↓ Skip to main content

The principle of proportionality revisited: interpretations and applications

Overview of attention for article published in Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, November 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
2 policy sources

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 Mendeley
Title
The principle of proportionality revisited: interpretations and applications
Published in
Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, November 2011
DOI 10.1007/s11019-011-9360-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Göran Hermerén

Abstract

The principle of proportionality is used in many different contexts. Some of these uses and contexts are first briefly indicated. This paper focusses on the use of this principle as a moral principle. I argue that under certain conditions the principle of proportionality is helpful as a guide in decision-making. But it needs to be clarified and to be used with some flexibility as a context-dependent principle. Several interpretations of the principle are distinguished, using three conditions as a starting point: importance of objective, relevance of means, and most favourable option. The principle is then tested against an example, which suggests that a fourth condition, focusing on non-excessiveness, needs to be added. I will distinguish between three main interpretations of the principle, some primarily with uses in research ethics, others with uses in other areas of bioethics, for instance in comparisons of therapeutic means and ends. The relations between the principle of proportionality and the precautionary principle are explored in the following section. It is concluded that the principles are different and may even clash. In the next section the principle of proportionality is applied to some medical examples drawn from research ethics and bioethics. In concluding, the status of the principle of proportionality as a moral principle is discussed. What has been achieved so far and what remains to be done is finally summarized.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 46 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 17%
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Professor 4 8%
Student > Master 4 8%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 13 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 13%
Social Sciences 4 8%
Psychology 4 8%
Arts and Humanities 3 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 6%
Other 13 27%
Unknown 15 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 June 2020.
All research outputs
#2,884,525
of 24,047,183 outputs
Outputs from Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy
#84
of 612 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,481
of 144,770 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy
#2
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,047,183 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 612 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 144,770 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.