↓ Skip to main content

Financial Planning for Retirement: A Psychosocial Perspective

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
194 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
Financial Planning for Retirement: A Psychosocial Perspective
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02338
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gabriela Topa, Gregg Lunceford, Richard E. Boyatzis

Abstract

Retirement is a time of life that has grown ever longer in the developed world, and the number of pensioners has increased accordingly, questioning the strength of Social Security systems and the social safety net in general. Financial Planning for Retirement (FRP) consists of the series of activities involved in the accumulation of wealth to cover needs in the post-retirement stage of life. The negative short-, mid-, and long-term consequences of inadequate Financial Planning for Retirement do not only affect individuals, but also their extended families, homes, eventually producing an unwanted impact on the entire society. The Capacity-Willingness-Opportunity Model has been proposed to understand FPR, combined with Intentional Change Theory, a framework for understanding the process, antecedents and consequences of FPR. From this perspective, we propose this promising model, but there are a large number of variables that have not been included that offer novel ways to deepen our understanding of FPR. A focus on each dimension of the model, the role of age and psychosocial variables associated with demographic indicators such as gender, health status, and migration, allow us to provide a proposal of scientific advancement of FPR.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 194 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 194 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 8%
Student > Bachelor 12 6%
Lecturer 11 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 5%
Other 30 15%
Unknown 94 48%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Business, Management and Accounting 41 21%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 20 10%
Psychology 8 4%
Unspecified 7 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 3%
Other 19 10%
Unknown 94 48%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. 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 19 September 2023.
All research outputs
#1,198,854
of 24,466,750 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#2,476
of 32,970 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,104
of 450,217 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#67
of 538 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,466,750 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,970 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 450,217 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 538 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.