↓ Skip to main content

Common Sense Beliefs about the Central Self, Moral Character, and the Brain

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 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
Common Sense Beliefs about the Central Self, Moral Character, and the Brain
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.02007
Pubmed ID
Authors

Diego Fernandez-Duque, Barry Schwartz

Abstract

To assess lay beliefs about self and brain, we probed people's opinions about the central self, in relation to morality, willful control, and brain relevance. In study 1, 172 participants compared the central self to the peripheral self. The central self, construed at this abstract level, was seen as more brain-based than the peripheral self, less changeable through willful control, and yet more indicative of moral character. In study 2, 210 participants described 18 specific personality traits on 6 dimensions: centrality to self, moral relevance, willful control, brain dependence, temporal stability, and desirability. Consistent with Study 1, centrality to the self, construed at this more concrete level, was positively correlated to brain dependence. Centrality to the self was also correlated to desirability and temporal stability, but not to morality or willful control. We discuss differences and similarities between abstract (Study 1) and concrete (Study 2) levels of construal of the central self, and conclude that in contemporary American society people readily embrace the brain as the underlying substrate of who they truly are.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 4%
France 1 4%
Unknown 25 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 22%
Student > Bachelor 5 19%
Researcher 5 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 19%
Lecturer 3 11%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 1 4%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 15 56%
Neuroscience 3 11%
Social Sciences 3 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 7%
Philosophy 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 2 7%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 17 February 2016.
All research outputs
#13,453,089
of 22,837,982 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#13,357
of 29,839 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#190,187
of 395,128 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#257
of 444 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,837,982 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,839 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 395,128 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 444 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.