↓ Skip to main content

Darkness’s Descent on the American Anthropological Association

Overview of attention for article published in Human Nature, February 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#23 of 385)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
blogs
9 blogs
twitter
37 tweeters
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Darkness’s Descent on the American Anthropological Association
Published in
Human Nature, February 2011
DOI 10.1007/s12110-011-9103-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alice Dreger

Abstract

In September 2000, the self-styled “anthropological journalist” Patrick Tierney began to make public his work claiming that the Yanomamö people of South America had been actively—indeed brutally—harmed by the sociobiological anthropologist Napoleon Chagnon and the geneticist-physician James Neel. Following a florid summary of Tierney’s claims by the anthropologists Terence Turner and Leslie Sponsel, the American Anthropological Association (AAA) saw fit to take Tierney’s claims seriously by conducting a major investigation into the matter. This paper focuses on the AAA’s problematic actions in this case but also provides previously unpublished information on Tierney’s falsehoods. The work presented is based on a year of research by a historian of medicine and science. The author intends the work to function as a cautionary tale to scholarly associations, which have the challenging duty of protecting scholarship and scholars from baseless and sensationalistic charges in the era of the Internet and twenty-four-hour news cycles.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 37 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 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 8%
Canada 2 3%
Norway 1 2%
New Zealand 1 2%
Unknown 54 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 22%
Student > Master 11 17%
Researcher 9 14%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Other 5 8%
Other 19 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 20 32%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 14%
Psychology 7 11%
Arts and Humanities 7 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 10%
Other 14 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 126. 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 25 July 2019.
All research outputs
#119,533
of 13,499,469 outputs
Outputs from Human Nature
#23
of 385 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#547
of 96,881 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Nature
#1
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,499,469 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 385 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 28.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 96,881 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them