↓ Skip to main content

Validating the reliability of passive acoustic localisation: a novel method for encountering rare and remote Antarctic blue whales

Overview of attention for article published in Endangered Species Research, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
13 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 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
Validating the reliability of passive acoustic localisation: a novel method for encountering rare and remote Antarctic blue whales
Published in
Endangered Species Research, January 2015
DOI 10.3354/esr00642
Authors

Brian S. Miller, Jay Barlow, Susannah Calderan, Kym Collins, Russell Leaper, Paula Olson, Paul Ensor, David Peel, David Donnelly, Virginia Andrews-Goff, Carlos Olavarria, Kylie Owen, Melinda Rekdahl, Natalie Schmitt, Victoria Wadley, Jason Gedamke, Nick Gales, Michael C. Double

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 4%
PR 1 2%
Unknown 44 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 17%
Student > Master 7 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Other 10 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 32 68%
Environmental Science 7 15%
Unspecified 4 9%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 3 6%
Engineering 1 2%
Other 0 0%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 10 February 2015.
All research outputs
#679,283
of 11,243,534 outputs
Outputs from Endangered Species Research
#177
of 410 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,318
of 259,183 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Endangered Species Research
#13
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,243,534 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 410 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 259,183 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.