↓ Skip to main content

説話の虚構と虚構の説話 : 藤原高藤説話をめぐって(文学における虚構とは何か,文学の部,<特集>日本文学協会第40回大会報告)

Overview of attention for article published in Japanese Literature, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages
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
説話の虚構と虚構の説話 : 藤原高藤説話をめぐって(文学における虚構とは何か,文学の部,<特集>日本文学協会第40回大会報告)
Published in
Japanese Literature, August 2017
DOI 10.20620/nihonbungaku.35.2_64
Authors

池上 洵一

Attention Score in Context

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 26 May 2020.
All research outputs
#8,891,409
of 26,243,859 outputs
Outputs from Japanese Literature
#56
of 391 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,259
of 332,639 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Japanese Literature
#39
of 302 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,243,859 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 391 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 332,639 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 302 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.