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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Maintaining Live Discussion in Two-Stage Open Peer Review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, January 2012
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fncom.2012.00009 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Erik Sandewall |
| Abstract |
Open peer review has been proposed for a number of reasons, in particular, for increasing the transparency of the article selection process for a journal, and for obtaining a broader basis for feedback to the authors and for the acceptance decision. The review discussion may also in itself have a value for the research community. These goals rely on the existence of a lively review discussion, but several experiments with open-process peer review in recent years have encountered the problem of faltering review discussions. The present article addresses the question of how lively review discussion may be fostered by relating the experience of the journal Electronic Transactions on Artificial Intelligence (ETAI) which was an early experiment with open peer review. Factors influencing the discussion activity are identified. It is observed that it is more difficult to obtain lively discussion when the number of contributed articles increases, which implies difficulties for scaling up the open peer review model. Suggestions are made for how this difficulty may be overcome. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 75% |
| Germany | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 2 | 5% |
| Denmark | 1 | 3% |
| Spain | 1 | 3% |
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Croatia | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 33 | 85% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Librarian | 6 | 15% |
| Researcher | 6 | 15% |
| Other | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 10 | 26% |
| Unknown | 4 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 16 | 41% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 18% |
| Unknown | 4 | 10% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 18 February 2020.
All research outputs
#13,128,563
of 22,663,150 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#521
of 1,334 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#145,149
of 244,048 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#27
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,663,150 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,334 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 244,048 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.