| Title |
Evolutionary Asiacentrism, Peking Man, and the Origins of␣Sinocentric Ethno-Nationalism
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of the History of Biology, April 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10739-014-9381-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hsiao-pei Yen |
| Abstract |
This paper discusses how the theory of evolutionary Asiacentrism and the Peking Man findings at the Zhoukoudian site stimulated Chinese intellectuals to construct Sinocentric ethno-nationalism during the period from the late 1920s to the early 1940s. It shows that the theory was first popularized by foreign scientists in Beijing, and the Peking man discoveries further provided strong evidence for the idea that Central Asia, or to be more specific, Tibet, Xinjiang, and Mongolia, was the original cradle of humans. Chinese scholars in the late 1930s and 1940s appropriated the findings to construct the monogenesis theory of the Chinese, which designated that all the diverse ethnic groups within the territory of China shared a common ancestor back to antiquity. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 13 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 21% |
| Researcher | 3 | 21% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 14% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 5 | 36% |
| Arts and Humanities | 4 | 29% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 7% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 3 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 23 November 2023.
All research outputs
#6,235,629
of 23,415,749 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the History of Biology
#122
of 491 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,084
of 228,355 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the History of Biology
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,415,749 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 491 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 228,355 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.