↓ Skip to main content

Eugenesia en Buenos Aires: discursos, prácticas, historiografía

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
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
11 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
Eugenesia en Buenos Aires: discursos, prácticas, historiografía
Published in
História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos, December 2016
DOI 10.1590/s0104-59702016000500009
Pubmed ID
Authors

Diego Armus

Abstract

Since the early 1990s, a series of studies underscored the overwhelming presence of positive eugenics in modern Argentina. These works emphasized the marginal role which discourse on eugenics took on violent methods for selection. In recent years, this point of view has shifted, emphasizing the conceptual viscosity of eugenics as well as the presence of negative eugenic discourses. This paper discusses these historiographic trends, and also dwells on the narratives that those perspectives articulated in relation to the question of sterilization and regulation of marriage of those who had tuberculosis in Buenos Aires during the first half of the twentieth century. This example stresses the need to examine discourse as well as practices in understanding and making sense of the past.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 11 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 27%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 27%
Researcher 1 9%
Student > Bachelor 1 9%
Unknown 3 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 2 18%
Psychology 2 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 9%
Arts and Humanities 1 9%
Philosophy 1 9%
Other 1 9%
Unknown 3 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 September 2020.
All research outputs
#4,621,110
of 18,982,937 outputs
Outputs from História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos
#340
of 1,119 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,390
of 271,272 outputs
Outputs of similar age from História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos
#6
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,982,937 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,119 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 271,272 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.