↓ Skip to main content

`Agon'izing Over Consensus: Why Habermasian Ideals cannot be `Real'

Overview of attention for article published in Planning Theory, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#40 of 145)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
187 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
124 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
`Agon'izing Over Consensus: Why Habermasian Ideals cannot be `Real'
Published in
Planning Theory, August 2016
DOI 10.1177/1473095203002001005
Authors

Jean Hillier

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 124 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 2%
United States 2 2%
Poland 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Unknown 117 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 28%
Student > Master 26 21%
Researcher 13 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 9%
Other 7 6%
Other 32 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 73 59%
Environmental Science 13 10%
Arts and Humanities 12 10%
Unspecified 10 8%
Engineering 6 5%
Other 10 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 11 December 2015.
All research outputs
#3,618,779
of 12,473,569 outputs
Outputs from Planning Theory
#40
of 145 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,256
of 280,202 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Planning Theory
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,473,569 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 145 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 280,202 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.