↓ Skip to main content

The Past Ubiquity and Environment of the Lost Earth Buildings of Scotland

Overview of attention for article published in Human Ecology, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Readers on

mendeley
13 Mendeley
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.
Title
The Past Ubiquity and Environment of the Lost Earth Buildings of Scotland
Published in
Human Ecology, September 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10745-017-9931-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Simon J. Parkin, W. Paul Adderley

Abstract

This paper investigates the once ubiquitous vernacular earth-built structures of Scotland and how perceptions of such buildings were shaped and developed through periods of intense cultural and environmental change. We focus upon the past exploitation of traditional resources to construct vernacular architectures and on changes in the perception of the resultant buildings. Historic earth-built structures are today deeply hidden within the landscapes of Scotland, although they were once a common feature of both urban and rural settlements. Whilst the eighteenth and nineteenth century period of Improvement - during which many of these structures were destroyed, repurposed, or left to decay - has received extensive attention by historians, there exists no previous serious study of the human and environmental dimensions. Through analysis of the material aspects of landscape resource use and analysis of the historical perceptions of such use, we emphasize the national significance of this undervalued aspect of Scotland's built and cultural heritage, increasingly at risk of being lost completely, highlighting the prior ubiquity of mudwall structures.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users 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 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 23%
Student > Bachelor 2 15%
Librarian 1 8%
Professor 1 8%
Lecturer 1 8%
Other 2 15%
Unknown 3 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Arts and Humanities 2 15%
Engineering 2 15%
Linguistics 1 8%
Environmental Science 1 8%
Materials Science 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 5 38%
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 20 February 2018.
All research outputs
#6,448,839
of 23,857,313 outputs
Outputs from Human Ecology
#276
of 794 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,426
of 318,752 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Ecology
#7
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,857,313 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 794 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 318,752 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 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 58% of its contemporaries.