2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.concog.2022.103296
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A bibliometric evaluation of the impact of theories of consciousness in academia and on social media

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, a recent bibliometric evaluation of consciousness theories showed that approximately 3-9 of the citations were based on testing ground. The authors reported that out of five considered theories (global workspace, higher order, integrated information, local recurrent and quantum theories), the IIT had the highest increase in publication and citation count (Yeung et al, 2022).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, a recent bibliometric evaluation of consciousness theories showed that approximately 3-9 of the citations were based on testing ground. The authors reported that out of five considered theories (global workspace, higher order, integrated information, local recurrent and quantum theories), the IIT had the highest increase in publication and citation count (Yeung et al, 2022).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The statement reflects the recognition that we have a problem within our field that can no longer be resolved by conventional scientific discourse. We have already exhausted the more intellectual and diplomatic means to contain potentially dangerous public misinformation 8,23,[27][28][29][30] , and unfortunately, we have failed. To those who think we should focus on the science: we already did [4][5][6][7][8] .…”
Section: Defining Pseudosciencementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The concern is that it is already false to characterize IIT, a panpsychist theory, as being empirically tested at all in a meaningful way, as Cogitate does in the preprint 9 . Characterizing IIT as one of the top two leading theories, and a well-established one, as they do in the preprint, is also problematic 23,28,38 .…”
Section: Cogitatementioning
confidence: 99%
“…During the preparation of this study, some other articles with similar or related aims have been published (Del Pin et al, 2021; Yaron et al, 2022; Yeung et al, 2022). While Del Pin et al’s (2021) focus is on “how to,” that is, the methodology of comparative analysis, and Yeung et al (2022) concentrate on public acceptance of theories, only Yaron et al’s (2022) work is similar to ours.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…During the preparation of this study, some other articles with similar or related aims have been published (Del Pin et al, 2021; Yaron et al, 2022; Yeung et al, 2022). While Del Pin et al’s (2021) focus is on “how to,” that is, the methodology of comparative analysis, and Yeung et al (2022) concentrate on public acceptance of theories, only Yaron et al’s (2022) work is similar to ours. However, as there are still differences useful for researchers of consciousness to pick up from the Yaron et al and our present report and because in such type of meta-analytic research converging evidence must be of value, we believe some parallelness can be excused.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%