↓ Skip to main content

Evaluating protected area effectiveness using bird lists in the Australian Wet Tropics

Overview of attention for article published in Diversity & Distributions, November 2014
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)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
22 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
123 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
Evaluating protected area effectiveness using bird lists in the Australian Wet Tropics
Published in
Diversity & Distributions, November 2014
DOI 10.1111/ddi.12274
Authors

Megan Barnes, Judit K. Szabo, William K. Morris, Hugh Possingham

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 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 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 4 3%
Brazil 2 2%
United Kingdom 2 2%
Canada 2 2%
India 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Unknown 111 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 29 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 19%
Student > Master 22 18%
Other 11 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Other 16 13%
Unknown 14 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 59 48%
Environmental Science 35 28%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 4 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 <1%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 <1%
Other 3 2%
Unknown 20 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 06 September 2017.
All research outputs
#1,814,743
of 18,925,022 outputs
Outputs from Diversity & Distributions
#365
of 1,461 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,556
of 248,455 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diversity & Distributions
#9
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,925,022 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,461 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 248,455 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 28 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 71% of its contemporaries.