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 |
Trait Anxiety Is Associated with Negative Interpretations When Resolving Valence Ambiguity of Surprised Faces
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01164 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gewnhi Park, Michael W. Vasey, Grace Kim, Dixie D. Hu, Julian F. Thayer |
| Abstract |
The current research examines whether trait anxiety is associated with negative interpretation bias when resolving valence ambiguity of surprised faces. To further isolate the neuro-cognitive mechanism, we presented angry, happy, and surprised faces at broad spatial frequency (BSF), high spatial frequency (HSF), and low spatial frequency (LSF) and asked participants to determine the valence of each face. High trait anxiety was associated with more negative interpretations of BSF (i.e., intact) surprised faces. However, the modulation of trait anxiety on the negative interpretation of surprised faces disappeared at HSF and LSF. The current study provides evidence that trait anxiety modulates negative interpretations of BSF surprised faces. However, the negative interpretation of LSF surprised faces appears to be a robust default response that occurs regardless of individual differences in trait anxiety. |
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 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 36 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 19% |
| Researcher | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 11% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 8 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 19 | 53% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 10 | 28% |
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 July 2016.
All research outputs
#20,336,031
of 22,881,154 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#24,225
of 29,979 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#322,120
of 367,226 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#341
of 379 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,881,154 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,979 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 367,226 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 379 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.