↓ Skip to main content

The Biophysical Effects of Neolithic Island Colonization: General Dynamics and Sociocultural Implications

Overview of attention for article published in Human Ecology, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 Mendeley
Title
The Biophysical Effects of Neolithic Island Colonization: General Dynamics and Sociocultural Implications
Published in
Human Ecology, October 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10745-017-9939-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas P. Leppard

Abstract

Does anthropogenic environmental change constrain long-term sociopolitical outcomes? It is clear that human colonization of islands radically alters their biological and physical systems. Despite considerable contextual variability in local specificities of this alteration, I argue that these processes are to some extent regular, predictable, and have socio-political implications. Reviewing the data for post-colonization ecodynamics, I show that Neolithic colonization of previously insulated habitats drives biotic homogenization. I argue that we should expect such homogenization to promote regular types of change in biophysical systems, types of change that can be described in sum as environmentally convergent. Such convergence should have significant implications for human social organization over the long term, and general dynamics of this sort are relevant in the context of understanding remarkably similar social evolutionary trajectories towards wealth-inequality not only islands, but also more generally.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 26%
Student > Master 4 15%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Researcher 2 7%
Other 6 22%
Unknown 3 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 8 30%
Social Sciences 4 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 7%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 7%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 5 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 26 November 2017.
All research outputs
#7,568,077
of 23,857,313 outputs
Outputs from Human Ecology
#324
of 794 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,967
of 330,967 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Ecology
#10
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,857,313 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 794 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 330,967 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.