↓ Skip to main content

“The wondrous eyes of a new technology”—a history of the early electroencephalography (EEG) of psychopathy, delinquency, and immorality

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 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
“The wondrous eyes of a new technology”—a history of the early electroencephalography (EEG) of psychopathy, delinquency, and immorality
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, April 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00232
Pubmed ID
Authors

Felix Schirmann

Abstract

This article presents a history of the early electroencephalography (EEG) of psychopathy, delinquency, and immorality in Great Britain and the United States in the 1940s and 1950s. Then, EEG was a novel research tool that promised ground-breaking insights in psychiatry and criminology. Experts explored its potential regarding the diagnosis, classification, etiology, and treatment of unethical and unlawful persons. This line of research yielded tentative and inconsistent findings, which the experts attributed to methodological and theoretical shortcomings. Accordingly, the scientific community discussed the reliability, validity, and utility of EEG, and launched initiatives to calibrate and standardize the novel tool. The analysis shows that knowledge production, gauging of the research tool, and attempts to establish credibility for EEG in the study of immoral persons occurred simultaneously. The paper concludes with a reflection on the similarities between EEG and neuroimaging-the prime research tool in the current neuroscience of morality-and calls for a critical assessment of their potentials and limitations in the study of immorality and crime.

X Demographics

X Demographics

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

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 3%
India 1 1%
Switzerland 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 72 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 17%
Student > Master 11 14%
Student > Bachelor 10 13%
Researcher 8 10%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 3 4%
Other 14 18%
Unknown 18 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 12%
Neuroscience 7 9%
Engineering 6 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 6%
Other 14 18%
Unknown 20 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. 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 27 December 2023.
All research outputs
#1,464,489
of 25,075,028 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#679
of 7,621 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,205
of 231,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#39
of 210 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,075,028 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,621 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 231,991 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 210 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.