↓ Skip to main content

Ethnic and adoption attitudes among Guatemalan University students

Overview of attention for article published in SpringerPlus, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
Title
Ethnic and adoption attitudes among Guatemalan University students
Published in
SpringerPlus, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s40064-015-1578-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Judith L. Gibbons, Ana Gabriela González-Oliva, Kostas Mylonas

Abstract

Intercountry adoptions from Guatemala were highly controversial, because of the large numbers of children being adopted to the USA, along with evidence of corruption and child theft. Since the implementation of the Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption in 2008, Guatemala's central authority for adoption has prioritized domestic placements for children over intercountry adoption. A possible attitudinal barrier to domestic adoption in Guatemala-negative attitudes and prejudice against Indigenous people-was investigated through questionnaires measuring attitudes toward adoption and attitudes toward and social distance from the two major ethnic groups (Ladino and Indigenous). Guatemalan university students (N = 177, 61 % men) were recruited from basic required courses at a private university. Results showed that attitudes toward adoption in general were more favorable than toward interethnic adoption, with the most negative attitudes toward adoption of Ladino children by Indigenous parents. Multiple regression and analysis of covariance models revealed that female gender, experience with adoption and more positive attitudes about Indigenous persons were associated with more positive attitudes toward adoption. The findings imply that negative attitudes toward Indigenous persons are associated with negative attitudes toward adoption, and serve as barriers to promoting domestic adoption in Guatemala.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Guatemala 1 7%
Unknown 14 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 2 13%
Professor 2 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Other 3 20%
Unknown 4 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 6 40%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 20%
Linguistics 1 7%
Social Sciences 1 7%
Unknown 4 27%
Attention Score in Context

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 05 October 2016.
All research outputs
#15,383,207
of 22,886,568 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#935
of 1,850 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#228,037
of 388,337 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#68
of 201 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,886,568 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,850 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 388,337 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 201 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.