↓ Skip to main content

Michigan Publishing

Article Metrics

Support Science by Publishing in Scientific Society Journals

Overview of attention for article published in mBio, September 2017
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 (#34 of 2,691)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
5 blogs
twitter
364 tweeters
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
Title
Support Science by Publishing in Scientific Society Journals
Published in
mBio, September 2017
DOI 10.1128/mbio.01633-17
Pubmed ID
Authors

Patrick D. Schloss, Mark Johnston, Arturo Casadevall

Abstract

Scientific societies provide numerous services to the scientific enterprise, including convening meetings, publishing journals, developing scientific programs, advocating for science, promoting education, providing cohesion and direction for the discipline, and more. For most scientific societies, publishing provides revenues that support these important activities. In recent decades, the proportion of papers on microbiology published in scientific society journals has declined. This is largely due to two competing pressures: authors' drive to publish in "glam journals"-those with high journal impact factors-and the availability of "mega journals," which offer speedy publication of articles regardless of their potential impact. The decline in submissions to scientific society journals and the lack of enthusiasm on the part of many scientists to publish in them should be matters of serious concern to all scientists because they impact the service that scientific societies can provide to their members and to science.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 364 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 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 > Ph. D. Student 6 35%
Researcher 3 18%
Librarian 2 12%
Student > Master 2 12%
Professor 1 6%
Other 2 12%
Unknown 1 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 18%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 12%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 6%
Other 5 29%
Unknown 1 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 262. 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 16 October 2018.
All research outputs
#38,006
of 12,035,891 outputs
Outputs from mBio
#34
of 2,691 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,138
of 270,616 outputs
Outputs of similar age from mBio
#1
of 188 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,035,891 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,691 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 270,616 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 188 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.