↓ Skip to main content

Immune to Situation: The Self-Serving Bias in Unambiguous Contexts

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 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
Immune to Situation: The Self-Serving Bias in Unambiguous Contexts
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, May 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00822
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiaoyan Wang, Li Zheng, Lin Li, Yijie Zheng, Peng Sun, Fanzhi A. Zhou, Xiuyan Guo

Abstract

Traditionally, the self-serving bias has been investigated in ambiguous contexts in which participants work on tasks that measure novel abilities before making attributions without clear criteria for success or failure feedback. Prior studies have confirmed that the self-serving bias is pervasive in the general population, yet it varies significantly across situations involving ambiguous contexts. The present study features an unambiguous context encompassing interpersonal events that involved implicit causality (with the "self" as an actor or recipient), the inherent logic of which indicated attribution criteria. The aim of this study was to explore whether there is a self-serving bias in unambiguous contexts and to examine whether it is as sensitive to situation as it has been shown to be in ambiguous contexts. The results showed that, in an unambiguous context, participants exhibited self-serving bias in relation to attribution associated with negative interpersonal events. Additionally, the self-serving bias was greater in the actor condition relative to the recipient condition (Study 1), and this effect was not affected by the level of self-awareness, which was manipulated by the use or otherwise of a camera during the experiment (Study 2). Our findings provide evidence for the existence of the self-serving bias in unambiguous contexts. Moreover, the self-serving bias was shown to be immune to situation in unambiguous contexts, but it did depend on factors associated with the events per se, such as the actor versus recipient role that the self played in interpersonal events.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 50 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 12%
Student > Master 4 8%
Researcher 3 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 19 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 19 38%
Neuroscience 3 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 4%
Linguistics 1 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 18 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 February 2023.
All research outputs
#1,997,024
of 25,253,876 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#4,049
of 34,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,886
of 319,834 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#121
of 601 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,253,876 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,120 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 well, scoring higher than 88% 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 319,834 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 601 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.