↓ Skip to main content

Language, philosophy and the risk of failure: rereading the debate between Searle and Derrida

Overview of attention for article published in Continental Philosophy Review, June 2002
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#43 of 255)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
Title
Language, philosophy and the risk of failure: rereading the debate between Searle and Derrida
Published in
Continental Philosophy Review, June 2002
DOI 10.1023/a:1016583115826
Authors

Hagi Kenaan

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 9%
South Africa 2 9%
Unknown 18 82%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor > Associate Professor 4 18%
Other 3 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 14%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Lecturer 2 9%
Other 5 23%
Unknown 3 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Philosophy 7 32%
Arts and Humanities 5 23%
Social Sciences 3 14%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 9%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 3 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 09 February 2023.
All research outputs
#8,534,528
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Continental Philosophy Review
#43
of 255 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,700
of 126,576 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Continental Philosophy Review
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 255 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. 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 126,576 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them