 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#2,704
of 32,661 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,459
of 335,312 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#84
of 646 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,276,163 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,661 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 335,312 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 646 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.