↓ Skip to main content

Are identities oral? Understanding ethnobotanical knowledge after Irish independence (1937–1939)

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 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
Are identities oral? Understanding ethnobotanical knowledge after Irish independence (1937–1939)
Published in
Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13002-017-0189-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fiona Shannon, Astrid Sasse, Helen Sheridan, Michael Heinrich

Abstract

The Schools' Folklore Scheme (1937-1939) was implemented at a pivotal time in Irelands' political history. It resulted in a body of ethnological information that is unique in terms of when, why and how it was collected. This material consists of over 700,000 pages of information, including ethnomedicinal and ethnobotanical traditions, reflecting an oral identity that spans generations and that in many cases was not documented in writing until the 1930s. The intention of this study is to highlight the importance of the Schools' Folklore Scheme and to demonstrate an ethnographic approach based on recollections of original participants of the scheme, to further understand the material in the collection and the impact it had on the participants. This study involves an analysis of both oral and archival data. Eleven semi-structured interviews with original participants of the scheme were carried out between April and September 2016. Their corresponding schools' archival contributions to the scheme were located, and ethnomedicinal information was analysed and compared with the participants' recollections. The majority of participants' stated the scheme had a positive impact on them. Five participants' recalled collecting ethnomedicinal information, and there was a direct correlation between three of the participants' ethnomedicinal recollections and their entries in the archives. One third of all the ethnomedicinal entries analysed included the use of a plant. There were 191 plant mentions and 64 plant species named. Contacting the original participants offers a novel approach of analysing this archival material. It provides a unique first-hand account of this historical initiative, an insight into how the scheme was implemented and how it impacted upon the children. The ethnomedicinal and ethnobotanical information provides an understanding of the medicinal practices in Ireland during the 1930s. The plant species that were both orally recalled by participants and documented in the archives are in keeping with key ethnomedicinal systems throughout the world.

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 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 > Bachelor 9 21%
Other 4 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Researcher 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 9 21%
Unknown 10 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 7%
Unspecified 1 2%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 14 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 24 October 2021.
All research outputs
#13,772,685
of 24,167,226 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#430
of 760 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#209,196
of 445,647 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#10
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,167,226 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 760 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 445,647 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.