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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The ‘side effects’ of medicalization: A meta-analytic review of how biogenetic explanations affect stigma
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Psychology Review, June 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.cpr.2013.06.002 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Erlend P. Kvaale, Nick Haslam, William H. Gottdiener |
| Abstract |
Reducing stigma is crucial for facilitating recovery from psychological problems. Viewing these problems biomedically may reduce the tendency to blame affected persons, but critics have cautioned that it could also increase other facets of stigma. We report on the first meta-analytic review of the effects of biogenetic explanations on stigma. A comprehensive search yielded 28 eligible experimental studies. Four separate meta-analyses (Ns=1207-3469) assessed the effects of biogenetic explanations on blame, perceived dangerousness, social distance, and prognostic pessimism. We found that biogenetic explanations reduce blame (Hedges g=-0.324) but induce pessimism (Hedges g=0.263). We also found that biogenetic explanations increase endorsement of the stereotype that people with psychological problems are dangerous (Hedges g=0.198), although this result could reflect publication bias. Finally, we found that biogenetic explanations do not typically affect social distance. Promoting biogenetic explanations to alleviate blame may induce pessimism and set the stage for self-fulfilling prophecies that could hamper recovery from psychological problems. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 83 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 14 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 10 | 12% |
| Spain | 5 | 6% |
| Australia | 3 | 4% |
| Ireland | 2 | 2% |
| Canada | 2 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 2 | 2% |
| France | 2 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 9 | 11% |
| Unknown | 33 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 61 | 73% |
| Scientists | 12 | 14% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 8 | 10% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 371 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 3 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Hong Kong | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 360 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 63 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 62 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 58 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 31 | 8% |
| Researcher | 28 | 8% |
| Other | 62 | 17% |
| Unknown | 67 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 168 | 45% |
| Social Sciences | 42 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 29 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 2% |
| Other | 38 | 10% |
| Unknown | 79 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 177. 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 02 November 2023.
All research outputs
#230,815
of 25,657,205 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Psychology Review
#57
of 1,573 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,465
of 209,966 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Psychology Review
#2
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,657,205 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,573 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 31.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 209,966 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.