↓ Skip to main content

Publicidade de alimentos para crianças e adolescentes: desvelar da perspectiva ética no discurso da autorregulamentação

Overview of attention for article published in Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 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
Publicidade de alimentos para crianças e adolescentes: desvelar da perspectiva ética no discurso da autorregulamentação
Published in
Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, July 2017
DOI 10.1590/1413-81232017227.03222017
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dillian Adelaine Cesar da Silva, Antonio Carlos Rodrigues da Cunha, Thiago Rocha da Cunha, Caroline Filla Rosaneli

Abstract

When it comes to food marketing, children are one of the major targets. Regulatory actions can play a strategic role in health protection. The objective of this research was to characterize the ethical perspective in the discourse against state regulatory actions on food marketing directed at children, aiming to understand the context of the discourse's production and how it creates meaning. The methodology adopted was qualitative, with documentary analysis and use of concepts and procedures from Discourse Analysis. The work of Hans Jonas, specifically his Responsibility Principle, and Garrafa and Port's Intervention Bioethics oriented the analysis. The self-regulation discourse analysis showed an ethical perspective in which relations of consumption predominate over the children´s vulnerability. The rhetorical excess is constant, as well as the use of resources like naturalization, untruthfulness, ideological dissimulation and euphemism. An erasure of social conflicts takes place, and an ahistorical perspective is present. The discourse does not align with Jonas´ Responsibility Principle, nor those of Intervention Bioethics. Lastly, the ethical perspective of the discourse represents a double paradox, because it is a business discourse that hides its competitive roots and metamorphoses into an ethical one.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 24%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 14%
Student > Master 2 7%
Other 1 3%
Librarian 1 3%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 12 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 17%
Social Sciences 2 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 3%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 13 45%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 April 2018.
All research outputs
#7,991,809
of 12,745,229 outputs
Outputs from Ciência & Saúde Coletiva
#248
of 704 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#162,442
of 273,184 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ciência & Saúde Coletiva
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,745,229 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 704 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 273,184 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them