↓ Skip to main content

The ‘Operational’ Definition of Self-Control

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, July 2018
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 (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
80 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
393 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
The ‘Operational’ Definition of Self-Control
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, July 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01231
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marleen Gillebaart

Abstract

Self-control is a hot topic across disciplines. As such, consensus on defining self-control is critical for advancing both scientific progress as well as societal impact of research findings. Specifically, the emergence of initiation as a self-control component, and the notion of effortless and strategic self-control, give rise to the question whether and how to distinguish self-control from self-regulation. In this paper, I propose an operational definition of self-control, based on converging definitions from the literature as well as on the emergence of new perspectives on self-control. The TOTE-model (Test-Operate-Test-Exit) of self-regulation will serve as a basis for this definition as it gives clear guidance for the inclusion of self-control as a component of, but not synonymous to self-regulation. Ultimately, an 'operational' definition is proposed in which self-regulation entails scaffolding for goal pursuit, including setting standards, and monitoring discrepancies, whereas self-control entails everything that one does in the 'operate' phase. This perspective allows for inclusion of traditional as well as contemporary research on self-control, and can provide direction for future studies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 393 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 393 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 55 14%
Student > Master 44 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 7%
Researcher 18 5%
Lecturer 14 4%
Other 32 8%
Unknown 202 51%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 102 26%
Social Sciences 19 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 13 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 2%
Other 30 8%
Unknown 213 54%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 January 2024.
All research outputs
#2,988,442
of 25,210,618 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#5,772
of 34,060 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,720
of 335,281 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#173
of 720 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,210,618 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,060 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 335,281 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 720 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.