| Title |
The use of concept maps for knowledge management: from classrooms to research labs
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry, January 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00216-011-5694-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Paulo Rogério Miranda Correia |
| Abstract |
Our contemporary society asks for new strategies to manage knowledge. The main activities developed by academics involve knowledge transmission (teaching) and production (research). Creativity and collaboration are valuable assets for establishing learning organizations in classrooms and research labs. Concept mapping is a useful graphical technique to foster some of the disciplines required to create and develop high-performance teams. The need for a linking phrase to clearly state conceptual relationships makes concept maps (Cmaps) very useful for organizing our own ideas (externalization), as well as, sharing them with other people (elicitation and consensus building). The collaborative knowledge construction (CKC) is supported by Cmaps because they improve the communication signal-to-noise ratio among participants with high information asymmetry. In other words, we can identify knowledge gaps and insightful ideas in our own Cmaps when discussing them with our counterparts. Collaboration involving low and high information asymmetry can also be explored through peer review and student-professor/advisor interactions, respectively. In conclusion, when it is used properly, concept mapping can provide a competitive advantage to produce and share knowledge in our contemporary society. To map is to know, as stated by Wandersee in 1990. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Colombia | 1 | 1% |
| Pakistan | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 68 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 22% |
| Researcher | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 12% |
| Professor | 6 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 12 | 16% |
| Unknown | 16 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 15 | 21% |
| Computer Science | 7 | 10% |
| Engineering | 7 | 10% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 5 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 17 | 23% |
| Unknown | 18 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 04 April 2018.
All research outputs
#7,355,930
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#1,695
of 9,619 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,063
of 252,183 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#21
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,619 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 252,183 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 87 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.