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 |
Error-Related Negativity and the Misattribution of State-Anxiety Following Errors: On the Reproducibility of Inzlicht and Al-Khindi (2012)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00475 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carmen Cano Rodilla, André Beauducel, Anja Leue |
| Abstract |
In their innovative study, Inzlicht and Al-Khindi (2012) demonstrated that participants who were allowed to misattribute their arousal and negative affect induced by errors to a placebo beverage had a reduced error-related negativity (ERN/Ne) compared to controls not being allowed to misattribute their arousal following errors. These results contribute to the ongoing debate that affect and motivation are interwoven with the cognitive processing of errors. Evidence that the misattribution of negative affect modulates the ERN/Ne is essential for understanding the mechanisms behind ERN/Ne. Therefore, and because of the growing debate on reproducibility of empirical findings, we aimed at replicating the misattribution effects on the ERN/Ne in a go/nogo task. Students were randomly assigned to a misattribution group (n = 48) or a control group (n = 51). Participants of the misattribution group consumed a beverage said to have side effects that would increase their physiological arousal, so that they could misattribute the negative affect induced by errors to the beverage. Participants of the control group correctly believed that the beverage had no side effects. As Inzlicht and Al-Khindi (2012), we did not observe performance differences between both groups. However, ERN/Ne differences between misattribution and control group could not be replicated, although the statistical power of the replication study was high. Evidence regarding the replication of performance and the non-replication of ERN/Ne findings was confirmed by Bayesian statistics. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
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 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 24 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 29% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 13% |
| Researcher | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 11 | 46% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 13% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 6 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 23 January 2018.
All research outputs
#14,860,134
of 22,886,568 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#4,918
of 7,172 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#193,172
of 320,656 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#100
of 152 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,886,568 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,172 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 320,656 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 152 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.