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 |
Under the radar: mitigating enigmatic ecological impacts
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Trends in Ecology & Evolution, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.tree.2014.09.003 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Keren G. Raiter, Hugh P. Possingham, Suzanne M. Prober, Richard J. Hobbs |
| Abstract |
Identifying the deleterious ecological effects of developments, such as roads, mining, and urban expansion, is essential for informing development decisions and identifying appropriate mitigation actions. However, there are many types of ecological impacts that slip 'under the radar' of conventional impact evaluations and undermine the potential for successful impact mitigation (including offsets). These 'enigmatic' impacts include those that are small but act cumulatively; those outside of the area directly considered in the evaluation; those not detectable with the methods, paradigms, or spatiotemporal scales used to detect them; those facilitated, but not directly caused, by development; and synergistic impact interactions. Here, we propose a framework for conceptualising enigmatic impacts and discuss ways to address them. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 6 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 13% |
| Spain | 2 | 8% |
| United States | 2 | 8% |
| Bosnia and Herzegovina | 1 | 4% |
| Sweden | 1 | 4% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 4% |
| Italy | 1 | 4% |
| Curaçao | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 6 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 15 | 63% |
| Scientists | 6 | 25% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 215 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 1% |
| Australia | 3 | 1% |
| Brazil | 3 | 1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Portugal | 2 | <1% |
| South Africa | 2 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Sudan | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 4 | 2% |
| Unknown | 193 | 90% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 44 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 40 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 26 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 14 | 7% |
| Other | 37 | 17% |
| Unknown | 36 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 74 | 34% |
| Environmental Science | 71 | 33% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 4 | 2% |
| Engineering | 4 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 1% |
| Other | 12 | 6% |
| Unknown | 47 | 22% |
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 14 May 2015.
All research outputs
#2,703,637
of 25,736,439 outputs
Outputs from Trends in Ecology & Evolution
#1,365
of 3,222 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,904
of 264,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trends in Ecology & Evolution
#15
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,736,439 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 3,222 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 31.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 264,537 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.