↓ Skip to main content

Ecological Rationality: A Framework for Understanding and Aiding the Aging Decision Maker

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
128 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
Ecological Rationality: A Framework for Understanding and Aiding the Aging Decision Maker
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2012.00019
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rui Mata, Thorsten Pachur, Bettina von Helversen, Ralph Hertwig, Jörg Rieskamp, Lael Schooler

Abstract

The notion of ecological rationality sees human rationality as the result of the adaptive fit between the human mind and the environment. Ecological rationality focuses the study of decision making on two key questions: First, what are the environmental regularities to which people's decision strategies are matched, and how frequently do these regularities occur in natural environments? Second, how well can people adapt their use of specific strategies to particular environmental regularities? Research on aging suggests a number of changes in cognitive function, for instance, deficits in learning and memory that may impact decision-making skills. However, it has been shown that simple strategies can work well in many natural environments, which suggests that age-related deficits in strategy use may not necessarily translate into reduced decision quality. Consequently, we argue that predictions about the impact of aging on decision performance depend not only on how aging affects decision-relevant capacities but also on the decision environment in which decisions are made. In sum, we propose that the concept of the ecological rationality is crucial to understanding and aiding the aging decision maker.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 128 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 5%
Switzerland 4 3%
Unknown 118 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 18%
Student > Master 19 15%
Researcher 18 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 7%
Professor 8 6%
Other 33 26%
Unknown 18 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 65 51%
Social Sciences 8 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 7 5%
Neuroscience 6 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 5%
Other 16 13%
Unknown 20 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 08 June 2015.
All research outputs
#7,148,903
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#4,630
of 11,541 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,997
of 250,100 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#60
of 154 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,541 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 250,100 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 154 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 60% of its contemporaries.