Research Blogging: Indexing and Registering the Change in Science 2.0

PLoS ONE

Volumn 7, Issue 12, 2012, Pages

  Fausto, Sibele ^a   Machado, Fabio A ^a   Bento, Luiz Fernando J ^b   Iamarino, Atila ^a   Nahas, Tatiana R ^c   Munger, David S ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SÃO PAULO   (Brazil)

^b FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF RIO DE JANEIRO   (Brazil)

^c NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCESS TO INFORMATION; CITATION ANALYSIS; INTERNET; MEDICAL RESEARCH; ONLINE SYSTEM; PEER REVIEW; QUALITY CONTROL; REGISTRATION; REVIEW; SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE;

BLOGGING; COMMUNICATION; HUMANS; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INTERNET; RESEARCH; SCIENCE; TECHNOLOGY;

EID: 84871184949     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0050109     Document Type: Review

References (49)

1. MacRoberts M, MacRoberts B, (2010) Problems of citation analysis: A study of uncited and seldom-cited influences. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 61 (1) (): 1-12 doi:10.1002/asi.21228.
2. Anderson K (2009) The impact factor: A tool from a bygone era? The Scholarly Kitchen (29 June). Available: http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2009/06/29/is-the-impact-factor-from-a-bygone-era. Accessed 15 January 2012.
3. Rosner M, Van Epps H, Hill E, (2007) Show me the data. Journal of Experimental Medicine 204 (13) (): 1091-1092 doi:10.1083/jcb.200711140.
4. Arbesman S (2012) New Ways to Measure Science. Social Dimension Wired Science Blogs (9 Jan). Available: http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/01/new-ways-to-measure-science/all/1. Accessed 10 January 2012.
5. Wikipedia. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. Available: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_Transactions_of_the_Royal_Society. Accessed 10 January 2012.
6. Lane J, (2010) Let's make science metrics more scientific. Nature 464: 7288.
7. Molloy JC, (2011) The Open Knowledge Foundation: Open Data Means Better Science. PLoS Biology 9 (12) (): e1001195 doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001195.
8. Schofield PN, Bubela T, Weaver P, Portilla L, Brown SD, et al. (2009) Post-publication sharing of data and tools. Nature 10: 171-173.
9. Li X, Thelwall M, Giustini D, (2011) Validating online reference managers for scholarly impact measurement. Scientometrics [Online 1st 21 December] 1-11 doi: 10.1007/s11192-011-0580-x.
10. Haustein S, Siebenlist T, (2011) Applying social bookmarking data to evaluate journal usage. Journal of Informetrics 5 (3) (): 446-457.
11. Eysenbach G, (2011) Can Tweets Predict Citations? Metrics of Social Impact Based on Twitter and Correlation with Traditional Metrics of Scientific Impact. Journal of Medical Internet Research 13 (4) (): e123 doi:10.2196/jmir.
12. Groth P, Gurney T (2010) Studying Scientific Discourse on the Web using Bibliometrics: A Chemistry Blogging Case Study. In: Proceedings of the WebSci10, Raleigh, NC, US. Available: http://journal.webscience.org/308. Accessed 10 January 2012.
13. Bonetta L, (2009) Should you be tweeting? Cell 139 (3) (): 452-453 doi:10.1016/j.cell.2009.10.017.
14. Bogers T, van den Bosch A (2008) Recommending scientific articles using CiteULike. Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Recommender Systems, New York: ACM, 287-290. Available: http://ilk.uvt.nl/~toine/publications/bogers.2008.recsys2008-paper.pdf. Accessed 10 January 2012.
15. Beltrão P (2006) Connotea tag: Evolution citation report. Public Rambling (21 Nov). Available: http://pbeltrao.blogspot.com/2006/11/connotea-tagevolution-citation-report.html. Accessed 20 January 2012.
16. Evans P, Krauthammer M (2011) Exploring the use of social media to measure journal article impact. In: AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings. 374-8. pmcd: PMC3243242.
17. Science Online 2012 Conference, 6th ed. Available: http://scienceonline2012.com. Accessed 22 January 2012.
18. Gu F, Widén-Wulff G, (2011) Scholarly communication and possible changes in the context of social media. The Electronic Library 29 (6) (): 762-776 doi: 10.1108/02640471111187999.
19. Public Library of Science (PLoS) Article-Level Metrics. Available: http://article-level-metrics.plos.org. Accessed 10 January 2012.
20. Yan K-K, Gerstein M, (2011) The Spread of Scientific Information: Insights from the Web Usage Statistics in PLoS Article-Level Metrics. PLoS ONE 6 (5) (): e19917 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0019917.
21. Neylon C, Wu S, (2009) Article-Level Metrics and the Evolution of Scientific Impact. PLoS Biology 7 (11) (): e1000242.
22. Priem J, Taborelli D, Groth P, Neylon C (2010) Altmetrics: a manifesto (26 Oct). Available: http://altmetrics.org/manifesto. Accessed 10 January 2010.
23. Bonetta L, (2007) Scientists Enter the Blogosphere. Cell 129 (3) (): 443-445.
24. Editorial (2009) It's good to blog. Nature 457: 1058 doi:10.1038/4571058a.
25. Kouper I, (2010) Science blogs and public engagement with science: practices, challenges, and opportunities. Journal of Science Communication 9 (1) (): 1-10.
26. Deitering A, Gronemyer K, (2011) Beyond Peer-Reviewed Articles: Using Blogs to Enrich Students' Understanding of Scholarly Work. Portal: Libraries and the Academy 11 (1) (): 489-503.
27. Powell DA, Jacob CJ, Chapman BJ, (2011) Using Blogs and New Media in Academic Practice: Potential Roles in Research, Teaching, Learning, and Extension. Innovative Higher Education [Online 1st 3 December] 1-12 doi:10.1007/s10755-011-9207-7.
28. Batts SA, Anthis NJ, Smith TC, (2008) Advancing Science through Conversations: Bridging the Gap between Blogs and the Academy. PLoS Biology 6 (9) (): 1837-1841.
29. Akst J (2010) Publish or post? The Scientist Blog (9 Aug). Available: http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/57613. Accessed 10 January 2012.
30. Shema H, Bar-Ilan J, Thelwall M, (2012) Research Blogs and the Discussion of Scholarly Information. PLoS ONE 7 (5) (): e35869 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0035869.
31. Munger D, (2010) Blogging out of balance. Seed Magazine (22 Sept) Available: http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/blogging_out_of_balance. Accessed 27 January 2012.
32. Bar-Ilan J, (2009) A closer look at the sources of Informetric Research. In: (2009) Proceedings of the 12th International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics Conference Larsen B, Leta J, editors. Rio de Janeiro: BIREME/PAHO/WHO, UFRJ. 1: 1-9.
33. R Development Core Team (2012) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
34. Kowalczyk S, Shankar K, (2011) Data sharing in the sciences. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 45: 247-294.
35. Moya-Anegón F, Chinchilla-Rodríguez Z, Vargas-Quesada B, Corera-Álvarez H, Muñoz-Fernández FJ, et al. (2007) Coverage analysis of Scopus: A journal metric approach. Scientometrics 73 (1) (): 53-78 doi:10.1007/s11192-007-1681-4.
36. Fausto S, Iamarino A, Bento LFJ, Nahas TR, (2011) Peer-reviewed science from blogs: an option for the Brazilian growing interest in science? In: (2011) Proceedings of the 13th International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics Conference Noyons E, Ngulube P, Leta J, editors. Durban: ISSI, Leiden University, University of Zululand. 2: 957-977.
37. Rowan C (2011) How blogs, Twitter and other social media tools are changing conversations about scientific research. Earth (28 Apr). Available: http://www.earthmagazine.org/article/science-and-social-media. Accessed: 01 may 2012.
38. Kwak H, Lee C, Park H, Moon S (2010) What is Twitter, a Social Network or a News Media? In: International World Wide Web Conference Committee (IW3C2). Raleigh, NC. Available: http://an.kaist.ac.kr/~haewoon/papers/2010-www-twitter.pdf. doi:10.1145/1772690.1772751. Accessed: 04 May 2012.
39. Garcia M (2011) Forests and Water, part 1: Where there's smoke. Hydro-Logic (23 Jun). Available: http://hydro-logic.blogspot.com/2011/06/forests-and-water-part-1-where-theres.html. Accessed: 10 January 2012.
40. Priem J, Hemminger BM (2010) Scientometrics 2.0: Toward new metrics of scholarly impact on the social Web. First Monday, 15(7). Available: http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2874/2570. Accessed 10 January 2012.
41. Harnad S, (1991) Post-Gutenberg Galaxy: The Fourth Revolution in the Means of Production of Knowledge. Public-Access Computer Systems Review 2 (1) (): 39-53.
42. Taylor M (2012) Academic publishers have become the enemies of science. The Guardian, (Monday, 14 Jan). Available: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/jan/16/academic-publishers-enemies-science. Accessed: 06 may, 2012.
43. Eisen MB (2012) Research Bought, Then Paid For. The New York Times (10 Jan). Available: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/11/opinion/research-bought-then-paid-for.html?_r=3&scp=1&sq=PLoS%20NIH&st=cse. Accessed: 06 May 2012.
44. The price of information (2012) The Economist (4th Feb). Available: http://www.economist.com/node/21545974. Accessed: 05 May 2012.
45. Janiszewski P, (2010) Why all scientists should blog: a case study. Science of Blogging (23 Nov) Available: http://scienceofblogging.com/why-scientists-should-blog-a-case-study. Accessed 15 January 2012.
46. CrowdoMeter (2011) Available: http://crowdometer.org/ratings. Accessed: 05 January 2012.
47. Fenner M, (2011) CrowdoMeter - or trying to understand tweets about journal papers. Gobbledygook (20 Dec) Available: http://blogs.plos.org/mfenner/2011/12/20/crowdometer-or-trying-to-understand-tweets-about-journal-papers. Accessed: 05 January 2012.
48. Bollen J, Van de Sompel H, Hagberg A, Chute R, (2009) A principal component analysis of 39 scientific impact measures. PLoS ONE 4 (6) (): e6022 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0006022.
49. Priem J, Piwowar HA, Hemminger BM (2012) Altmetrics in the wild: Using social media to explore scholarly impact. arXiv:1203.4745 [preprint]. Available: http://arxiv.org/html/1203.4745v1. Accessed: 22 April 2012.