↓ Skip to main content

Contrived Making Do As Rhetorical Practice in Outdoor Recreation

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Communication, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
4 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
Contrived Making Do As Rhetorical Practice in Outdoor Recreation
Published in
Frontiers in Communication, October 2017
DOI 10.3389/fcomm.2017.00015
Authors

Samantha Senda-Cook

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 4 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 4 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 1 25%
Unknown 3 75%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Decision Sciences 1 25%
Unknown 3 75%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 19 October 2017.
All research outputs
#17,918,662
of 23,006,268 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Communication
#581
of 912 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#234,448
of 327,202 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Communication
#5
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,006,268 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 912 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 327,202 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.