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 |
Diversity climate enhances work outcomes through trust and openness in workgroup communication
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
SpringerPlus, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40064-016-2499-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Joep Hofhuis, Pernill G. A. van der Rijt, Martijn Vlug |
| Abstract |
Diversity climate, defined as an organizational climate characterized by openness towards and appreciation of individual differences, has been shown to enhance outcomes in culturally diverse teams. To date, it remains unclear which processes are responsible for these findings. This paper presents two quantitative studies (n = 91; 246) that identify trust and openness in workgroup communication as possible mediators. We replicate earlier findings that perceived diversity climate positively relates to job satisfaction, sense of inclusion, work group identification and knowledge sharing in teams. In study 1, trust is shown to mediate the effects of perceived diversity climate on team members' sense of inclusion. In study 2, trust mediates the relationship between perceived diversity climate and workgroup identification and openness mediates its relationship with knowledge sharing. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 214 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 214 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 42 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 34 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 26 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 23 | 11% |
| Researcher | 10 | 5% |
| Other | 22 | 10% |
| Unknown | 57 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Business, Management and Accounting | 48 | 22% |
| Social Sciences | 38 | 18% |
| Psychology | 25 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 3% |
| Engineering | 7 | 3% |
| Other | 30 | 14% |
| Unknown | 59 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 46. 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 24 June 2022.
All research outputs
#766,136
of 22,738,543 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#30
of 1,853 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,500
of 352,410 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#7
of 213 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,738,543 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,853 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 352,410 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 213 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.