↓ Skip to main content
What is this page? Embed badge

Water isotope systematics: Improving our palaeoclimate interpretations

Overview of attention for article published in Quaternary Science Reviews, January 2016
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 (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
19 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Summary Twitter Dimensions citations
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
Water isotope systematics: Improving our palaeoclimate interpretations
Published in
Quaternary Science Reviews, January 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.quascirev.2015.11.014
Authors

M.D. Jones, S. Dee, L. Anderson, A. Baker, G. Bowen, D.C. Noone

View on publisher site

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 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 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 4%
United States 1 2%
Australia 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 45 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 36%
Researcher 14 28%
Student > Master 4 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Professor 2 4%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 6 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Earth and Planetary Sciences 26 52%
Engineering 2 4%
Computer Science 1 2%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Chemistry 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 18 36%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 14 February 2016.
All research outputs
#2,700,965
of 22,835,198 outputs
Outputs from Quaternary Science Reviews
#799
of 3,549 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,344
of 393,571 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Quaternary Science Reviews
#15
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,835,198 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,549 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 393,571 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.

This page is provided by Altmetric.