↓ Skip to main content

Promise and Deceit: Pharmakos, Drug Replacement Therapy, and the Perils of Experience

Overview of attention for article published in Culture, Medicine & Psychiatry, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#47 of 442)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
Title
Promise and Deceit: Pharmakos, Drug Replacement Therapy, and the Perils of Experience
Published in
Culture, Medicine & Psychiatry, May 2014
DOI 10.1007/s11013-014-9376-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Todd Meyers

Abstract

The problem of lying as a feature of medication compliance has been well documented in anthropological and clinical literatures. Yet the role of the lie-its destabilizing effects on the continuity of drug treatment and therapy, as a technology of drug misuse, or as a way to understand the neuro-chemical processes of treatment (pharmacotherapy "tricking" or lying to the brain)-has been less considered, particularly in the context of opioid replacement therapy. The following paper is set against the backdrop of a three-year study of adolescents receiving a relatively new drug (buprenorphine) for the treatment of opiate dependency inside and outside of highly monitored treatment environments in the United States. Lies give order not only to the experience of addiction but also to the experience of therapy as well. In order to better understand this ordering of experience, the paper puts the widely discussed conceptual duality of the pharmakon (healing and poison) in conversation with a perilously overlooked subject in the critical study of pharmacotherapy, namely the pharmakos or the personification of sacrifice. The paper demonstrates how the patient-subject comes to represent therapeutic promise by allowing for the possibility of (and often performing) deceit.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 17%
Student > Master 4 17%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Other 2 9%
Other 7 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 9 39%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 30%
Psychology 3 13%
Unspecified 2 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 4%
Other 1 4%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 March 2019.
All research outputs
#901,539
of 13,494,857 outputs
Outputs from Culture, Medicine & Psychiatry
#47
of 442 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,945
of 189,111 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Culture, Medicine & Psychiatry
#3
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,494,857 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 442 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 189,111 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 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.