↓ Skip to main content

On the autonomy of the concept of disease in psychiatry

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
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 (91st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 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
On the autonomy of the concept of disease in psychiatry
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00457
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas Schramme

Abstract

Does the reference to a mental realm in using the notion of mental disorder lead to a dilemma that consists in either implying a Cartesian account of the mind-body relation or in the need to give up a notion of mental disorder in its own right? Many psychiatrists seem to believe that denying substance dualism requires a purely neurophysiological stance for explaining mental disorder. However, this conviction is based on a limited awareness of the philosophical debate on the mind-body problem. This article discusses the reasonableness of the concept of mental disorder in relation to reductionist and eliminativist strategies in the philosophy of mind. It is concluded that we need a psychological level of explanation that cannot be reduced to neurophysiological findings in order to make sense of mental disorder.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 19%
Student > Bachelor 8 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Researcher 4 9%
Other 9 21%
Unknown 5 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 17 40%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 21%
Philosophy 3 7%
Social Sciences 3 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 2%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 4 9%
Attention Score in Context

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 08 September 2017.
All research outputs
#2,309,525
of 22,715,151 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#4,478
of 29,509 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,435
of 280,748 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#233
of 969 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,715,151 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,509 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 280,748 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 969 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.