↓ Skip to main content

An Empirical Assessment of Taxic Paleobiology

Overview of attention for article published in Science, July 2000
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
87 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.
Article details
Title
An Empirical Assessment of Taxic Paleobiology
Published in
Science, July 2000
DOI 10.1126/science.289.5476.110
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jonathan M. Adrain, and Stephen R. Westrop

Abstract

The analysis of major changes in faunal diversity through time is a central theme of analytical paleobiology. The most important sources of data are literature-based compilations of stratigraphic ranges of fossil taxa. The levels of error in these compilations and the possible effects of such error have often been discussed but never directly assessed. We compared our comprehensive database of trilobites to the equivalent portion of J. J. Sepkoski Jr.'s widely used global genus database. More than 70% of entries in the global database are inaccurate; however, as predicted, the error is randomly distributed and does not introduce bias.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
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 demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 4 5%
Argentina 4 5%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Czechia 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
Unknown 75 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 27 31%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 20%
Student > Master 11 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Other 5 6%
Other 17 20%
Unknown 4 5%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Earth and Planetary Sciences 44 51%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 28 32%
Environmental Science 5 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Arts and Humanities 1 1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 5 6%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 01 October 2021.
All research outputs
#9,625,057
of 29,686,237 outputs
Outputs from Science
#55,176
of 88,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,513
of 46,855 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#156
of 261 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 29,686,237 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 88,468 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 66.8. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 46,855 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 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 261 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.