| Title |
Color preferences in participants with high or low hypnotic susceptibility
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ndt.s154887 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Enyan Yu, Junpeng Zhu, Yunfei Tan, Zhengluan Liao, Yaju Qiu, Bingren Zhang, Chu Wang, Wei Wang |
| Abstract |
Color preferences vary among normal individuals and psychiatric patients, and this might be related to their different levels of hypnotic susceptibility. We hypothesized that individuals with higher hypnotic susceptibility prefer more arousing colors such as red. Out of 440 participants, we selected 70 with higher (HIGH) and 66 with lower (LOW) hypnotic susceptibilities, and asked them to undergo the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale: Form C (SHSSC) test, then to order their preferences of 11 colors. The HIGH group preferred red more and scored higher on the total SHSSC. The preference order of black was negatively predicted by the SHSSC Taste hallucination but positively by Arm rigidity, and the preference of yellow was positively predicted by Posthypnotic amnesia and Taste hallucination in the HIGH group. The red preference and the SHSSC associations with black and yellow preferences in participants with high hypnotic susceptibility help to clarify the individual difference of color preference and provide research hints for behavioral studies in normal individuals and psychiatric patients. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Congo | 1 | 13% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 13% |
| Australia | 1 | 13% |
| Malaysia | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 20 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 3 | 15% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Researcher | 2 | 10% |
| Professor | 2 | 10% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 8 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 3 | 15% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 10% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 10 | 50% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 27 December 2022.
All research outputs
#5,342,712
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#742
of 3,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,789
of 450,901 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#18
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,120 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 450,901 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 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.