↓ Skip to main content

Judging Strangers’ Trustworthiness is Associated with Theory of Mind Skills

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychiatry, April 2015
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 (90th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Judging Strangers’ Trustworthiness is Associated with Theory of Mind Skills
Published in
Frontiers in Psychiatry, April 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyt.2015.00052
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marie Prevost, Mathieu Brodeur, Kristine H. Onishi, Martin Lepage, Ian Gold

Abstract

Trusting people requires evaluating them to assess their trustworthiness. Evaluating a stranger's intentions is likely to be one method of assessing trustworthiness. The present study tested the hypothesis that judgments of trustworthiness are associated with mind reading skills, also called theory of mind (ToM). We tested a group of healthy participants and a group of patients with paranoid schizophrenia. Both groups made ToM judgments and judged the trustworthiness of strangers. Participants were also assessed for their disposition to trust as well as levels of paranoid belief. As anticipated, healthy participants had a normal ToM scores and patients with paranoid schizophrenia had poor ToM scores. In paranoid patients, better ability to read others' minds was associated with judging others as more trustworthy, while the reverse was found in the healthy participants (better mind reading was associated with judging others as less trustworthy), suggesting a non-linear relationship between trust in others and being able to read their intentions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Sweden 1 2%
Unknown 58 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 28%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Student > Postgraduate 5 8%
Student > Master 5 8%
Other 11 18%
Unknown 12 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 28 46%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 10%
Computer Science 2 3%
Philosophy 2 3%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 17 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 22 December 2015.
All research outputs
#1,746,760
of 22,799,071 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#926
of 9,902 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,032
of 264,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#11
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,799,071 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,902 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 264,968 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.