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 |
A New Measure of Interpersonal Exploitativeness
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00299 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Amy B. Brunell, Mark S. Davis, Dan R. Schley, Abbey L. Eng, Manfred H.M. van Dulmen, Kelly L. Wester, Daniel J. Flannery |
| Abstract |
Measures of exploitativeness evidence problems with validity and reliability. The present set of studies assessed a new measure [the Interpersonal Exploitativeness Scale (IES)] that defines exploitativeness in terms of reciprocity. In Studies 1 and 2, 33 items were administered to participants. Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis demonstrated that a single factor consisting of six items adequately assess interpersonal exploitativeness. Study 3 results revealed that the IES was positively associated with "normal" narcissism, pathological narcissism, psychological entitlement, and negative reciprocity and negatively correlated with positive reciprocity. In Study 4, participants competed in a commons dilemma. Those who scored higher on the IES were more likely to harvest a greater share of resources over time, even while controlling for other relevant variables, such as entitlement. Together, these studies show the IES to be a valid and reliable measure of interpersonal exploitativeness. The authors discuss the implications of these studies. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 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 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 58 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 19% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 13 | 22% |
| Unknown | 10 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 25 | 42% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 7 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 5% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 7 | 12% |
| Unknown | 12 | 20% |
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 29 May 2013.
All research outputs
#20,194,150
of 22,711,242 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#23,845
of 29,503 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#248,752
of 280,736 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#851
of 969 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,711,242 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,503 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 280,736 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 969 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.