| Title |
Methods for Practising Ethics in Research and Innovation: A Literature Review, Critical Analysis and Recommendations
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Science and Engineering Ethics, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11948-017-9961-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wessel Reijers, David Wright, Philip Brey, Karsten Weber, Rowena Rodrigues, Declan O’Sullivan, Bert Gordijn |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 34 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 8 | 24% |
| Netherlands | 2 | 6% |
| Austria | 1 | 3% |
| Italy | 1 | 3% |
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Denmark | 1 | 3% |
| Ireland | 1 | 3% |
| Germany | 1 | 3% |
| Pakistan | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 17 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 27 | 79% |
| Scientists | 3 | 9% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 205 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 205 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 29 | 14% |
| Researcher | 24 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 19 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 11 | 5% |
| Other | 37 | 18% |
| Unknown | 70 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Business, Management and Accounting | 22 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 21 | 10% |
| Computer Science | 20 | 10% |
| Engineering | 14 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 3% |
| Other | 42 | 20% |
| Unknown | 79 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 26 November 2021.
All research outputs
#1,606,786
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Science and Engineering Ethics
#116
of 987 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,762
of 327,329 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science and Engineering Ethics
#6
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 987 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 327,329 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.