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 |
Rats maintain an overhead binocular field at the expense of constant fusion
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature, May 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1038/nature12153 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Damian J. Wallace, David S. Greenberg, Juergen Sawinski, Stefanie Rulla, Giuseppe Notaro, Jason N. D. Kerr |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 83 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 22 | 27% |
| United Kingdom | 7 | 8% |
| United States | 5 | 6% |
| Taiwan | 1 | 1% |
| Belgium | 1 | 1% |
| Italy | 1 | 1% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| Austria | 1 | 1% |
| Chile | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 3 | 4% |
| Unknown | 40 | 48% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 72 | 87% |
| Scientists | 6 | 7% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 4% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 546 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 12 | 2% |
| France | 4 | <1% |
| Japan | 4 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 2 | <1% |
| Germany | 2 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Singapore | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 5 | <1% |
| Unknown | 511 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 142 | 26% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 138 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 52 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 35 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 29 | 5% |
| Other | 77 | 14% |
| Unknown | 73 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 173 | 32% |
| Neuroscience | 159 | 29% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 34 | 6% |
| Psychology | 29 | 5% |
| Engineering | 17 | 3% |
| Other | 49 | 9% |
| Unknown | 85 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 105. 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 28 March 2024.
All research outputs
#409,312
of 25,708,267 outputs
Outputs from Nature
#20,046
of 98,566 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,814
of 208,443 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature
#269
of 1,030 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,708,267 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 98,566 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 102.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 208,443 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,030 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 73% of its contemporaries.