↓ Skip to main content

Children as ethnobotanists: methods and local impact of a participatory research project with children on wild plant gathering in the Grosses Walsertal Biosphere Reserve, Austria

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
103 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
Children as ethnobotanists: methods and local impact of a participatory research project with children on wild plant gathering in the Grosses Walsertal Biosphere Reserve, Austria
Published in
Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13002-016-0119-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susanne Grasser, Christoph Schunko, Christian R. Vogl

Abstract

Ethically sound research in applied ethnobiology should benefit local communities by giving them full access to research processes and results. Participatory research may ensure such access, but there has been little discussion on methodological details of participatory approaches in ethnobiological research. This paper presents and discusses the research processes and methods developed in the course of a three-year research project on wild plant gathering, the involvement of children as co-researchers and the project's indications for local impact. Research was conducted in the Grosses Walsertal Biosphere Reserve, Austria, between 2008 and 2010 in four research phases. In phase 1, 36 freelist interviews with local people and participant observation was conducted. In phase 2 school workshops were held in 14 primary school classes and their 189 children interviewed 506 family members with structured questionnaires. In phase 3, 27 children and two researchers co-produced participatory videos. In phase 4 indications for the impact of the project were investigated with questionnaires from ten children and with participant observation. Children participated in various ways in the research process and the scientific output and local impact of the project was linked to the phases, degrees and methods of children's involvement. Children were increasingly involved in the project, from non-participation to decision-making. Scientific output was generated from participatory and non-participatory activities whereas local impact - on personal, familial, communal and institutional levels - was mainly generated through the participatory involvement of children as interviewers and as co-producers of videos. Creating scientific outputs from participatory video is little developed in ethnobiology, whereas bearing potential. As ethnobotanists and ethnobiologists, if we are truly concerned about the impact and benefits of our research processes and results to local communities, the details of the research processes need to be deliberately planned and evaluated and then reported and discussed in academic publications.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Denmark 1 <1%
Unknown 102 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 18%
Student > Master 14 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 8%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 8%
Other 23 22%
Unknown 23 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 24 23%
Social Sciences 15 15%
Environmental Science 10 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 3%
Other 16 16%
Unknown 30 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 April 2017.
All research outputs
#7,154,603
of 22,893,031 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#295
of 736 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#109,158
of 320,105 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#4
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,893,031 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 736 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 320,105 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.