| Title |
Back to the Grindstone? The Archaeological Potential of Grinding-Stone Studies in Africa with Reference to Contemporary Grinding Practices in Marakwet, Northwest Kenya
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
African Archaeological Review, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10437-017-9264-0 |
| Authors |
Anna C. Shoemaker, Matthew I.J. Davies, Henrietta L. Moore |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| South Africa | 1 | 14% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 14% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 14% |
| United States | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 57% |
| Scientists | 3 | 43% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 32 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 19% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 6% |
| Professor | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 8 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Arts and Humanities | 15 | 47% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 9% |
| Engineering | 2 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 10 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 November 2023.
All research outputs
#4,404,706
of 24,561,012 outputs
Outputs from African Archaeological Review
#80
of 386 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,260
of 320,035 outputs
Outputs of similar age from African Archaeological Review
#2
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,561,012 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 386 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 320,035 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.