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 |
Active imaginative listening—a neuromusical critique
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neuroscience, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnins.2014.00251 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David Rosenboom |
| Abstract |
The parallel study of music in science and creative practice can be traced back to the ancients; and paralleling the emergence of music neuroscience, creative musical practitioners have employed neurobiological phenomena extensively in music composition and performance. Several examples from the author's work in this area, which began in the 1960s, are cited and briefly described. From this perspective, the author also explores questions pertinent to current agendas evident in music neuroscience and speculates on potentially potent future directions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 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 | 4 | 25% |
| Finland | 1 | 6% |
| France | 1 | 6% |
| Chile | 1 | 6% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 8 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 14 | 88% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 6% |
| Scientists | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 4% |
| Finland | 1 | 2% |
| France | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 50 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 15% |
| Researcher | 6 | 11% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 17% |
| Unknown | 11 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 10 | 19% |
| Computer Science | 7 | 13% |
| Arts and Humanities | 6 | 11% |
| Psychology | 6 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 10 | 19% |
| Unknown | 12 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 23 April 2018.
All research outputs
#2,835,332
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#1,858
of 11,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,615
of 247,497 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#17
of 119 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 11,538 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 247,497 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 119 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.