↓ Skip to main content

“We get what we deserve”: the belief in a just world and its health consequences for Blacks

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Behavioral Medicine, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#43 of 736)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
Title
“We get what we deserve”: the belief in a just world and its health consequences for Blacks
Published in
Journal of Behavioral Medicine, June 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10865-015-9652-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nao Hagiwara, Courtney J. Alderson, Jessica M. McCauley

Abstract

This study explored whether individual differences in the endorsement of the belief that the world is a just place (i.e., the just world belief) would predict individual differences in resilience/vulnerability to the negative health consequences of discrimination. One-hundred and thirty Blacks participated in a vital check and completed a computer-based questionnaire that included measures of the just world belief, perceived discrimination, physical and mental health, and the presence/absence of chronic illnesses. Endorsement of the just world belief was not associated with self-reported physical/mental health; however, it moderated the effects of perceived discrimination on the number of chronic illnesses and systolic blood pressure. These findings suggest that Blacks who believe that the world is a just place where they get what they deserve may be at a particularly higher risk for the negative health consequences of discrimination. Theoretical and clinical implications of the findings are discussed.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 5%
Unknown 38 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 8 20%
Unspecified 7 18%
Student > Bachelor 6 15%
Student > Master 4 10%
Researcher 4 10%
Other 11 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 20 50%
Unspecified 8 20%
Social Sciences 7 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 10%
Neuroscience 1 3%
Other 0 0%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 18 November 2016.
All research outputs
#553,049
of 12,316,253 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Behavioral Medicine
#43
of 736 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,253
of 264,707 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Behavioral Medicine
#3
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,316,253 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 736 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 264,707 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.