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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Crucial Dimensions of Human Altruism. Affective vs. Conceptual Factors Leading to Helping or Reinforcing Others
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00519 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anna Szuster |
| Abstract |
The aim of this article is to identify factors leading to favorable attitudes toward other people from different social categories. The parts of article reflect diverse levels of altruism regulation from primary affective responses to the environment, through social norms, to abstract moral concepts related to good and evil. The latter allow understanding of the perspective of other people (including those belonging to out-groups), acceptance of their values and engagement not only in helping behavior but also in supporting the development of others. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 50% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Austria | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 45 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 6% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 17% |
| Unknown | 11 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 14 | 30% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 13% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 5 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 6% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Unknown | 12 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 07 June 2016.
All research outputs
#15,426,842
of 25,888,065 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#14,983
of 34,864 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,996
of 316,983 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#240
of 429 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,888,065 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,864 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 316,983 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 429 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.