| Title |
Value-impregnated factual claims and slippery-slope arguments
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11019-016-9723-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gert Helgesson, Niels Lynøe, Niklas Juth |
| Abstract |
Slippery-slope arguments typically question a course of action by estimating that it will end in misery once the first unfortunate step is taken. Previous studies indicate that estimations of the long-term consequences of certain debated actions, such as legalizing physician-assisted suicide, may be strongly influenced by tacit personal values. In this paper, we suggest that to the extent that slippery-slope arguments rest on estimations of future events, they may be mere rationalizations of personal values. This might explain why there are proponents even for strikingly poor slippery-slope arguments. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 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 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 14 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 2 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 7% |
| Researcher | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 7 | 50% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 29% |
| Psychology | 2 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 7 | 50% |
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 18 May 2017.
All research outputs
#15,330,390
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy
#360
of 604 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#208,064
of 339,543 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy
#14
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 604 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 339,543 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.