| Title |
Digitale Medien als Informationsquelle über Umwelt und Gesundheit für Laien
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00103-017-2549-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kai Sassenberg |
| Abstract |
Over the last two decades, the Internet has become the primary source of information. Thanks to the Internet, laypeople have access to information from the health and the environmental sector, which was for a long time available only to experts (e. g. scientific publications, statistics). Information on the Internet varies in quality, as generally anybody can publish online, without any quality control. At the same time, Internet use comes with specific situational characteristics. Given that the amount of information is nearly unlimited and that this information is easily available via search engines, users are not restricted to one or just a few texts, but can choose between multiple sources depending on their motivation and interest. Together with the heterogeneity of the sources, this provides the basis for a strong impact of motivation on the process and the outcomes of information acquisition online. Based on empirical research in the domain of Internet searching in the health sector, the current article discusses the impact of the use of digital media in the context of environmental medicine. Research has led to four conclusions: (1) Users are not sufficiently sensitive to the quality of information. (2) Information supporting their own opinion is preferably processed. (3) Users who feel threatened focus on positive information. (4) Vigilant users focus on negative information, which might result in cyberchrondria. The implications of these effects for the use of digital media in the sector of environmental medicine are discussed. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 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 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 12 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 33% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 25% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 8% |
| Researcher | 1 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 4 | 33% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 17% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 17% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 8% |
| Linguistics | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 02 May 2017.
All research outputs
#15,457,417
of 22,968,808 outputs
Outputs from Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz
#632
of 931 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#193,678
of 309,828 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz
#15
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,968,808 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 931 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 309,828 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.