↓ Skip to main content

Biosecurity and Open-Source Biology: The Promise and Peril of Distributed Synthetic Biological Technologies

Overview of attention for article published in Science & Engineering Ethics, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
8 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 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
Biosecurity and Open-Source Biology: The Promise and Peril of Distributed Synthetic Biological Technologies
Published in
Science & Engineering Ethics, September 2014
DOI 10.1007/s11948-014-9591-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicholas G. Evans, Michael J. Selgelid

Abstract

In this article, we raise ethical concerns about the potential misuse of open-source biology (OSB): biological research and development that progresses through an organisational model of radical openness, deskilling, and innovation. We compare this organisational structure to that of the open-source software model, and detail salient ethical implications of this model. We demonstrate that OSB, in virtue of its commitment to openness, may be resistant to governance attempts.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Russia 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 45 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 23%
Student > Master 10 21%
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Other 4 9%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 6 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 9 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 9%
Engineering 3 6%
Other 13 28%
Unknown 7 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 02 April 2019.
All research outputs
#1,782,276
of 16,491,346 outputs
Outputs from Science & Engineering Ethics
#167
of 798 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,025
of 213,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science & Engineering Ethics
#3
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,491,346 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 798 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 213,122 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.