| Title |
The Happy Hen on Your Supermarket Shelf
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, May 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11673-013-9448-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christine Parker, Carly Brunswick, Jane Kotey |
| Abstract |
This paper investigates what "free-range" eggs are available for sale in supermarkets in Australia, what "free-range" means on product labelling, and what alternative "free-range" offers to cage production. The paper concludes that most of the "free-range" eggs currently available in supermarkets do not address animal welfare, environmental sustainability, and public health concerns but, rather, seek to drive down consumer expectations of what these issues mean by balancing them against commercial interests. This suits both supermarkets and egg producers because it does not challenge dominant industrial-scale egg production and the profits associated with it. A serious approach to free-range would confront these arrangements, and this means it may be impossible to truthfully label many of the "free-range" eggs currently available in the dominant supermarkets as free-range. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 51 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 13 | 25% |
| Researcher | 10 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Unknown | 10 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 16 | 30% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 11 | 21% |
| Unknown | 12 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 19 May 2017.
All research outputs
#1,879,415
of 22,711,242 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Bioethical Inquiry
#67
of 596 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,818
of 195,531 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Bioethical Inquiry
#3
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,711,242 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 596 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 195,531 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 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.