↓ Skip to main content

Hazards inherent in interdisciplinary behavioral research

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Zoology, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 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
Hazards inherent in interdisciplinary behavioral research
Published in
Frontiers in Zoology, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/1742-9994-12-s1-s21
Pubmed ID
Authors

David Crews, Seth A Weisberg, Sahotra Sarkar

Abstract

Many, if not all, questions in biology and psychology today were formulated and considered in depth, though typically in a different language, from the 1700's to the early 1900's. However, because of politics or fashion, some topics fell out of favor or failed to recruit new scientists and hence languished. Despite greatly expanded scholarship in the history of the life sciences in the twentieth century, many such topics have had to be rediscovered in recent years, while much of the wisdom already accrued stays in the older literature and not in active minds. This is particularly true today when scientific advances appear at breakneck speed. It would not be an exaggeration to say that many 'breakthroughs' turn out really to be rediscoveries of forgotten observations. Two areas of particular significance to the interdisciplinary study of behavior are the Norms of Reaction (from Biology) and the concept of Plasticity (from Psychology). These and related fields benefit from the perspective of epigenetics so long as rigorous operational definitions are implemented. It is also important to revive Hogben's admonition that the interaction of hereditary and environment cannot be understood outside of the context of development. Five examples of increasing complexity in phenotypic plasticity in brain and behavior are presented to illustrate this perspective.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 6%
Germany 1 3%
Switzerland 1 3%
Unknown 31 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 26%
Researcher 5 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 11%
Other 3 9%
Student > Master 2 6%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 8 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 43%
Psychology 4 11%
Neuroscience 2 6%
Computer Science 1 3%
Environmental Science 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 10 29%
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 24 November 2021.
All research outputs
#19,944,994
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Zoology
#587
of 695 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#190,800
of 278,035 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Zoology
#23
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 695 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.0. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 278,035 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.