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 |
Benefits of social vs. non-social feedback on learning and generosity. Results from the Tipping Game
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01154 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Matteo Colombo, Aistis Stankevicius, Peggy Seriès |
| Abstract |
Although much work has recently been directed at understanding social decision-making, relatively little is known about how different types of feedback impact adaptive changes in social behavior. To address this issue quantitatively, we designed a novel associative learning task called the "Tipping Game," in which participants had to learn a social norm of tipping in restaurants. Participants were found to make more generous decisions from feedback in the form of facial expressions, in comparison to feedback in the form of symbols such as ticks and crosses. Furthermore, more participants displayed learning in the condition where they received social feedback than participants in the non-social condition. Modeling results showed that the pattern of performance displayed by participants receiving social feedback could be explained by a lower sensitivity to economic costs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users 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 | 17% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 4 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 2 | 4% |
| Iran, Islamic Republic of | 1 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 45 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 10% |
| Researcher | 5 | 10% |
| Professor | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 10 | 20% |
| Unknown | 8 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 19 | 39% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 16% |
| Unknown | 11 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 09 August 2015.
All research outputs
#13,574,675
of 24,072,790 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#12,226
of 32,309 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,519
of 259,631 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#199
of 367 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,072,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,309 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 259,631 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 367 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.