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 |
The Co-evolution of Honesty and Strategic Vigilance
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01503 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christophe Heintz, Mia Karabegovic, Andras Molnar |
| Abstract |
We hypothesize that when honesty is not motivated by selfish goals, it reveals social preferences that have evolved for convincing strategically vigilant partners that one is a person worth cooperating with. In particular, we explain how the patterns of dishonest behavior observed in recent experiments can be motivated by preferences for social and self-esteem. These preferences have evolved because they are adaptive in an environment where it is advantageous to be selected as a partner by others and where these others are strategically vigilant: they efficiently evaluate the expected benefit of cooperating with specific partners and attend to their intentions. We specify the adaptive value of strategic vigilance and preferences for social and self-esteem. We argue that evolved preferences for social and self-esteem are satisfied by applying mechanisms of strategic vigilance to one's own behavior. We further argue that such cognitive processes obviate the need for the evolution of preferences for fairness and social norm compliance. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 83% |
| Unknown | 1 | 17% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Hungary | 2 | 4% |
| United States | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 47 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 18% |
| Lecturer | 7 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 12% |
| Unknown | 10 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 20 | 39% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 16% |
| Philosophy | 4 | 8% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 4% |
| Decision Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 11 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 21 January 2023.
All research outputs
#1,417,041
of 25,312,451 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#2,919
of 34,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,062
of 327,135 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#54
of 477 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,312,451 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 327,135 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 477 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.