The microblogging platform has transformed research communication, but its future is in doubt.

Altmetrics track how scholarly works are discussed, shared, read and reused online. Such real-time feedback may especially matter for underrepresented and early-career researchers, though the metrics have limitations.

One-year follow-up of this TSSMN prospective randomized trial importantly demonstrates that tweeting results in significantly more article citations over time, highlighting the durable scholarly impact of social media activity.

The Social Sciences have long been struggling with quantitative forms of research assessment—insufficient coverage in prominent citation indices and overall lower citation counts than in STM subject areas have led to a widespread weariness regarding bibliometric evaluations among social scientists. Fueled by the rise of the social web, new hope is often placed on alternative metrics that measure the attention scholarly publications receive online, in particular on social media. But almost a decade after the coining of the term altmetrics for this new group of indicators, the uptake of the concept in the Social Sciences still seems to be low. Just like with traditional bibliometric indicators, one central problem hindering the applicability of altmetrics for the Social Sciences is the low coverage of social science publications on the respective data sources—which in the case of altmetrics are the various social media platforms on which interactions with scientific outputs can be measured. Another reason is that social scientists have strong opinions about the usefulness of metrics for research evaluation which may hinder broad acceptance of altmetrics too. We conducted qualitative interviews and online surveys with researchers to identify the concerns which inhibit the use of social media and the utilization of metrics for research evaluation in the Social Sciences. By analyzing the response data from the interviews in conjunction with the response data from the surveys, w...

Content in Journal of Scholarly Publishing published by @utpjournals.

The academic publishing world is changing significantly, with ever-growing numbers of publications each year and shifting publishing patterns. However, the metrics used to measure academic...

Answer: Only if it's gold.

The unintended consequences of online engagement for female academics: A discussion for the altmetric community Jaigris Hodson and George Veletsianos Bitlink: http://bit.ly/4amChallenge

Welcome to the first Altmetrics Research Roundup! In these regular posts, I’ll be sharing and summarizing the altmetrics research that’s most relevant to practicing bibliometricians’ daily work. In…

The reliable assessment of individual faculty members’ contributions is a key challenge in the governance of research institutions. Traditionally, scientific im...

Objective – In order to inform a library service related to creating and maintaining online scholarly profiles, we sought to assess the knowledge base and needs of our academic communities. Participants were queried about use, issues, and attitudes toward scholarly profile and altmetric tools, as well as the role librarians could play in assisting with the curation of online reputation.    Methods – Semi-structured interviews with 18 scholar-practitioners and 5 graduate students from two mid-sized universities.  Results – While all participants had Googled themselves, few were strategic about their online scholarly identity. Participants affirmed the perception that altmetrics can be of value in helping to craft a story of the value of their research and its diverse outputs. When participants had prior knowledge of altmetrics tools, it tended to be very narrow and deep, and perhaps field-specific.  Participants identified time as the major barrier to use of scholarly profile and altmetrics tools.  Conclusions – Librarians are well-placed to assist scholar-practitioners who wish to curate an online profile or use altmetrics tools. Areas of assistance include: personalized support, establishment of goals, orientation to specific tools, orientation to altmetrics and scholarly promotion landscape, preparing users for potential difficulties, discussing copyright implications, Open Access education, and guidance with packaging content for different venues and audiences.

Visit the post for more.

Recently, NIH Scientists  B. Ian Hutchins and colleagues have (pre)published “The Relative Citation Ratio (RCR). A new metric that uses citation rates to measure influence at the article level”. [N…

Research evaluation in the sciences has a gender problem and the indicators we use to understand academic impact are faulty.