↓ Skip to main content

A question of dissemination: Assessing the practices and implications of research in tropical landscapes

Overview of attention for article published in Ambio, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
12 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
Title
A question of dissemination: Assessing the practices and implications of research in tropical landscapes
Published in
Ambio, April 2018
DOI 10.1007/s13280-018-1056-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anne H. Toomey, María Eugenia Copa Alvaro, Matthew Aiello-Lammens, Oscar Loayza Cossio, Jos Barlow

Abstract

Current debates in the conservation sciences argue for better integration between research and practice, often citing the importance of the diffusion, dissemination and implementation of scientific knowledge for environmental management and policy. This paper focuses on a relatively well-researched protected area (Madidi National Park) in Bolivia in order to present different interpretations and understandings of the implications and availability of research findings. We draw on findings from quantitative and qualitative methods to determine the extent to which research carried out in the region was disseminated and/or implemented for management actions, and to understand subsequent implications for how local actors perceive the value of research and its role in management and conservation. We discuss the critical consequences of these findings for the future of conservation science and practice in biologically and culturally diverse landscapes, with an explicit call to action for academic institutions to support researchers in developing appropriate dissemination strategies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 23%
Researcher 7 15%
Student > Master 5 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Other 11 23%
Unknown 5 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 16 34%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 30%
Social Sciences 3 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 4%
Linguistics 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 8 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 15 December 2021.
All research outputs
#1,926,122
of 24,558,777 outputs
Outputs from Ambio
#344
of 1,751 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,819
of 331,217 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ambio
#7
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,558,777 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,751 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 331,217 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 87% 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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.