↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Color preferences in participants with high or low hypnotic susceptibility

Overview of attention for article published in Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (58th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
8 Mendeley
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.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 8 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 8 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 3 38%
Professor 2 25%
Student > Master 2 25%
Student > Bachelor 1 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 4 50%
Psychology 2 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 16 April 2018.
All research outputs
#6,799,850
of 12,808,036 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#838
of 2,166 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#140,966
of 343,961 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#31
of 83 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,808,036 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,166 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 343,961 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 83 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 61% of its contemporaries.