↓ Skip to main content

Variações sobre a "cultura científica" em quatro autores brasileiros

Overview of attention for article published in História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos, March 2015
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 (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 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
Variações sobre a "cultura científica" em quatro autores brasileiros
Published in
História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos, March 2015
DOI 10.1590/s0104-59702015005000011
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marina Assis Fonseca, Bernardo Jefferson de Oliveira

Abstract

The concept of "scientific culture" varies historically, and the examination of its continuities and transformations can help us understand the relationship between the scientific community and society. The views on the role of science in society go far beyond the advancement of a particular form of knowledge and its possible or promising fruit. They involve values, postures and practices to be disseminated and reveal expectations of social and cultural advancement. This article discusses four expressive visions of different moments in Brazilian history. The formulations of four influential authors in scientific and educational policies of the country at different times are presented and analyzed: Miguel Ozorio de Almeida, Anísio Teixeira, Maurício Rocha e Silva and Carlos Vogt.

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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 41 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 22%
Student > Master 7 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Researcher 4 10%
Professor 3 7%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 9 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 12 29%
Arts and Humanities 5 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 12%
Environmental Science 3 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 12 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 03 May 2022.
All research outputs
#2,651,167
of 22,807,037 outputs
Outputs from História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos
#132
of 1,582 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,817
of 263,469 outputs
Outputs of similar age from História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos
#1
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,807,037 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,582 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 263,469 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.