The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 5 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.
Timeline
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
Title |
A method of evaluating effects of antecedent precipitation on duststorms and its application to Yuma, Arizona, 1981?1988
|
---|---|
Published in |
Climatic Change, December 1990
|
DOI | 10.1007/bf00138374 |
Authors |
David J. Mackinnon, Diana F. Elder, Paula J. Helm, Marlene F. Tuesink, Catherine A. Nist |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 5 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Professor | 2 | 40% |
Researcher | 1 | 20% |
Student > Postgraduate | 1 | 20% |
Student > Master | 1 | 20% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Environmental Science | 2 | 40% |
Earth and Planetary Sciences | 1 | 20% |
Materials Science | 1 | 20% |
Unknown | 1 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 29 July 2016.
All research outputs
#5,911,788
of 22,903,988 outputs
Outputs from Climatic Change
#3,335
of 5,816 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,087
of 59,606 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Climatic Change
#7
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,903,988 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,816 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.6. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 59,606 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.