| Title |
Point of view filming and the elicitation interview
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Tijdschrift voor Medisch Onderwijs, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40037-016-0278-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jonathan Skinner, Gerard J Gormley |
| Abstract |
Face-to-face interviews are a fundamental research tool in qualitative research. Whilst this form of data collection can provide many valuable insights, it can often fall short of providing a complete picture of a research subject's experiences. Point of view (PoV) interviewing is an elicitation technique used in the social sciences as a means of enriching data obtained from research interviews. Recording research subjects' first person perspectives, for example by wearing digital video glasses, can afford deeper insights into their experiences. PoV interviewing can promote making visible the unverbalizable and does not rely as much on memory as the traditional interview. The use of such relatively inexpensive technology is gaining interest in health profession educational research and pedagogy, such as dynamic simulation-based learning and research activities. In this interview, Dr Gerry Gormley (a medical education researcher) talks to Dr Jonathan Skinner (an anthropologist with an interest in PoV interviewing), exploring some of the many crossover implications with PoV interviewing for medical education research and practice. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 25% |
| Canada | 1 | 6% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 6% |
| Australia | 1 | 6% |
| Malaysia | 1 | 6% |
| Isle of Man | 1 | 6% |
| United States | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 6 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 7 | 44% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 7 | 44% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ireland | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 33 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 21% |
| Researcher | 7 | 21% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Professor | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 10 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 32% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Psychology | 2 | 6% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 12% |
| Unknown | 10 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 24 November 2021.
All research outputs
#4,307,416
of 25,402,889 outputs
Outputs from Tijdschrift voor Medisch Onderwijs
#194
of 574 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,102
of 377,775 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tijdschrift voor Medisch Onderwijs
#3
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,402,889 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 574 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.7. 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 377,775 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.