| Title |
Towards a Multi-Agent-Based Modelling of Obsidian Exchange in the Neolithic Near East
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, December 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10816-013-9196-1 |
| Authors |
David Ortega, Juan José Ibañez, Lamya Khalidi, Vicenç Méndez, Daniel Campos, Luís Teira |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 | 44% |
| United States | 1 | 11% |
| Spain | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 3 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 78% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 11% |
| Scientists | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 2% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 84 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 22 | 25% |
| Researcher | 22 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 14% |
| Professor | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 12 | 14% |
| Unknown | 10 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Arts and Humanities | 38 | 43% |
| Social Sciences | 21 | 24% |
| Computer Science | 6 | 7% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Unknown | 13 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 02 July 2015.
All research outputs
#2,437,349
of 23,867,274 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory
#65
of 342 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,428
of 314,030 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory
#1
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,867,274 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 342 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 314,030 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them