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 |
Gender Differences in Performance Predictions: Evidence from the Cognitive Reflection Test
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01680 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Patrick Ring, Levent Neyse, Tamas David-Barett, Ulrich Schmidt |
| Abstract |
This paper studies performance predictions in the 7-item Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) and whether they differ by gender. After participants completed the CRT, they predicted their own (i), the other participants' (ii), men's (iii), and women's (iv) number of correct answers. In keeping with existing literature, men scored higher on the CRT than women and both men and women were too optimistic about their own performance. When we compare gender-specific predictions, we observe that men think they perform significantly better than other men and do so significantly more than women. The equality between women's predictions about their own performance and their female peers cannot be rejected. Our findings contribute to the growing literature on the underpinnings of behavior in economics and in psychology by uncovering gender differences in confidence about one's ability relative to same and opposite sex peers. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 | 3 | 20% |
| India | 2 | 13% |
| Japan | 1 | 7% |
| Austria | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 8 | 53% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 13 | 87% |
| Scientists | 2 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 64 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 13 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 13% |
| Researcher | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 10 | 16% |
| Unknown | 13 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 13 | 20% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 8 | 13% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 6 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 17% |
| Unknown | 20 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 72. 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 14 January 2024.
All research outputs
#595,255
of 25,393,455 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#1,229
of 34,361 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,427
of 318,343 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#21
of 445 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,393,455 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,361 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 96% 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 318,343 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 445 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.