| Title |
Fashioning Racial Selves: Reflexive Practices in the Society for Racial Hygiene
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry, September 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11013-011-9228-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Eric J. Engstrom |
| Abstract |
The paper examines the admissions practices of the German Society for Racial Hygiene (Gesellschaft für Rassenhygiene) between 1905 and 1916. It assesses the Society's changing statutes and the various charts (genealogical, anthropological, and clinical) used to vet prospective members. The Society's admissions procedures were dual-use technologies, at once serving as evidence for both the larger goals of racial science research and the narrower aims of social inclusion/exclusion. But these procedures can also be interpreted as reflexive practices by which members fashioned their sense of racial self and cultivated relations to that self. Finally, the article situates these practices in the context of histories of human experimentation, the self, and biopolitics. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 6 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Librarian | 1 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 17% |
| Professor | 1 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 17% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 17% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 1 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 17% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 17% |
| Psychology | 1 | 17% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 17% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 1 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 December 2011.
All research outputs
#5,012,530
of 23,906,448 outputs
Outputs from Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry
#322
of 622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,251
of 116,653 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry
#3
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,906,448 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% 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 is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 116,653 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.