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 |
Patterns of empathy as embodied practice in clinical conversation—a musical dimension
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, April 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00349 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michael B. Buchholz |
| Abstract |
Cognitive linguistics and conversation analysis (a) converge in the analysis of category bound activities and (b) in viewing thinking and talking as embodied activities. The first aim of this paper is to outline these powerful theories as useful tools for the analysis of enacting empathy. The second aim is to outline these theories as useful tools for the analysis of how empathy is co-enacted in clinical conversation documented in transcripts. Cognitive Linguistics and Conversation Analysis converge in detecting patterns of I-You-relationships with roots in early preverbal embodied protoconversation continuing to more symbolic conversational level. The paper proposes to describe this continuity of empathic conversation in musical metaphors like balance, rhythm and resonance. In a first section transcripts from therapeutic sessions are presented. In a second section linguistic and other research data are presented in order to bring empirical data to this new conception of how empathy can be understood, how it is done and how two participants cooperate to enact empathy. Ideas for further research are outlined. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 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 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| New Zealand | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 52 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 11% |
| Researcher | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 10 | 19% |
| Unknown | 11 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 19 | 36% |
| Linguistics | 6 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Unknown | 10 | 19% |
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 31 May 2014.
All research outputs
#20,230,558
of 22,756,196 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#23,959
of 29,666 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#193,556
of 227,508 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#285
of 322 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,756,196 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 29,666 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 227,508 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 322 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.