↓ Skip to main content

A construct divided: prosocial behavior as helping, sharing, and comforting subtypes

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, September 2014
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 (90th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
244 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
407 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 construct divided: prosocial behavior as helping, sharing, and comforting subtypes
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, September 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00958
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kristen A Dunfield

Abstract

The development and maintenance of prosocial, other-oriented behaviors has been of considerable recent interest. Though it is clear that prosocial behaviors emerge early and play a uniquely important role in the social lives of humans, there is less consensus regarding the mechanisms that underlie and maintain these fundamental acts. The goal of this paper is to clarify inconsistencies in our understanding of the early emergence and development of prosocial behavior by proposing a taxonomy of prosocial behavior anchored in the social-cognitive constraints that underlie the ability to act on behalf of others. I will argue that within the general domain of prosocial behavior, other-oriented actions can be categorized into three distinct types (helping, sharing, and comforting) that reflect responses to three distinct negative states (instrumental need, unmet material desire, and emotional distress). In support of this proposal, I will demonstrate that the three varieties of prosocial behavior show unique ages of onset, uncorrelated patterns of production, and distinct patterns of individual differences. Importantly, by differentiating specific varieties of prosocial behavior within the general category, we can begin to explain inconsistencies in the past literature and provide a framework for directing future research into the ontogenetic origins of these essential social behaviors.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 407 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 3 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 396 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 72 18%
Student > Master 70 17%
Student > Bachelor 52 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 30 7%
Researcher 17 4%
Other 50 12%
Unknown 116 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 189 46%
Social Sciences 29 7%
Neuroscience 12 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 11 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 2%
Other 31 8%
Unknown 127 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 16 January 2022.
All research outputs
#2,069,096
of 22,888,307 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#4,046
of 29,997 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,822
of 237,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#77
of 366 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,888,307 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,997 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 237,555 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 366 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.