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 |
Is it becoming harder to secure reviewers for peer review? A test with data from five ecology journals
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Research Integrity and Peer Review, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s41073-016-0022-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Arianne Y. K. Albert, Jennifer L. Gow, Alison Cobra, Timothy H. Vines |
| Abstract |
There is concern in the academic publishing community that it is becoming more difficult to secure reviews for peer-reviewed manuscripts, but much of this concern stems from anecdotal and rhetorical evidence. We examined the proportion of review requests that led to a completed review over a 6-year period (2009-2015) in a mid-tier biology journal (Molecular Ecology). We also re-analyzed previously published data from four other mid-tier ecology journals (Functional Ecology,Journal of Ecology,Journal of Animal Ecology, andJournal of Applied Ecology), looking at the same proportion over the period 2003 to 2010. The data fromMolecular Ecologyshowed no significant decrease through time in the proportion of requests that led to a review (proportion in 2009 = 0.47 (95 % CI = 0.43 to 0.52), proportion in 2015 = 0.44 (95 % CI = 0.40 to 0.48)). This proportion did decrease for three of the other ecology journals (changes in proportions from 2003 to 2010 = -0.10, -0.18, and -0.09), while the proportion for the fourth (Functional Ecology) stayed roughly constant (change in proportion = -0.04). Overall, our data suggest that reviewer agreement rates have probably declined slightly but not to the extent suggested by the anecdotal and rhetorical evidence. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | 13% |
| Japan | 2 | 13% |
| Austria | 1 | 7% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 7% |
| Brazil | 1 | 7% |
| Australia | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 7 | 47% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 53% |
| Scientists | 4 | 27% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 17 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 3 | 18% |
| Researcher | 3 | 18% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Librarian | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 18% |
| Unknown | 3 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 18% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 6% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 18% |
| Unknown | 6 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 30 January 2023.
All research outputs
#1,808,074
of 25,262,379 outputs
Outputs from Research Integrity and Peer Review
#76
of 131 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,420
of 318,799 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Research Integrity and Peer Review
#3
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,262,379 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 131 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 74.9. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 318,799 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.