↓ Skip to main content

Gender Differences in Meaningful Leisure Among Older Adults: Joint Displays of Four Phenomena

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 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
Gender Differences in Meaningful Leisure Among Older Adults: Joint Displays of Four Phenomena
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, September 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01450
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nuria Jaumot-Pascual, María Jesús Monteagudo, Douglas A. Kleiber, Jaime Cuenca

Abstract

Vital events, such as widowhood and retirement, are broadly accepted as points of inflection in the lives of older adults that often differ according to gender. In this study, we analyzed the influence of gender on meaningful leisure among older adults through the integration of qualitative and quantitative findings. The use of joint displays revealed that in this sample of people from Northern Spain: (1) there were no significant differences in the influence of retirement and widowhood on the leisure of the two genders, (2) the ethic of care was a constraining factor in older women's leisure, (3) women were more innovative in their leisure in older age, and (4) volunteer activities were highly segregated by gender. The use of joint displays helped illuminate these four phenomena in light of quantitative and qualitative data.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor 5 13%
Student > Master 5 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Researcher 3 8%
Other 9 24%
Unknown 7 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 9 24%
Psychology 5 13%
Arts and Humanities 3 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 5%
Unspecified 2 5%
Other 9 24%
Unknown 8 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 28 September 2018.
All research outputs
#3,983,418
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#6,737
of 30,483 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,597
of 336,121 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#233
of 736 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,483 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 336,121 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 736 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.