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 |
Abstract “why” Thoughts About Success Lead to Greater Positive Generalization in Sport Participants
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01783 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jens Van Lier, Michelle L. Moulds, Filip Raes |
| Abstract |
Generalizing from a single failure or success to future performances and their self-concept could have an important impact on sport participants. This study examined the impact of the way sport participants think about success on positive generalization. Sport participants (N = 222) completed an online experimental study in which they were induced to think about meanings, causes and implications (i.e., abstract-"why"-thinking) or about more perceptual concrete aspects of their performance (i.e., concrete-"how"-thinking). We hypothesized that abstract-"why"-thinking would lead to greater positive generalization and that this effect would be moderated by self-esteem. Our results supported our hypothesis that abstract thinking increased positive generalization, and this effect was more clearly visible in sport participants with higher self-esteem. These results suggest that retrospective thinking about the "why" of a good performance may benefit athletes in the long run because they generalize the outcome to future performances and their self-concept which may boost their motivation and consequently their performance. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Belgium | 2 | 18% |
| United States | 1 | 9% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 9% |
| Italy | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 6 | 55% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 55% |
| Scientists | 4 | 36% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 20 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 19% |
| Researcher | 4 | 19% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 5% |
| Librarian | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 7 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 6 | 29% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 10% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 5% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 7 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 04 November 2022.
All research outputs
#4,155,272
of 23,041,514 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#7,001
of 30,339 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,232
of 387,376 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#122
of 456 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,041,514 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,339 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 76% 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 387,376 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 456 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.