↓ Skip to main content

Wiley Online Library

A path model of different forms of impulsivity with externalizing and internalizing psychopathology: Towards greater specificity

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of Clinical Psychology, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
84 Mendeley
Title
A path model of different forms of impulsivity with externalizing and internalizing psychopathology: Towards greater specificity
Published in
British Journal of Clinical Psychology, May 2017
DOI 10.1111/bjc.12135
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sheri L. Johnson, Jordan A. Tharp, Andrew D. Peckham, Charles S. Carver, Claudia M. Haase

Abstract

A growing empirical literature indicates that emotion-related impulsivity (compared to impulsivity that is unrelated to emotion) is particularly relevant for understanding a broad range of psychopathologies. Recent work, however, has differentiated two forms of emotion-related impulsivity: A factor termed Pervasive Influence of Feelings captures tendencies for emotions (mostly negative emotions) to quickly shape thoughts, and a factor termed Feelings Trigger Action captures tendencies for positive and negative emotions to quickly and reflexively shape behaviour and speech. This study used path modelling to consider links from emotion-related and non-emotion-related impulsivity to a broad range of psychopathologies. Undergraduates completed self-report measures of impulsivity, depression, anxiety, aggression, and substance use symptoms. A path model (N = 261) indicated specificity of these forms of impulsivity. Pervasive Influence of Feelings was related to anxiety and depression, whereas Feelings Trigger Action and non-emotion-related impulsivity were related to aggression and substance use. The findings of this study suggest that emotion-relevant impulsivity could be a potentially important treatment target for a set of psychopathologies. Recent work has differentiated two forms of emotion-related impulsivity. This study tests a multivariate path model linking emotion-related and non-emotion-related impulsivity with multiple forms of psychopathology. Impulsive thoughts in response to negative emotions were related to anxiety and depression. Impulsive actions in response to emotions were related to aggression and substance use, as did non-emotion-related impulsivity. The study was limited by the reliance on self-report measures of impulsivity and psychopathology. There is a need for longitudinal work on how these forms of impulsivity predict the onset and course of psychopathology.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 84 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 19%
Student > Master 13 15%
Researcher 12 14%
Student > Bachelor 10 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 8%
Other 13 15%
Unknown 13 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 39 46%
Neuroscience 7 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 6%
Sports and Recreations 3 4%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 19 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 10 June 2017.
All research outputs
#4,111,152
of 22,979,862 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of Clinical Psychology
#218
of 658 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,523
of 310,872 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of Clinical Psychology
#10
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,979,862 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 658 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 310,872 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 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.