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 |
Would the Australian megafauna have become extinct if humans had never colonised the continent? Comments on “A review of the evidence for a human role in the extinction of Australian megafauna and an alternative explanation” by S. Wroe and J. Field
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Quaternary Science Reviews, February 2007
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.quascirev.2006.10.008 |
| Authors |
Barry W. Brook, David M.J.S. Bowman, David A. Burney, Timothy F. Flannery, Michael K. Gagan, Richard Gillespie, Christopher N. Johnson, Peter Kershaw, John W. Magee, Paul S. Martin, Gifford H. Miller, Benny Peiser, Richard G. Roberts |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 121 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 2% |
| France | 2 | 2% |
| Brazil | 2 | 2% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Czechia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 109 | 90% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 30 | 25% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 27 | 22% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 7% |
| Other | 25 | 21% |
| Unknown | 4 | 3% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 30 | 25% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 30 | 25% |
| Environmental Science | 28 | 23% |
| Social Sciences | 11 | 9% |
| Arts and Humanities | 11 | 9% |
| Other | 3 | 2% |
| Unknown | 8 | 7% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 15 November 2019.
All research outputs
#4,367,050
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Quaternary Science Reviews
#1,198
of 3,837 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,462
of 168,733 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Quaternary Science Reviews
#3
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,837 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 168,733 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.