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 |
Academic urban legends
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Social Studies of Science, June 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1177/0306312714535679 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ole Bjørn Rekdal |
| Abstract |
Many of the messages presented in respectable scientific publications are, in fact, based on various forms of rumors. Some of these rumors appear so frequently, and in such complex, colorful, and entertaining ways that we can think of them as academic urban legends. The explanation for this phenomenon is usually that authors have lazily, sloppily, or fraudulently employed sources, and peer reviewers and editors have not discovered these weaknesses in the manuscripts during evaluation. To illustrate this phenomenon, I draw upon a remarkable case in which a decimal point error appears to have misled millions into believing that spinach is a good nutritional source of iron. Through this example, I demonstrate how an academic urban legend can be conceived and born, and can continue to grow and reproduce within academia and beyond. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2,543 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 | 543 | 21% |
| United Kingdom | 230 | 9% |
| Canada | 73 | 3% |
| Australia | 54 | 2% |
| Germany | 50 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 44 | 2% |
| India | 33 | 1% |
| Korea, Republic of | 28 | 1% |
| Sweden | 25 | <1% |
| Other | 317 | 12% |
| Unknown | 1146 | 45% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1840 | 72% |
| Scientists | 541 | 21% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 107 | 4% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 52 | 2% |
| Unknown | 3 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 428 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 10 | 2% |
| Sweden | 3 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 2 | <1% |
| Germany | 2 | <1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 2 | <1% |
| France | 2 | <1% |
| Canada | 2 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Other | 10 | 2% |
| Unknown | 391 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 100 | 23% |
| Researcher | 68 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 47 | 11% |
| Other | 29 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 25 | 6% |
| Other | 98 | 23% |
| Unknown | 61 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 97 | 23% |
| Psychology | 42 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 38 | 9% |
| Computer Science | 31 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 17 | 4% |
| Other | 134 | 31% |
| Unknown | 69 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1925. 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 08 April 2024.
All research outputs
#5,023
of 25,801,916 outputs
Outputs from Social Studies of Science
#1
of 969 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19
of 244,454 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Social Studies of Science
#1
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,801,916 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 969 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 244,454 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 13 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 92% of its contemporaries.