↓ Skip to main content

Debating the ‘integration of Islam’: the discourse between governmental actors and Islamic representatives in Germany and the Netherlands

Overview of attention for article published in Comparative Migration Studies, August 2018
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)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
14 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
Debating the ‘integration of Islam’: the discourse between governmental actors and Islamic representatives in Germany and the Netherlands
Published in
Comparative Migration Studies, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s40878-018-0086-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthias Kortmann

Abstract

This paper examines what influences the views of governmental and Islamic actors in consultations on the integration of Islam in Germany and the Netherlands. Disentangling institutionalist and constructivist assumptions within the concept of political opportunity structures and employing a content analysis of primary documents and interviews, the paper shows that expectations of both approaches apply: On the one hand, Islamic organizations (as challengers) and governmental representatives (as defenders of the status quo) each problematize the issue differently. Yet, their views also depend on specific national contextual factors (i.e. regimes of immigrant integration and religious governance) and, therefore, differ cross-nationally, too. The paper argues that it is fruitful to uncover the ways participants in the discourses define and conceive of central terms and concepts prevalent in order to disclose their fundamental motivations, interests, and strategies.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Lecturer 3 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Professor 1 7%
Other 2 14%
Unknown 4 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 5 36%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 7%
Linguistics 1 7%
Chemical Engineering 1 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 36%

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 06 August 2018.
All research outputs
#2,994,882
of 13,333,056 outputs
Outputs from Comparative Migration Studies
#54
of 114 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,211
of 268,449 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Comparative Migration Studies
#2
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,333,056 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 77th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 114 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 268,449 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 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.