↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Interoceptive sensitivity as a proxy for emotional intensity and its relationship with perseverative cognition

Overview of attention for article published in Psychology Research and Behavior Management, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
Title
Interoceptive sensitivity as a proxy for emotional intensity and its relationship with perseverative cognition
Published in
Psychology Research and Behavior Management, December 2017
DOI 10.2147/prbm.s139790
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ricardo G Lugo, Kirsi Helkala, Benjamin J Knox, Øyvind Jøsok, Natalie M Lande, Stefan Sütterlin

Abstract

Technical advancement in military cyber defense poses increased cognitive demands on cyber officers. In the cyber domain, the influence of emotion on decision-making is rarely investigated. The purpose of this study was to assess psychophysiological correlation with perseverative cognitions during emotionally intensive/stressful situations in cyber military personnel. In line with parallel research on clinical samples high on perseverative cognition, we expected a decreased interoceptive sensitivity in officers with high levels of perseverative cognition. We investigated this association in a sample of 27 cyber officer cadets. Contrary to our hypothesis, there was no relationship between the factors. Cyber officers might display characteristics not otherwise found in general populations. The cyber domain may lead to a selection process that attracts different profiles of cognitive and emotional processing.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 30%
Researcher 6 18%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 10 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 9 27%
Neuroscience 6 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 9%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 12 36%
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 December 2017.
All research outputs
#15,879,822
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Psychology Research and Behavior Management
#340
of 778 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#244,505
of 446,259 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychology Research and Behavior Management
#5
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 778 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 446,259 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.