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 |
The Soul-Sucking Wasp by Popular Acclaim – Museum Visitor Participation in Biodiversity Discovery and Taxonomy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, April 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0095068 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michael Ohl, Volker Lohrmann, Laura Breitkreuz, Lukas Kirschey, Stefanie Krause |
| Abstract |
Taxonomy, the science of describing and naming of the living world, is recognized as an important and relevant field in modern biological science. While there is wide agreement on the importance of a complete inventory of all organisms on Earth, the public is partly unaware of the amount of known and unknown biodiversity. Out of the enormous number of undescribed (but already recognized) species in natural history museum collections, we selected an attractive example of a wasp, which was presented to museum visitors at a special museum event. We asked 300 visitors to vote on a name for the new species and out of four preselected options, Ampulex dementor Ohl n. sp. was selected. The name, derived from the 'soul sucking' dementors from the popular Harry Potter books is an allusion to the wasps' behavior to selectively paralyze its cockroach prey. In this example, public voting on a scientific name has been shown to be an appropriate way to link museum visitors emotionally to biodiversity and its discovery. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 172 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 44 | 26% |
| United Kingdom | 14 | 8% |
| Canada | 10 | 6% |
| Japan | 4 | 2% |
| Denmark | 2 | 1% |
| Ireland | 2 | 1% |
| South Africa | 2 | 1% |
| Mexico | 2 | 1% |
| Spain | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 20 | 12% |
| Unknown | 70 | 41% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 131 | 76% |
| Scientists | 29 | 17% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 10 | 6% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 2 | 4% |
| Mexico | 1 | 2% |
| Colombia | 1 | 2% |
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 45 | 90% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 18% |
| Researcher | 8 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 10% |
| Professor | 5 | 10% |
| Other | 12 | 24% |
| Unknown | 5 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 31 | 62% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 6% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 12% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 346. 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 04 July 2023.
All research outputs
#96,662
of 25,899,121 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#1,564
of 225,910 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#710
of 242,624 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#40
of 4,925 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,899,121 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 225,910 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 242,624 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,925 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.