↓ Skip to main content

Review of Nada Gligorov: Neuroethics and the Scientific Revision of Common Sense

Overview of attention for article published in Neuroethics, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Readers on

mendeley
2 Mendeley
Title
Review of Nada Gligorov: Neuroethics and the Scientific Revision of Common Sense
Published in
Neuroethics, February 2017
DOI 10.1007/s12152-017-9306-y
Authors

Paul Boswell

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 2 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 2 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 1 50%
Unknown 1 50%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 1 50%
Unknown 1 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 28 August 2017.
All research outputs
#4,748,750
of 25,202,494 outputs
Outputs from Neuroethics
#251
of 435 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,825
of 317,271 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuroethics
#11
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,202,494 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 435 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 317,271 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 75% 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 is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.