You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Quantum ergonomics: shifting the paradigm of the systems agenda
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Ergonomics, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1080/00140139.2016.1231840 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Guy H. Walker, Paul M. Salmon, Melissa Bedinger, Neville A. Stanton |
| Abstract |
A paradigm is an accepted world view. If we do not continually question our paradigm then wider trends and movements will overtake the discipline leaving it ill adapted to future challenges. This Special Issue is an opportunity to keep systems thinking at the forefront of ergonomics theory and practice. Systems thinking prompts us to ask whether ergonomics, as a discipline, has been too timid? Too preoccupied with the resolution of immediate problems with industrial-age methods when, approaching fast, are developments which could render these operating assumptions an irrelevance. Practical case studies are presented to show how abstract systems problems can be tackled head-on to deliver highly innovative and cost-effective insights. The strategic direction of the discipline foregrounds high-quality systems problems. These are something the discipline is well able to respond to provided that the appropriate operating paradigms are selected. Practitioner Summary: High-quality systems problems are the future of the discipline. How do we convert obtuse sounding systems concepts into practical interventions? In this paper, the essence of systems thinking is distilled and practical case studies used to demonstrate the benefits of this new paradigm. |
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 | 2 | 13% |
| United States | 2 | 13% |
| Indonesia | 1 | 6% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 6% |
| France | 1 | 6% |
| Argentina | 1 | 6% |
| Australia | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 7 | 44% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 63% |
| Scientists | 4 | 25% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 6% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 57 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 9% |
| Professor | 5 | 9% |
| Researcher | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 12 | 21% |
| Unknown | 10 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 18 | 32% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 11% |
| Psychology | 5 | 9% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 11 | 19% |
| Unknown | 12 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 2018.
All research outputs
#2,786,204
of 22,896,955 outputs
Outputs from Ergonomics
#227
of 2,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,674
of 314,045 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ergonomics
#5
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,896,955 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,261 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 314,045 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 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.