↓ Skip to main content

Positive Arousal Increases Individuals’ Preferences for Risk

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, December 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 (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
7 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 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
Positive Arousal Increases Individuals’ Preferences for Risk
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, December 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02142
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrea Galentino, Nicolao Bonini, Lucia Savadori

Abstract

Much is known about the effect of negative arousal on decision making, but little is known about the effect of positive arousal. In this study, we manipulated positive arousal and measured individual choices under risk using an incentivized task. Participants were randomly assigned to either a low arousal or a high arousal condition and asked to choose between pairs of two-outcome monetary lotteries with the same expected value but different risk in terms of outcome variance. The probability was set at 50% for each lottery. Participants in the high arousal group selected the riskier lottery more often and took more time to make choices than participants in the low arousal group. This finding shows that introducing a pleasant arousing cue as part of the decision context shifts an individual's preferences toward the risky economic option and away from the safer one.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 22%
Student > Bachelor 8 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 13%
Researcher 6 11%
Other 3 6%
Other 10 19%
Unknown 8 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 30%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 6 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 9%
Neuroscience 5 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 7%
Other 9 17%
Unknown 9 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 October 2022.
All research outputs
#1,883,289
of 25,595,500 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#3,843
of 34,680 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,141
of 446,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#85
of 533 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,595,500 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 34,680 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. 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 446,411 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 533 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.