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 |
Fluid Intelligence and Cognitive Reflection in a Strategic Environment: Evidence from Dominance-Solvable Games
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01188 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nobuyuki Hanaki, Nicolas Jacquemet, Stéphane Luchini, Adam Zylbersztejn |
| Abstract |
Dominance solvability is one of the most straightforward solution concepts in game theory. It is based on two principles: dominance (according to which players always use their dominant strategy) and iterated dominance (according to which players always act as if others apply the principle of dominance). However, existing experimental evidence questions the empirical accuracy of dominance solvability. In this study, we study the relationships between the key facets of dominance solvability and two cognitive skills, cognitive reflection, and fluid intelligence. We provide evidence that the behaviors in accordance with dominance and one-step iterated dominance are both predicted by one's fluid intelligence rather than cognitive reflection. Individual cognitive skills, however, only explain a small fraction of the observed failure of dominance solvability. The accuracy of theoretical predictions on strategic decision making thus not only depends on individual cognitive characteristics, but also, perhaps more importantly, on the decision making environment itself. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 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 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 30 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 17% |
| Professor | 5 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 8 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 6 | 20% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 5 | 17% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 10% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 7% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 11 | 37% |
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 06 September 2016.
All research outputs
#15,383,207
of 22,886,568 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#18,788
of 29,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#230,306
of 357,753 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#278
of 384 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,886,568 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,991 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 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 357,753 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 384 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.