↓ Skip to main content

Nine fallacies of natural disaster: The case of the Sahel

Overview of attention for article published in Climatic Change, March 1977
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
Title
Nine fallacies of natural disaster: The case of the Sahel
Published in
Climatic Change, March 1977
DOI 10.1007/bf00162778
Authors

Michael H. Glantz

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Netherlands 1 3%
Unknown 32 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 29%
Researcher 4 12%
Student > Master 4 12%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Other 6 18%
Unknown 4 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 10 29%
Social Sciences 10 29%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 3 9%
Arts and Humanities 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 6 18%
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 29 July 2016.
All research outputs
#5,901,506
of 22,867,327 outputs
Outputs from Climatic Change
#3,333
of 5,811 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,058
of 5,232 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Climatic Change
#7
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,867,327 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,811 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.6. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 5,232 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.