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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Identifying Audiences of E-Infrastructures - Tools for Measuring Impact
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, December 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0050943 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daphne Duin, David King, Peter van den Besselaar |
| Abstract |
Research evaluation should take into account the intended scholarly and non-scholarly audiences of the research output. This holds too for research infrastructures, which often aim at serving a large variety of audiences. With research and research infrastructures moving to the web, new possibilities are emerging for evaluation metrics. This paper proposes a feasible indicator for measuring the scope of audiences who use web-based e-infrastructures, as well as the frequency of use. In order to apply this indicator, a method is needed for classifying visitors to e-infrastructures into relevant user categories. The paper proposes such a method, based on an inductive logic program and a bayesian classifier. The method is tested, showing that the visitors are efficiently classified with 90% accuracy into the selected categories. Consequently, the method can be used to evaluate the use of the e-infrastructure within and outside academia. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Poland | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 5% |
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| India | 1 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Mexico | 1 | 2% |
| Belgium | 1 | 2% |
| Nigeria | 1 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Greece | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 42 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 18 | 32% |
| Librarian | 9 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 14% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 8 | 14% |
| Unknown | 1 | 2% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 13 | 23% |
| Computer Science | 12 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 13% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 5% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 15 December 2012.
All research outputs
#15,258,711
of 22,689,790 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#129,945
of 193,655 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#179,971
of 278,718 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,992
of 4,853 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,689,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,655 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 278,718 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,853 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.