↓ Skip to main content

A structural interpretation of measurement and some related epistemological issues

Overview of attention for article published in Studies in History & Philosophy of Science Part A, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
38 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.
Article details
Title
A structural interpretation of measurement and some related epistemological issues
Published in
Studies in History & Philosophy of Science Part A, August 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.shpsa.2017.08.001
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Measurement is widely applied because its results are assumed to be more reliable than opinions and guesses, but this reliability is sometimes justified in a stereotyped way. After a critical analysis of such stereotypes, a structural characterization of measurement is proposed, as partly empirical and partly theoretical process, by showing that it is in fact the structure of the process that guarantees the reliability of its results. On this basis the role and the structure of background knowledge in measurement and the justification of the conditions of object-relatedness ("objectivity") and subject-independence ("intersubjectivity") of measurement are specifically discussed.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 11%
Professor 4 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 6 16%
Unknown 15 39%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 4 11%
Engineering 4 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Psychology 2 5%
Physics and Astronomy 2 5%
Other 7 18%
Unknown 17 45%
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 August 2017.
All research outputs
#28,611,663
of 34,372,222 outputs
Outputs from Studies in History & Philosophy of Science Part A
#782
of 963 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#287,849
of 357,933 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Studies in History & Philosophy of Science Part A
#3
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,372,222 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 963 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% 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 357,933 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.