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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Coevolution of languages and genes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Opinion in Genetics & Development, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.gde.2014.07.006 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Brigitte Pakendorf |
| Abstract |
The evolution of languages shares certain characteristics with that of genes, such as the predominantly vertical line of transmission and the retention of traces of past events such as contact. Thus, studies of language phylogenies and their correlations with genetic phylogenies can enrich our understanding of human prehistory, while insights gained from genetic studies of past population contact can help shed light on the processes underlying language contact and change. As demonstrated by recent research, these evolutionary processes are more complex than simple models of gene-language coevolution predict, with linguistic boundaries only occasionally functioning as barriers to gene flow. More frequently, admixture takes place irrespective of linguistic differences, but with a detectable impact of contact-induced changes in the languages concerned. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 10% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 10% |
| France | 1 | 5% |
| United States | 1 | 5% |
| Mexico | 1 | 5% |
| Germany | 1 | 5% |
| Australia | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 11 | 55% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 16 | 80% |
| Scientists | 4 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 1 | 1% |
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 1% |
| France | 1 | 1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 79 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 19% |
| Researcher | 15 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 9% |
| Professor | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 16 | 19% |
| Unknown | 10 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 31 | 36% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 9% |
| Arts and Humanities | 8 | 9% |
| Linguistics | 5 | 6% |
| Environmental Science | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 15 | 18% |
| Unknown | 14 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 June 2017.
All research outputs
#2,721,481
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Current Opinion in Genetics & Development
#193
of 1,740 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,574
of 247,681 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Opinion in Genetics & Development
#5
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 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 1,740 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 247,681 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 31 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.