↓ Skip to main content

Autoritarismo y eugenesia punitiva: higiene racial y nacionalcatolicismo en el franquismo, 1936-1945

Overview of attention for article published in História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos, December 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 (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 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
Autoritarismo y eugenesia punitiva: higiene racial y nacionalcatolicismo en el franquismo, 1936-1945
Published in
História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos, December 2016
DOI 10.1590/s0104-59702016000500008
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ricardo Campos

Abstract

This paper examines some of the main elements that shaped eugenic discourse and practices during the first decades of the Franco regime. It primarily addresses the ideological basis of racial hygiene stemming from Francoist medicine and psychiatry, examining its relationship with the concept of Spanishness (Hispanidad). It shows that Francoist eugenics had punitive and coercive aspects and outlines the role it played in the brutal repression unleashed against the regime's political enemies, constructing its anti-Spanish identity. The paper also explores how the Catholic Church accepted eugenics as long as it was not linked to neo-Malthusianism and did not propagate sterilization, contraception, and abortion. In this respect, the paper examines the Catholic Church's position on the premarital certificate and counseling.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 25%
Student > Bachelor 2 17%
Researcher 2 17%
Student > Postgraduate 1 8%
Unknown 4 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Arts and Humanities 3 25%
Social Sciences 3 25%
Psychology 1 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 8%
Unknown 4 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 29 November 2023.
All research outputs
#2,543,960
of 25,806,080 outputs
Outputs from História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos
#80
of 1,630 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,234
of 419,043 outputs
Outputs of similar age from História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos
#6
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,806,080 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,630 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 419,043 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.