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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Positive–Negative Asymmetry in the Evaluations of Political Candidates. The Role of Features of Similarity and Affect in Voter Behavior
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00213 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Andrzej Falkowski, Magdalena Jabłońska |
| Abstract |
In this study we followed the extension of Tversky's research about features of similarity with its application to open sets. Unlike the original closed-set model in which a feature was shifted between a common and a distinctive set, we investigated how addition of new features and deletion of existing features affected similarity judgments. The model was tested empirically in a political context and we analyzed how positive and negative changes in a candidate's profile affect the similarity of the politician to his or her ideal and opposite counterpart. The results showed a positive-negative asymmetry in comparison judgments where enhancing negative features (distinctive for an ideal political candidate) had a greater effect on judgments than operations on positive (common) features. However, the effect was not observed for comparisons to a bad politician. Further analyses showed that in the case of a negative reference point, the relationship between similarity judgments and voting intention was mediated by the affective evaluation of the candidate. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Greece | 1 | 33% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 12 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 3 | 25% |
| Professor | 2 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 3 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 5 | 42% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 17% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 25% |
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 27 February 2018.
All research outputs
#15,492,327
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#18,968
of 30,282 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#210,955
of 330,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#433
of 567 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,282 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 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 330,052 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 567 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.