↓ Skip to main content

Social Dominance Orientation, Dispositional Empathy, and Need for Cognitive Closure Moderate the Impact of Empathy-Skills Training, but Not Patient Contact, on Medical Students' Negative Attitudes…

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 Mendeley
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.
Title
Social Dominance Orientation, Dispositional Empathy, and Need for Cognitive Closure Moderate the Impact of Empathy-Skills Training, but Not Patient Contact, on Medical Students' Negative Attitudes toward Higher-Weight Patients
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, April 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00504
Pubmed ID
Authors

Angela Meadows, Suzanne Higgs, Sara E. Burke, John F. Dovidio, Michelle van Ryn, Sean M. Phelan

Abstract

Anti-fat bias in healthcare providers and medical students has serious implications for quality of care of higher-weight patients. Studies of interventions aimed at reducing anti-fat attitudes in medical students have generally been disappointing, with little enduring effect. It is possible that some students may be more receptive to prejudice-reducing influences than others, due to underlying differences in their personal characteristics. It is also possible that attitudes toward patients, specifically, may differ from anti-fat attitudes in general, and prejudice-reduction effectiveness on patient-specific attitudes has not yet been evaluated. The present study explored the effect on general and patient-specific anti-fat attitudes of (1) contact with higher-weight individuals prior to and during medical school; and (2) training designed to increase medical students' empathy toward patients by encouraging them to take the patient's perspective during clinical encounters. The moderating role of individual difference factors on effectiveness of contact and student-reported hours of empathy training on patient-specific attitudes was assessed. A total of 3,576 students enrolled across 49 US medical schools completed an online survey at the start of their first year of medical school and at the end of their fourth year. Favorable contact experience with higher-weight patients predicted improved attitudes toward heavier patients after 4 years of medical school, and appeared sufficient to partially offset the effects of dislike of higher-weight individuals at baseline. The impact of favorable contact on general anti-fat attitudes was less strong, highlighting the importance of using target-specific outcome measures. The positive effects of favorable contact on attitudes toward higher-weight patients did not differ based on students' baseline levels of social dominance orientation, dispositional empathy, or need for cognitive closure. In contrast, the effectiveness of training did vary by student characteristics, generally being more effective in students who were more egalitarian and empathic at baseline, with little effect, or even adverse effects in students low in these traits. Overall, however, perspective-taking training produced only small improvements in attitudes toward higher-weight patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 99 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 14%
Student > Bachelor 13 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 11%
Researcher 7 7%
Unspecified 6 6%
Other 22 22%
Unknown 26 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 27 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 6%
Unspecified 6 6%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 30 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 11 April 2021.
All research outputs
#4,917,774
of 24,253,070 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#7,945
of 32,619 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,947
of 312,621 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#214
of 554 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,253,070 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,619 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 312,621 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 554 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.