↓ Skip to main content

A sociogenomic perspective on neuroscience in organizational behavior

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Readers on

mendeley
84 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
A sociogenomic perspective on neuroscience in organizational behavior
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00084
Pubmed ID
Authors

Seth M. Spain, P. D. Harms

Abstract

We critically examine the current biological models of individual organizational behavior, with particular emphasis on the roles of genetics and the brain. We demonstrate how approaches to biology in the organizational sciences assume that biological systems are simultaneously causal and essentially static; that genotypes exert constant effects. In contrast, we present a sociogenomic approach to organizational research, which could provide a meta-theoretical framework for understanding organizational behavior. Sociogenomics is an interactionist approach that derives power from its ability to explain how genes and environment operate. The key insight is that both genes and the environment operate by modifying gene expression. This leads to a conception of genetic and environmental effects that is fundamentally dynamic, rather than the static view of classical biometric approaches. We review biometric research within organizational behavior, and contrast these interpretations with a sociogenomic view. We provide a review of gene expression mechanisms that help explain the dynamism observed in individual organizational behavior, particularly factors associated with gene expression in the brain. Finally, we discuss the ethics of genomic and neuroscientific findings for practicing managers and discuss whether it is possible to practically apply these findings in management.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users 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 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 1%
Malaysia 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
India 1 1%
Belgium 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 78 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 23%
Student > Master 13 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 8%
Professor 7 8%
Other 15 18%
Unknown 11 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 19 23%
Business, Management and Accounting 18 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 11%
Social Sciences 6 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 5%
Other 15 18%
Unknown 13 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 16 December 2020.
All research outputs
#6,098,697
of 24,036,420 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#2,411
of 7,404 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,223
of 313,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#51
of 124 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,036,420 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,404 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 313,991 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 124 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 58% of its contemporaries.