↓ Skip to main content

Inclusive fitness in evolution

Overview of attention for article published in Nature, March 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
112 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Inclusive fitness in evolution
Published in
Nature, March 2011
DOI 10.1038/nature09834
Pubmed ID
Authors

Regis Ferriere, Richard E. Michod

Abstract

Arising from M. A. Nowak, C. E. Tarnita & E. O. Wilson 466, 1057-1062 (2010); Nowak et al. reply. For over fifty years, the evolution of social behaviour has been guided by the concept of inclusive fitness as a measure of evolutionary success. Nowak et al. argue that inclusive fitness should be abandoned. In so doing, however, they misrepresent the role that inclusive fitness has played in the theory of social evolution by which understanding social behaviour in a variety of disciplines has developed and flourished. By discarding inclusive fitness on the basis of its limitations, they create a conceptual tension which, we argue, is unnecessary, and potentially dangerous for evolutionary biology.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 4%
Germany 2 2%
Italy 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Unknown 102 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 38 34%
Researcher 22 20%
Student > Bachelor 13 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Student > Master 7 6%
Other 19 17%
Unknown 6 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 58 52%
Environmental Science 8 7%
Neuroscience 5 4%
Psychology 4 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 4%
Other 21 19%
Unknown 12 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 21 June 2015.
All research outputs
#992,098
of 19,327,386 outputs
Outputs from Nature
#30,104
of 83,780 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,995
of 170,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature
#519
of 1,005 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,327,386 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 83,780 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 94.2. 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 170,622 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,005 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.