The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 3 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
セノマニアン/チューロニアン期境界前後の軟体動物相 : 北海道大夕張地域と米国西部内陸地域の比較(<特集>白亜紀海洋無酸素事変の解明)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Fossils, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.14825/kaseki.74.0_36 |
| Authors |
栗原 憲一, 川辺 文久 |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 1 | 33% |
| Other | 1 | 33% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 May 2022.
All research outputs
#8,731,930
of 25,852,155 outputs
Outputs from Fossils
#26
of 116 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,913
of 333,087 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Fossils
#5
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,852,155 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 116 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 333,087 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.