↓ Skip to main content

A Loss‐Gain Calculator for Biodiversity Offsets and the Circumstances in Which No Net Loss Is Feasible

Overview of attention for article published in Conservation Letters, September 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)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
26 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 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
A Loss‐Gain Calculator for Biodiversity Offsets and the Circumstances in Which No Net Loss Is Feasible
Published in
Conservation Letters, September 2015
DOI 10.1111/conl.12206
Authors

Gibbons, Philip, Evans, Megan C., Maron, Martine, Gordon, Ascelin, Roux, Darren, Hase, Amrei, Lindenmayer, David B., Possingham, Hugh P., Philip Gibbons, Megan C. Evans, Martine Maron, Ascelin Gordon, Darren Le Roux, Amrei von Hase, David B. Lindenmayer, Hugh P. Possingham

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 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 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 3 5%
Finland 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
United States 1 2%
New Zealand 1 2%
Unknown 56 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 24%
Student > Master 12 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 19%
Other 6 10%
Unspecified 5 8%
Other 13 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 30 48%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 35%
Unspecified 6 10%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 2%
Other 2 3%

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 05 August 2016.
All research outputs
#795,364
of 11,223,428 outputs
Outputs from Conservation Letters
#319
of 640 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,037
of 241,343 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Conservation Letters
#14
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,223,428 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 640 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 241,343 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 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.