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 |
P Taylor, C Earl, C McLoughlin
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Australasian Journal on Ageing, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1111/ajag.12253 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Philip Taylor, Catherine Earl, Christopher McLoughlin |
| Abstract |
This study aimed to determine factors associated with the implementation by employers of the practice of offering reduced working hours for workers nearing retirement. Data came from a survey of 2000 employers of more than 50 employees each (30% response rate). A minority (33%) of employers offered reduced working hours to older workers nearing retirement. Factors associated with offering reduced working hours were: expecting workforce ageing to cause a loss of staff to retirement; being a large employer; being a public/not-for-profit sector employer; not experiencing difficulties recruiting labourers; having a larger proportion of workers aged over 50; experiencing national competition for labour; not experiencing difficulties recruiting machinery operators/drivers; not expecting workforce ageing to increase workplace injuries; and experiencing difficulties with the quality of candidates. A minority of employers were found to offer reduced working hours to those nearing retirement. Factors associated with their propensity to do so included industry sector, size of employer, concerns about labour supply and the effects of workforce ageing. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 22 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 32% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 14% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Librarian | 1 | 5% |
| Professor | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 6 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 14% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 3 | 14% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 18% |
| Unknown | 6 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 27 October 2015.
All research outputs
#16,707,477
of 24,571,708 outputs
Outputs from Australasian Journal on Ageing
#668
of 798 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#172,531
of 290,089 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Australasian Journal on Ageing
#16
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,571,708 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 798 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 290,089 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.