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 |
Guessing versus Choosing an Upcoming Task
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00396 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Thomas Kleinsorge, Juliane Scheil |
| Abstract |
We compared the effects of guessing vs. choosing an upcoming task. In a task-switching paradigm with four tasks, two groups of participants were asked to either guess or choose which task will be presented next under otherwise identical conditions. The upcoming task corresponded to participants' guesses or choices in 75 % of the trials. However, only participants in the Choosing condition were correctly informed about this, whereas participants in the Guessing condition were told that tasks were determined at random. In the Guessing condition, we replicated previous findings of a pronounced reduction of switch costs in case of incorrect guesses. This switch cost reduction was considerably less pronounced with denied choices in the Choosing condition. We suggest that in the Choosing condition, the signaling of prediction errors associated with denied choices is attenuated because a certain proportion of denied choices is consistent with the overall representation of the situation as conveyed by task instructions. In the Guessing condition, in contrast, the mismatch of guessed and actual task is resolved solely on the level of individual trials by strengthening the representation of the actual task. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 12 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 31% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 15% |
| Professor | 2 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 1 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 5 | 38% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 23% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 4 | 31% |
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 24 March 2016.
All research outputs
#20,599,965
of 25,312,451 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#25,193
of 34,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#228,553
of 306,958 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#396
of 473 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,312,451 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,187 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 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 306,958 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 473 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.