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
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
トラブルとして記録される会話 : 新潮合評会に見る座談会の批評性
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Japanese Literature, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.20620/nihonbungaku.58.12_47 |
| Authors |
酒井 浩介 |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 5 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 03 November 2023.
All research outputs
#7,436,652
of 25,852,155 outputs
Outputs from Japanese Literature
#24
of 391 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,375
of 328,722 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Japanese Literature
#1
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,852,155 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 391 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 328,722 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.