↓ Skip to main content

Apontamentos críticos sobre estigma e medicalização à luz da psicologia e da antropologia

Overview of attention for article published in Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Apontamentos críticos sobre estigma e medicalização à luz da psicologia e da antropologia
Published in
Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, September 2015
DOI 10.1590/1413-81232015209.08732015
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lygia de Sousa Viégas, Rui Massato Harayama, Marilene Proença Rebello de Souza

Abstract

This article aims to reflect on ethical aspects involved in the social sciences and humanities researches conducted in the educational context. In this debate, which goes beyond the limits of Resolution 466/2012 and the Plataforma Brasil bureaucracies, we refer to Psychology and Anthropology critical readings in order to emphasize the ethical risks in the medicalized view of education and human development, which has contributed to the production of stigmas that reinforces school exclusion. As central elements of this questioning, we highlight: the debate about the illusion that research in humanities and social sciences do not imply ethical risks and the false dichotomy of biomedical sciences x social and human sciences within the research in psychology and anthropology in education. Attesting to the importance of such problems we referred to researches of national and international authors in the field of school /educational psychology and neuroscience. Through these considerations, the article concludes for the importance of ethical rigor in humanities and social sciences researches, focusing not only in the construction of the project and the methodological procedures of data collection, but also in the research results interpretations and in the publication of reports and scientific articles.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 4%
Brazil 1 4%
Unknown 21 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 3 13%
Student > Bachelor 3 13%
Student > Master 3 13%
Other 2 9%
Researcher 2 9%
Other 4 17%
Unknown 6 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 6 26%
Arts and Humanities 5 22%
Unspecified 3 13%
Psychology 1 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 6 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 21 September 2015.
All research outputs
#22,759,802
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Ciência & Saúde Coletiva
#1,775
of 2,037 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,476
of 276,791 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ciência & Saúde Coletiva
#34
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,037 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 276,791 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.