↓ Skip to main content

Situating Suicide as an Anthropological Problem: Ethnographic Approaches to Understanding Self-Harm and Self-Inflicted Death

Overview of attention for article published in Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry, March 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
102 Mendeley
Title
Situating Suicide as an Anthropological Problem: Ethnographic Approaches to Understanding Self-Harm and Self-Inflicted Death
Published in
Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry, March 2012
DOI 10.1007/s11013-012-9255-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

James Staples, Tom Widger

Abstract

More than a century after Durkheim's sociological classic placed the subject of suicide as a concern at the heart of social science, ethnographic, cross-cultural analyses of what lie behind people's attempts to take their own lives remain few in number. But by highlighting how the ethnographic method privileges a certain view of suicidal behaviour, we can go beyond the limited sociological and psychological approaches that define the field of 'suicidology' in terms of social and psychological 'pathology' to engage with suicide from our informants' own points of view-and in so doing cast the problem in a new light and new terms. In particular, suicide can be understood as a kind of sociality, as a special kind of social relationship, through which people create meaning in their own lives. In this introductory essay we offer an overview of the papers that make up this special issue and map out the theoretical opportunities and challenges they present.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
Germany 1 <1%
Sri Lanka 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Unknown 96 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 23%
Student > Master 22 22%
Researcher 12 12%
Student > Postgraduate 8 8%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Other 19 19%
Unknown 10 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 45 44%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 12%
Psychology 12 12%
Arts and Humanities 6 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 13 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 September 2022.
All research outputs
#2,337,696
of 23,906,448 outputs
Outputs from Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry
#121
of 622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,738
of 158,838 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry
#3
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,906,448 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 622 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 158,838 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.