| Title |
Ethics and Epistemology of Big Data
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11673-017-9815-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wendy Lipworth, Paul H. Mason, Ian Kerridge |
| Abstract |
In this Symposium on the Ethics and Epistemology of Big Data, we present four perspectives on the ways in which the rapid growth in size of research databanks-i.e. their shift into the realm of "big data"-has changed their moral, socio-political, and epistemic status. While there is clearly something different about "big data" databanks, we encourage readers to place the arguments presented in this Symposium in the context of longstanding debates about the ethics, politics, and epistemology of biobank, database, genetic, and epidemiological research. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 50% |
| France | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 56 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 8 | 14% |
| Unknown | 16 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 6 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 9% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 4 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 7% |
| Philosophy | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 21% |
| Unknown | 22 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 25 January 2018.
All research outputs
#14,958,596
of 23,007,887 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Bioethical Inquiry
#416
of 601 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#196,282
of 331,435 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Bioethical Inquiry
#14
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,887 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 601 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 331,435 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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.