↓ Skip to main content

Forum on Proposed Revisions to ABET Engineering Accreditation Commission General Criteria on Student Outcomes and Curriculum (Criteria 3 and 5)

Overview of attention for book
Forum on Proposed Revisions to ABET Engineering Accreditation Commission General Criteria on…
The National Academies Press
Overall attention for this book
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
9 Mendeley
Title
Forum on Proposed Revisions to ABET Engineering Accreditation Commission General Criteria on Student Outcomes and Curriculum (Criteria 3 and 5)
Published by
The National Academies Press, June 2016
DOI 10.17226/23556
ISBNs
978-0-309-44484-2, 978-0-309-44485-9, 978-0-309-44486-6, 978-0-309-44487-3, 978-0-309-44488-0
Authors

Robert Pool, Rapporteur; Committee on Engaging the Engineering Community in a Constructive Dialogue Regarding ABET Criteria Changes; National Academy of Engineering, , National Academy of Engineering

Timeline
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 9 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor > Associate Professor 2 22%
Librarian 1 11%
Other 1 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 11%
Professor 1 11%
Other 2 22%
Unknown 1 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 2 22%
Engineering 2 22%
Arts and Humanities 1 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 11%
Materials Science 1 11%
Other 1 11%
Unknown 1 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 05 July 2016.
All research outputs
#5,632,200
of 26,855,855 outputs
Outputs from The National Academies Press
#3,628
of 10,370 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,922
of 334,465 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The National Academies Press
#47
of 90 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,855,855 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,370 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 334,465 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 90 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.