↓ Skip to main content

How social cognition can inform social decision making

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% 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 (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
11 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Readers on

mendeley
328 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
How social cognition can inform social decision making
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2013.00259
Pubmed ID
Authors

Victoria K. Lee, Lasana T. Harris

Abstract

Social decision-making is often complex, requiring the decision-maker to make inferences of others' mental states in addition to engaging traditional decision-making processes like valuation and reward processing. A growing body of research in neuroeconomics has examined decision-making involving social and non-social stimuli to explore activity in brain regions such as the striatum and prefrontal cortex, largely ignoring the power of the social context. Perhaps more complex processes may influence decision-making in social vs. non-social contexts. Years of social psychology and social neuroscience research have documented a multitude of processes (e.g., mental state inferences, impression formation, spontaneous trait inferences) that occur upon viewing another person. These processes rely on a network of brain regions including medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC), superior temporal sulcus (STS), temporal parietal junction, and precuneus among others. Undoubtedly, these social cognition processes affect social decision-making since mental state inferences occur spontaneously and automatically. Few studies have looked at how these social inference processes affect decision-making in a social context despite the capability of these inferences to serve as predictions that can guide future decision-making. Here we review and integrate the person perception and decision-making literatures to understand how social cognition can inform the study of social decision-making in a way that is consistent with both literatures. We identify gaps in both literatures-while behavioral economics largely ignores social processes that spontaneously occur upon viewing another person, social psychology has largely failed to talk about the implications of social cognition processes in an economic decision-making context-and examine the benefits of integrating social psychological theory with behavioral economic theory.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 328 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 1%
United States 4 1%
France 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Russia 1 <1%
Unknown 314 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 86 26%
Student > Master 55 17%
Researcher 41 13%
Student > Bachelor 29 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 5%
Other 55 17%
Unknown 45 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 119 36%
Neuroscience 49 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 5%
Social Sciences 14 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 4%
Other 54 16%
Unknown 61 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. 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 13 April 2023.
All research outputs
#1,504,797
of 25,706,302 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#712
of 11,674 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,979
of 290,780 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#26
of 246 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,706,302 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,674 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 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 290,780 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 246 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.