↓ Skip to main content

Awesome women and bad feminists: the role of online social networks and peer support for feminist practice in academia

Overview of attention for article published in cultural geographies, December 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#14 of 442)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
46 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 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
Awesome women and bad feminists: the role of online social networks and peer support for feminist practice in academia
Published in
cultural geographies, December 2019
DOI 10.1177/1474474019890321
Authors

Hannah Bayfield, Laura Colebrooke, Hannah Pitt, Rhiannon Pugh, Natalia Stutter

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 46 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 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 21%
Researcher 3 13%
Student > Bachelor 3 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Lecturer 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 9 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Arts and Humanities 3 13%
Social Sciences 3 13%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 8%
Physics and Astronomy 1 4%
Environmental Science 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 12 50%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 33. 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 17 May 2021.
All research outputs
#916,801
of 21,200,018 outputs
Outputs from cultural geographies
#14
of 442 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,834
of 426,801 outputs
Outputs of similar age from cultural geographies
#1
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,200,018 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 442 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 426,801 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them