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 |
Social Cognition in a Clinical Sample of Personality Disorder Patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychiatry, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyt.2015.00075 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Amparo Ruiz-Tagle, Elsa Costanzo, Delfina De Achával, Salvador Guinjoan |
| Abstract |
Social cognition was assessed in a clinical sample of personality disorder (PD) stable patients receiving ambulatory treatment (N = 17) and healthy matched controls (N = 17) using tests of recognition of emotions in faces and eyes, in a test of social faux pas and in theory of mind (ToM) stories. Results indicated that when compared with healthy controls, individuals with PD showed a clear tendency to obtain lower scoring in tasks assessing recognition of emotion in faces (T = -2.602, p = 0.014), eyes (T = -3.593, p = 0.001), ToM stories (T = -4.706, p = 0.000), and Faux pas (T = -2.227, p = 0.035). In the present pilot study, PD individuals with a normal cognitive efficiency showed an impaired performance at social cognition assessment including emotion recognition and ToM. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 57 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 10% |
| Researcher | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 21% |
| Unknown | 19 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 24 | 41% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 2% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Unknown | 20 | 34% |
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 15 May 2015.
All research outputs
#18,409,030
of 22,803,211 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#6,820
of 9,905 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,633
of 266,756 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#41
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,803,211 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,905 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 266,756 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.