↓ Skip to main content

SAGE Publishing

Academic urban legends

Overview of attention for article published in Social Studies of Science, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#1 of 969)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
425 Mendeley
citeulike
21 CiteULike
Title
Academic urban legends
Published in
Social Studies of Science, June 2014
DOI 10.1177/0306312714535679
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ole Bjørn Rekdal

Abstract

Many of the messages presented in respectable scientific publications are, in fact, based on various forms of rumors. Some of these rumors appear so frequently, and in such complex, colorful, and entertaining ways that we can think of them as academic urban legends. The explanation for this phenomenon is usually that authors have lazily, sloppily, or fraudulently employed sources, and peer reviewers and editors have not discovered these weaknesses in the manuscripts during evaluation. To illustrate this phenomenon, I draw upon a remarkable case in which a decimal point error appears to have misled millions into believing that spinach is a good nutritional source of iron. Through this example, I demonstrate how an academic urban legend can be conceived and born, and can continue to grow and reproduce within academia and beyond.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2,542 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 425 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 10 2%
Sweden 3 <1%
Netherlands 2 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
New Zealand 2 <1%
France 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Other 10 2%
Unknown 388 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 100 24%
Researcher 68 16%
Student > Master 47 11%
Other 29 7%
Student > Bachelor 25 6%
Other 95 22%
Unknown 61 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 97 23%
Psychology 42 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 38 9%
Computer Science 31 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 17 4%
Other 131 31%
Unknown 69 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1926. 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 30 November 2023.
All research outputs
#4,970
of 25,595,500 outputs
Outputs from Social Studies of Science
#1
of 969 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19
of 243,952 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Social Studies of Science
#1
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,595,500 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 969 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 243,952 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 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.