↓ Skip to main content

“It was terrible. I didn’t set a limit”: Proximal and Distal Prevention Strategies for Reducing the Risk of a Bust in Gambling Venues

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Gambling Studies, January 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 Mendeley
Title
“It was terrible. I didn’t set a limit”: Proximal and Distal Prevention Strategies for Reducing the Risk of a Bust in Gambling Venues
Published in
Journal of Gambling Studies, January 2019
DOI 10.1007/s10899-019-09829-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Simone N. Rodda, Kathleen L. Bagot, Victoria Manning, Dan I. Lubman

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 11%
Student > Master 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Professor 3 7%
Lecturer 2 4%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 23 50%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 11 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 4%
Sports and Recreations 2 4%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 24 52%
Attention Score in Context

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 30 March 2020.
All research outputs
#7,209,370
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Gambling Studies
#327
of 990 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#142,816
of 447,230 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Gambling Studies
#7
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 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 990 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 447,230 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 24 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 66% of its contemporaries.