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 |
Can money heal all wounds? Social exchange norm modulates the preference for monetary versus social compensation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01411 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yulong Cao, Hongbo Yu, Yanhong Wu, Xiaolin Zhou |
| Abstract |
Compensation is a kind of pro-social behavior that can restore a social relationship jeopardized by interpersonal transgression. The effectiveness of a certain compensation strategy (e.g., repaying money, sharing loss, etc.) may vary as a function of the social norm/relationship. Previous studies have shown that two types of norms (or relationships), monetary/exchange and social/communal, differentially characterize people's appraisal of and response to social exchanges. In this study, we investigated how individual differences in preference for these norms affect individuals' perception of others' as well as the selection of their own reciprocal behaviors. In a two-phase experiment with interpersonal transgression, we asked the participant to perform a dot-estimation task with two partners who occasionally and unintentionally inflicted noise stimulation upon the participant (first phase). As compensation one partner gave money to the participant 80% of the time (the monetary partner) and the other bore the noise for the participant 80% of the time (the social partner). Results showed that the individuals' preference for compensation (repaying money versus bearing noise) affected their relationship (exchange versus communal) with the partners adopting different compensation strategies: participants tended to form communal relationships and felt closer to the partner whose compensation strategy matched their own preference. The participants could be differentiated into a social group, who tended to form communal relationship with the social partner, and a monetary group, who tended to form communal relationship with the monetary partner. In the second phase of the experiment, when the participants became transgressors and were asked to compensate for their transgression with money, the social group offered more compensation to the social partners than to the monetary partners, while the monetary group compensated less than the social group in general and showed no difference in their offers to the monetary and social partners. These findings demonstrate that the effectiveness of compensation varies as a function of individuals' preference for communal versus monetary norm and that monetary compensation alone does not heal all wounds. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 32 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 38% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 19% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Researcher | 2 | 6% |
| Professor | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 7 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 15 | 47% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 8 | 25% |
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 23 September 2015.
All research outputs
#19,886,582
of 25,310,061 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#23,198
of 34,183 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,820
of 281,632 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#412
of 556 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,310,061 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,183 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 281,632 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 556 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.