↓ Skip to main content

Maker Cultures and the Prospects for Technological Action

Overview of attention for article published in Science and Engineering Ethics, July 2016
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 (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
157 Mendeley
Title
Maker Cultures and the Prospects for Technological Action
Published in
Science and Engineering Ethics, July 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11948-016-9796-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susana Nascimento, Alexandre Pólvora

Abstract

Supported by easier and cheaper access to tools and expanding communities, maker cultures are pointing towards the ideas of (almost) everyone designing, creating, producing and distributing renewed, new and improved products, machines, things or artefacts. A careful analysis of the assumptions and challenges of maker cultures emphasizes the relevance of what may be called technological action, that is, active and critical interventions regarding the purposes and applications of technologies within ordinary lives, thus countering the deterministic trends of current directions of technology. In such transformative potential, we will explore a set of elements what is and could be technological action through snapshots of maker cultures based on the empirical research conducted in three particular contexts: the Fab Lab Network, Maker Media core outputs and initiatives such as Maker Faires, and the Open Source Hardware Association (OSHWA). Elements such as control and empowerment through material engagement, openness and sharing, and social, cultural, political and ethical values of the common good in topics such as diversity, sustainability and transparency, are critically analysed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 157 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Unknown 155 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 14%
Student > Bachelor 15 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 9%
Researcher 11 7%
Other 28 18%
Unknown 42 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 27 17%
Engineering 19 12%
Design 19 12%
Arts and Humanities 12 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 7 4%
Other 27 17%
Unknown 46 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 06 September 2019.
All research outputs
#3,482,650
of 23,953,397 outputs
Outputs from Science and Engineering Ethics
#276
of 948 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,083
of 360,840 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science and Engineering Ethics
#8
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,953,397 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 948 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 360,840 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.