↓ Skip to main content

Math skills and market and non-market outcomes: Evidence from an Amazonian society of forager-farmers

Overview of attention for article published in Economics of Education Review, September 2013
Altmetric Badge
28

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
27 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
Title
Math skills and market and non-market outcomes: Evidence from an Amazonian society of forager-farmers
Published in
Economics of Education Review, September 2013
DOI 10.1016/j.econedurev.2013.09.004
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eduardo A. Undurraga, Jere R. Behrman, Elena L. Grigorenko, Alan Schultz, Julie Yiu, TAPS Bolivia Study Team, Ricardo A. Godoy

Abstract

Research in industrial nations suggests that formal math skills are associated with improvements in market and non-market outcomes. But do these associations also hold in a highly autarkic setting with a limited formal labor market? We examined this question using observational annual panel data (2008 and 2009) from 1,121 adults in a native Amazonian society of forager-farmers in Bolivia (Tsimane'). Formal math skills were associated with an increase in wealth in durable market goods and in total wealth between data collection rounds, and with improved indicators of own reported perceived stress and child health. These associations did not vary significantly by people's Spanish skills or proximity to town. We conclude that the positive association between math skills and market and non-market outcomes extends beyond industrial nations to even highly autarkic settings.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 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 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 18%
Student > Bachelor 5 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 15%
Researcher 5 15%
Professor 3 9%
Other 9 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 12 36%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 7 21%
Psychology 4 12%
Unspecified 3 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Other 5 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. 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 18 December 2013.
All research outputs
#427,664
of 11,405,972 outputs
Outputs from Economics of Education Review
#52
of 797 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,845
of 150,154 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Economics of Education Review
#3
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,405,972 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 797 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 150,154 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.