↓ Skip to main content

Cognitive Appraisals Mediate Affective Reactivity in Affiliative Extraversion

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 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 Appraisals Mediate Affective Reactivity in Affiliative Extraversion
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, May 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00782
Pubmed ID
Authors

Greig Inglis, Marc C. Obonsawin, Simon C. Hunter

Abstract

Extraversion is comprised of two main components of affiliation and agency. Affiliative and agentic extraversion have been found to predict positive activation in response to appetitive stimuli, and affiliative extraversion also predicts warmth-affection in response to affiliative stimuli. The aim of this study was to test whether cognitive appraisals could account for these personality-emotion relationships. In an online experiment, 192 participants completed affiliative and appetitive imagery tasks, and reported their affect before and after each task. Participants also reported on how they appraised the imagined events. Affiliative extraversion was positively associated with warmth-affection following the affiliative imagery, and this relationship was mediated by appraisals of intrinsic pleasantness and compatibility with internal standards. Affiliative extraversion also predicted positive activation following the affiliative imagery, and this relationship was mediated by appraisals of importance. Neither agentic nor affiliative extraversion predicted any other form of affect following either the affiliative or appetitive imagery tasks. These results suggest that cognitive appraisals may be one mechanism that mediate affective reactivity in affiliative extraversion, although future confirmatory studies are required to further test this hypothesis.

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 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Lecturer 3 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 17%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Professor 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 6 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 6 33%
Social Sciences 2 11%
Neuroscience 2 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 5 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 23 May 2018.
All research outputs
#15,332,207
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#16,709
of 31,442 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#200,621
of 331,350 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#474
of 658 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,442 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 331,350 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 658 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.