Emotional crisis communication

Overview of attention for article published in Public Relations Review
Altmetric Badge

About this score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#38 of 254)
  • Good score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
Title
Emotional crisis communication
Published in
Public Relations Review
DOI 10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.03.004

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 4%
Netherlands 2 4%
Spain 1 2%
Kenya 1 2%
Unknown 44 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor 1 2%
Researcher 1 2%
Librarian 1 2%
Unknown 47 94%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 23 46%
Business Administration 14 28%
Management Science / Operations Research 3 6%
Humanities 3 6%
Linguistics 2 4%
Other 5 10%

Score in context

This research output has an Altmetric score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This score was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 April 2014.
All research outputs
#892,472
of 4,725,882 outputs
Outputs from Public Relations Review
#38
of 254 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,325
of 109,070 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Public Relations Review
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,725,882 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 254 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean score of 3.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 score to the 109,070 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them