↓ Skip to main content

A motivation model for interaction between parent and child based on the need for relatedness

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
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
A motivation model for interaction between parent and child based on the need for relatedness
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00618
Pubmed ID
Authors

Masaki Ogino, Akihiko Nishikawa, Minoru Asada

Abstract

In parent-child communication, emotions are evoked by various types of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Those emotions encourage actions that promote more interactions. We present a motivation model of infant-caregiver interactions, in which relatedness, one of the most important basic psychological needs, is a variable that increases with experiences of emotion sharing. Besides being an important factor of pleasure, relatedness is a meta-factor that affects other factors such as stress and emotional mirroring. The proposed model is implemented in an artificial agent equipped with a system to recognize gestures and facial expressions. The baby-like agent successfully interacts with an actual human and adversely reacts when the caregiver suddenly ceases facial expressions, similar to the "still-face paradigm" demonstrated by infants in psychological experiments. In the simulation experiment, two agents, each controlled by the proposed motivation model, show relatedness-dependent emotional communication that mimics actual human communication.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 2 6%
Indonesia 1 3%
Unknown 30 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 15%
Student > Master 4 12%
Researcher 4 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 7 21%
Unknown 8 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 10 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 12%
Engineering 3 9%
Computer Science 2 6%
Linguistics 1 3%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 9 27%
Attention Score in Context

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 12 September 2013.
All research outputs
#15,687,681
of 24,943,708 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#16,482
of 33,669 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,099
of 292,957 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#621
of 969 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,943,708 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,669 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 292,957 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.