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 |
Distorted Views of Biodiversity: Spatial and Temporal Bias in Species Occurrence Data
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLoS Biology, June 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000385 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elizabeth H. Boakes, Philip J. K. McGowan, Richard A. Fuller, Ding Chang-qing, Natalie E. Clark, Kim O'Connor, Georgina M. Mace |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| France | 1 | 25% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,041 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 22 | 2% |
| Brazil | 16 | 2% |
| Germany | 11 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 9 | <1% |
| Spain | 8 | <1% |
| Colombia | 4 | <1% |
| Italy | 3 | <1% |
| Indonesia | 2 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 2 | <1% |
| Other | 24 | 2% |
| Unknown | 940 | 90% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 243 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 188 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 161 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 81 | 8% |
| Other | 49 | 5% |
| Other | 176 | 17% |
| Unknown | 143 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 516 | 50% |
| Environmental Science | 232 | 22% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 29 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 16 | 2% |
| Computer Science | 14 | 1% |
| Other | 59 | 6% |
| Unknown | 175 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 11 May 2022.
All research outputs
#1,576,215
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Biology
#2,532
of 9,159 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,157
of 108,517 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Biology
#7
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,159 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 47.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 108,517 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.