↓ Skip to main content

Cognitive Engagement Mediates the Relationship between Positive Life Events and Positive Emotionality

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
29 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
Cognitive Engagement Mediates the Relationship between Positive Life Events and Positive Emotionality
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, October 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01861
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alexander Strobel, Kristin Anacker, Anja Strobel

Abstract

Need for Cognition (NFC) is conceptualized as an individuals' tendency to engage in and enjoy effortful cognitive activity and, thus, captures one's cognitive engagement. It plays a well-established role in information processing in experimental or academic contexts. However, so far comparably little is known about its consequences for other than purely cognitive or academic outcomes. Indeed, NFC is positively associated with personality traits pertaining to Positive Emotionality (PE) and negatively to traits related to Negative Emotionality (NE). Moreover, evidence suggests NFC to be related to an active, problem-focused coping style. We therefore hypothesized NFC to mediate between life events and individual differences in PE and NE. In a sample of N = 202 volunteers from the general population, we observed that the number of past positive and negative life events had direct effects on PE, and NE, respectively, and that for positive life events, a mediating effect on PE via NFC was observed, with a higher number of past positive life events being related to higher NFC that in turn was related to increased PE. Thus, the present results lend support to the notion of NFC as an important factor supporting personal well-being by way of its mediating role between the number of past positive life events and positive affect.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Researcher 3 10%
Other 2 7%
Student > Master 2 7%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 11 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 14 48%
Computer Science 1 3%
Environmental Science 1 3%
Unknown 13 45%
Attention Score in Context

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 20 October 2017.
All research outputs
#18,573,839
of 23,005,189 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,475
of 30,245 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#251,813
of 328,576 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#515
of 612 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,005,189 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,245 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 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 328,576 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 612 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.