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 |
The marketing firm and consumer choice: implications of bilateral contingency for levels of analysis in organizational neuroscience
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, July 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00472 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gordon R. Foxall |
| Abstract |
The emergence of a conception of the marketing firm (Foxall, 1999a) conceived within behavioral psychology and based on a corresponding model of consumer choice, (Foxall, 1990/2004) permits an assessment of the levels of behavioral and organizational analysis amenable to neuroscientific examination. This paper explores the ways in which the bilateral contingencies that link the marketing firm with its consumerate allow appropriate levels of organizational neuroscientific analysis to be specified. Having described the concept of the marketing firm and the model of consumer behavior on which it is based, the paper analyzes bilateral contingencies at the levels of (i) market exchange, (ii) emotional reward, and (iii) neuroeconomics. Market exchange emerges as a level of analysis that lends itself predominantly to the explanation of firm-consumerate interactions in terms of the super-personal level of reinforcing and punishing contingencies: the marketing firm can be treated as a contextual or operant system in its own right. However, the emotional reward and neuroeconomic levels of analysis should be confined to the personal level of analysis represented by individual managers on the one hand and individual consumers on the other. This also entails a level of abstraction but it is one that can be satisfactorily handled in terms of the concept of bilateral contingency. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 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 | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 45 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 19% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 9% |
| Researcher | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 15% |
| Unknown | 12 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 14 | 30% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 10 | 21% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 9% |
| Linguistics | 1 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Unknown | 12 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 10 June 2014.
All research outputs
#18,828,575
of 24,036,420 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#5,856
of 7,404 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,346
of 231,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#214
of 253 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,036,420 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 231,991 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 253 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.