↓ Skip to main content

A cognitive account of belief: a tentative road map

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
7 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
11 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
129 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
200 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 cognitive account of belief: a tentative road map
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, February 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01588
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael H. Connors, Peter W. Halligan

Abstract

Over the past decades, delusions have become the subject of growing and productive research spanning clinical and cognitive neurosciences. Despite this, the nature of belief, which underpins the construct of delusions, has received little formal investigation. No account of delusions, however, would be complete without a cognitive level analysis of belief per se. One reason for this neglect is the assumption that, unlike more established and accessible modular psychological process (e.g., vision, audition, face-recognition, language-processing, and motor-control systems), beliefs comprise more distributed and therefore less accessible central cognitive processes. In this paper, we suggest some defining characteristics and functions of beliefs. Working back from cognitive accounts of delusions, we consider potential candidate cognitive processes that may be involved in normal belief formation. Finally, we advance a multistage account of the belief process that could provide the basis for a more comprehensive model of belief.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 200 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 1%
United States 2 1%
Spain 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 194 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 28 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 14%
Student > Master 22 11%
Student > Bachelor 22 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 7%
Other 27 14%
Unknown 61 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 51 26%
Social Sciences 19 10%
Neuroscience 11 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 4%
Other 35 18%
Unknown 66 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 73. 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 07 January 2024.
All research outputs
#595,590
of 25,654,566 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#1,236
of 34,727 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,804
of 369,793 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#28
of 424 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,654,566 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,727 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 369,793 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 424 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.