↓ Skip to main content

Understanding and accounting for relational context is critical for social neuroscience

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
35 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
71 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
Understanding and accounting for relational context is critical for social neuroscience
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, March 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00127
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elizabeth Clark-Polner, Margaret S. Clark

Abstract

Scientists have increasingly turned to the brain and to neuroscience more generally to further an understanding of social and emotional judgments and behavior. Yet, many neuroscientists (certainly not all) do not consider the role of relational context. Moreover, most have not examined the impact of relational context in a manner that takes advantage of conceptual and empirical advances in relationship science. Here we emphasize that: (1) all social behavior takes place, by definition, within the context of a relationship (even if that relationship is a new one with a stranger), and (2) relational context shapes not only social thoughts, feelings, and behaviors, but also some seemingly non-social thoughts, feelings, and behaviors in profound ways. We define relational context and suggest that accounting for it in the design and interpretation of neuroscience research is essential to the development of a coherent, generalizable neuroscience of social behavior. We make our case in two ways: (a) we describe some existing neuroscience research in three substantive areas (perceiving and reacting to others' emotions, providing help, and receiving help) that already has documented the powerful impact of relational context. (b) We describe some other neuroscience research from these same areas that has not taken relational context into account. Then, using findings from social and personality psychology, we make a case that different results almost certainly would have been found had the research been conducted in a different relational context. We neither attempt to review all evidence that relational context shapes neuroscience findings nor to put forward a theoretical analysis of all the ways relational context ought to shape neuroscience findings. Our goal is simply to urge greater and more systematic consideration of relational context in neuroscientific research.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 35 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 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Argentina 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 66 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 17%
Student > Master 12 17%
Researcher 8 11%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Other 17 24%
Unknown 10 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 28 39%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 8%
Social Sciences 5 7%
Neuroscience 4 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 4%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 13 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 36. 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 31 July 2023.
All research outputs
#1,010,117
of 23,578,918 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#469
of 7,324 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,377
of 225,308 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#19
of 145 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,578,918 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,324 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 225,308 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 145 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.