| Title |
An analysis of the titles of papers submitted to the UK REF in 2014: authors, disciplines, and stylistic details
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scientometrics, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11192-016-2081-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
John Hudson |
| Abstract |
In 2014 over 52,000 academics submitted >155,500 journal articles in 36 different disciplines for assessment in the UK's four-year Research Evaluation Framework (the REF). In this paper the characteristics of the titles of these papers are assessed. Although these varied considerably between the disciplines, the main findings were that: (i) the lengths of the titles increased with the number of authors in almost all disciplines, (ii) the use of colons and question marks tended to decline with increasing author numbers-although there were a few disciplines, such as economics, where the reverse was evident, (iii) papers published later on in the 4-year period tended to have more authors than those published earlier, and (iv), in some disciplines, the numbers of subsequent citations to papers were higher when the titles were shorter and when they employed colons but lower when they used question marks. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 19% |
| Norway | 2 | 10% |
| United States | 2 | 10% |
| Spain | 1 | 5% |
| Brazil | 1 | 5% |
| Australia | 1 | 5% |
| Japan | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 9 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 43% |
| Scientists | 7 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 14% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Russia | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 56 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 14% |
| Researcher | 7 | 12% |
| Lecturer | 7 | 12% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 10 | 18% |
| Unknown | 15 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Linguistics | 10 | 18% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 9% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 4 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 15 | 26% |
| Unknown | 17 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. 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 22 August 2019.
All research outputs
#1,475,301
of 25,387,480 outputs
Outputs from Scientometrics
#250
of 2,908 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,484
of 378,077 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientometrics
#7
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,387,480 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,908 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 378,077 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.