↓ Skip to main content

On the bibliometric coordinates of four different research fields in Geography

Overview of attention for article published in Scientometrics, February 2016
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 (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
Title
On the bibliometric coordinates of four different research fields in Geography
Published in
Scientometrics, February 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11192-016-1864-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Juan Gorraiz, Christian Gumpenberger, Thomas Glade

Abstract

This study is a bibliometric analysis of the highly complex research discipline Geography. In order to identify the most popular and most cited publication channels, to reveal publication strategies, and to analyse the discipline's coverage within publications, the three main data sources for citation analyses, namely Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar, have been utilized. This study is based on publication data collected for four individual evaluation exercises performed at the University of Vienna and related to four different subfields: Geoecology, Social and Economic Geography, Demography and Population Geography, and Economic Geography. The results show very heterogeneous and individual publication strategies, even in the same research fields. Monographs, journal articles and book chapters are the most cited document types. Differences between research fields more related to the natural sciences than to the social sciences are clearly visible, but less considerable when taking into account the higher number of co-authors. General publication strategies seem to be established for both natural science and social sciences, however, with significant differences. While in natural science mainly publications in international peer-reviewed scientific journals matter, the focus in social sciences is rather on book chapters, reports and monographs. Although an "iceberg citation model" is suggested, citation analyses for monographs, book chapters and reports should be conducted separately and should include complementary data sources, such as Google Scholar, in order to enhance the coverage and to improve the quality of the visibility and impact analyses. This is particularly important for social sciences related research within Geography.

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 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Unknown 46 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Other 4 9%
Other 10 21%
Unknown 8 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 10 21%
Computer Science 4 9%
Engineering 4 9%
Arts and Humanities 3 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Other 12 26%
Unknown 12 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 22 April 2020.
All research outputs
#3,742,806
of 22,849,304 outputs
Outputs from Scientometrics
#754
of 2,682 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,885
of 400,363 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientometrics
#16
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,849,304 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,682 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 400,363 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.