↓ Skip to main content

Facing danger: how do people behave in times of need? The case of adult attachment styles

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, December 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 (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
31 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 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
Facing danger: how do people behave in times of need? The case of adult attachment styles
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, December 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01452
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tsachi Ein-Dor

Abstract

Bowlby's (1982) attachment theory has generated an enormous body of research and conceptual elaborations. Although attachment theory and research propose that attachment security provides a person with many adaptive advantages, during all phases of the life cycle, numerous studies indicate that almost half of the human species can be classified as insecurely attached or insecure with respect to attachment. It seems odd that evolution left humans in this vulnerable position, unless there are some advantages to individuals or groups, under at least some conditions, of anxious and avoidant attachment styles. I argue that a social group containing members with different attachment patterns may be more conducive to survival than a homogeneous group of securely attached individuals because each attachment disposition has specific adaptive advantages that promote the survival of the individual and people around him or her when facing threats and perils. In making this argument, I extend the scope of attachment theory and research by considering a broader range of adaptive functions of insecure attachment strategies, and present data to support my argument.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 31 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 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 55 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 14%
Student > Bachelor 8 14%
Researcher 7 13%
Student > Master 6 11%
Professor 5 9%
Other 11 20%
Unknown 11 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 26 46%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 15 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 August 2022.
All research outputs
#1,550,472
of 24,506,807 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#3,161
of 33,030 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,376
of 371,147 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#62
of 368 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,506,807 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,030 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 371,147 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 368 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.