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 |
Extensive enactivism: why keep it all in?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00706 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daniel D. Hutto, Michael D. Kirchhoff, Erik Myin |
| Abstract |
Radical enactive and embodied approaches to cognitive science oppose the received view in the sciences of the mind in denying that cognition fundamentally involves contentful mental representation. This paper argues that the fate of representationalism in cognitive science matters significantly to how best to understand the extent of cognition. It seeks to establish that any move away from representationalism toward pure, empirical functionalism fails to provide a substantive "mark of the cognitive" and is bereft of other adequate means for individuating cognitive activity. It also argues that giving proper attention to the way the folk use their psychological concepts requires questioning the legitimacy of commonsense functionalism. In place of extended functionalism-empirical or commonsensical-we promote the fortunes of extensive enactivism, clarifying in which ways it is distinct from notions of extended mind and distributed cognition. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 | 3 | 75% |
| Colombia | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 2% |
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 1% |
| France | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 75 | 89% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 17% |
| Researcher | 14 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 8% |
| Professor | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 22 | 26% |
| Unknown | 9 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Philosophy | 26 | 31% |
| Psychology | 18 | 21% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 10% |
| Arts and Humanities | 8 | 10% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 11 | 13% |
| Unknown | 10 | 12% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 14 November 2021.
All research outputs
#2,844,604
of 25,743,152 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#1,330
of 7,754 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,415
of 263,873 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#61
of 257 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,743,152 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,754 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 well, scoring higher than 82% 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 263,873 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 257 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.