↓ Skip to main content

Editorial: Coauthors gone bad; how to avoid publishing conflict and a proposed agreement for co-author teams

Overview of attention for article published in Biological Conservation, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
33 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
181 Mendeley
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.
Title
Editorial: Coauthors gone bad; how to avoid publishing conflict and a proposed agreement for co-author teams
Published in
Biological Conservation, August 2014
DOI 10.1016/j.biocon.2014.06.003
Authors

Richard B. Primack, John A. Cigliano, E.C.M. Parsons

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 33 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 181 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 3%
Germany 3 2%
Italy 2 1%
United Kingdom 2 1%
Finland 2 1%
Austria 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Other 4 2%
Unknown 158 87%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 56 31%
Student > Ph. D. Student 36 20%
Student > Master 27 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 10 6%
Other 24 13%
Unknown 18 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 74 41%
Environmental Science 41 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 4%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 5 3%
Other 23 13%
Unknown 24 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. 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 24 August 2020.
All research outputs
#1,145,397
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Biological Conservation
#998
of 6,612 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,147
of 240,208 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biological Conservation
#11
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,612 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 240,208 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 95% 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 well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.