Social media and altmetrics: An overview of current alternative approaches to measuring scholarly impact

Incentives and Performance: Governance of Research Organizations

Volumn , Issue , 2015, Pages 261-276

  Weller, Katrin ^a  

^a GESIS LEIBNIZ INSTITUTE FOR THE SOCIAL SCIENCES   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84929467961     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-09785-5_16     Document Type: Chapter

References (72)

1. Adie E, Roe W (2013) Altmetric: enriching scholarly content with article-level discussion and metrics. Learn Publish 26(1):11–17
2. Allen HG, Stanton TR, Di Pietro F, Moseley GL, Sampson M (2013) Social media release increases dissemination of original articles in the clinical pain sciences. PLoS ONE 8(7): e68914
3. Altmetrics.com (no date) What does Altmetric do? http://www.altmetric.com/whatwedo.php#score. Accessed 14 June 2014
4. Bar-Ilan J (2012) JASIST 2001-2010. Bull Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 38(6):24–28
5. Bar-Ilan J, Haustein S, Peters I, Priem J, Shema H, Terliesner J (2012) Beyond citations. Scholars, visibility on the social Web. In: Proceedings of the 17th international conference on science and technology indicators (STI conference), Montreal, pp 98–109
6. Bartling S, Friesike S (eds) (2014) Opening science: the evolving guide on how the internet is changing research, collaboration and scholarly publishing. Springer, Heidelberg; New York
7. Baynes G (2012) Scientometrics, bibliometrics, altmetrics: some introductory advice for the lost and bemused. Insights 25(3):311–315
8. Bruns A (2008) Blogs, Wikipedia, second life, and beyond. From production to produsage. Peter Lang, New York
9. Buschman M, Michalek A (2013) Are alternative metrics still alternative? Bull Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 39(4):35–39
10. Buzzetto-More NA (2013) Social media and prosumerism. Issues Inf Sci Inf Technol 10:81–93
11. Cheung M (2013) Altmetrics: too soon for use in assessment. Nature 494(7436):176
12. Cronin B (1984) The citation process. The role and significance of citations in scientific communication.
13. Taylor Graham, London Downes S (2005) E-learning 2.0. eLearn Magazine. http://elearnmag.acm.org/featured.cfm? aid¼1104968. Accessed 15 June 2014
14. Faris DM (2013) Dissent and revolution in a digital age. Social media, blogging and activism in Egypt.
15. Tauris, London Fenner M (2014) Altmetrics and other novel measures for scientific impact. In: Bartling S, Friesike S (eds) Opening science. The evolving guide on how the internet is changing research, collaboration and scholarly publishing. Springer, Heidelberg; New York, pp 179–190
16. Frey B, Osterloh M (2011) Ranking games. University of Zurich Department of Economics Working Paper No. 39. doi:10.2139/ssrn.1957162. Accessed 22 June 2014
17. Friesike S, Schildhauer T (2015) Open science: many good resolutions, very few incentives, yet. In: Welpe IM, Wollersheim J, Ringelhan S, Osterloh M (eds) Incentives and performance –governance of research organizations. Springer, Cham
18. Gaffney D, Puschmann C (2014) Data collection on Twitter. In: Weller K, Bruns A, Burgess J, Mahrt M, Puschmann C (eds) Twitter and society. Peter Lang, New York, pp 55–68
19. Galligan F, Dyas-Correia S (2013) Altmetrics: rethinking the way we measure. Ser Rev 39(1):56–61
20. Gerber A (2012) Online trends from the first German trend study on science communication. In: Tokar A, Beurskens M, Keuneke S, Mahrt M, Peters I, Puschmann C, van Treeck T, Weller K (eds) Science and the internet. Düsseldorf University Press, Düsseldorf, pp 13–18
21. Haustein S, Lariviére V (2015) The use of bibliometrics for assessing research: possibilities, limitations and adverse effects. In: Welpe IM, Wollersheim J, Ringelhan S, Osterloh M (eds) Incentives and performance – governance of research organizations. Springer, Cham
22. Haustein S, Peters I, Bar-Ilan J, Priem J, Shema H, Terliesner J (2013) Coverage and adoption of altmetrics sources in the bibliometric community. In: Proceedings of the 14th international society of scientometrics and informatics conference, Vienna, Austria, 15–19th July 2013, pp 1–12
23. Haustein S, Bowman TD, Holmberg K, Peters I, Lariviére V (2014a) Astrophysicists on Twitter: an in-depth analysis of tweeting and scientific publication behavior. Aslib J Inf Manag 66 (3):279–296
24. Haustein S, Lariviére V, Thelwall M, Amyot D, Peters I (2014b) Tweets vs. Mendeley readers: how do these two social media metrics differ? Inf Technol 56(5) (in press)
25. Haustein S, Peters I, Sugimoto CR, Thelwall M, Lariviére V (2014c) Tweeting biomedicine: an analysis of tweets and citations in the biomedical literature. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 65 (4):656–669
26. Henning V, Reichelt J (2008) Mendeley. A Last.fm for research? In: Proceedings of the 4th IEEE international conference on eScience, Indianapolis, pp 327–328
27. Hey T (2005) Cyberinfrastructure for e-Science. Science 308(5723):817–821
28. Hey T, Trefethen A (2003) The data deluge: an e-Science perspective. In: Berman F, Fox CG (eds) Grid computing. Making the global infrastructure a reality. Wiley, Chichester, pp 809–824
29. Holmberg K, Thelwall M (2014) Disciplinary differences in Twitter scholarly communication. Scientometrics. doi:10.1007/s11192-014-1229-3
30. Kaplan AM, Haenlein M (2010) Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Bus Horizons 53(1):59–68
31. Kousha K, Thelwall M (2008) Assessing the impact of disciplinary research on teaching. An automatic analysis of online syllabuses. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 59:2060–2069
32. Lapinski S, Piwowar H, Priem J (2013) Riding the crest of the altmetrics wave: how librarians can help prepare faculty for the next generation of research impact metrics. Coll Res Libr News 74 (6):292–294 + 300
33. Letierce J, Passant A, Breslin J, Decker S (2010) Understanding how Twitter is used to spread scientific messages. In: Proceedings of the WebSci10: extending the frontiers of society on-line, Raleigh
34. Leydesdorff L (1995) The challenge of scientometrics. The development, measurement and selforganization of scientific communication. DSWO, Leiden
35. Li N, Gillet D (2013) Identifying influential scholars in academic social media platforms. In: Proceedings of the 2013 IEEEACM international conference on advances in social networks analysis and mining. ACM, New York, pp 608–614
36. Li X, Thelwall M, Giustini D (2012) Validating online reference managers for scholarly impact measurement. Scientometrics 91(2):461–471
37. Lin J, Fenner M (2013) The many faces of article-level metrics. Bull Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 39 (4):27–30
38. Liu J, Adie E (2013a) Five challenges in altmetrics: a toolmaker’s perspective. Bull Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 39(4):31–34
39. Liu J, Adie E (2013b) New perspectives on article-level metrics: developing ways to assess research uptake and impact online. Insights UKSG J 26(2):153–158
40. MacRoberts M, MacRoberts BR (1989) Problems of citation analysis. A critical review. J Am Soc Inf Sci 40(5):342–349
41. Mahrt M, Weller K, Peters I (2014) Twitter in scholarly communication. In: Weller K, Bruns A, Burgess J, Mahrt M, Puschmann C (eds) Twitter and society. Peter Lang, New York, pp 399–410
42. Maness J (2006) Library 2.0 theory. Web 2.0 and its implications for libraries. Webology 3(2): Article 25. http://www.webology.ir/2006/v3n2/a25.html. Accessed 14 June 2014
43. McNab C (2009) What social media offers to health professionals and citizens. Bull World Health Organ 89(8):566–567
44. Nentwich M (2003) Cyberscience. Research in the age of the internet. Austrian Academy of Sciences Press, Vienna
45. Nentwich M, König R (2012) Cyberscience 2.0. Research in the age of digital social networks. Campus Verlag, Frankfurt; New York
46. Nentwich M, König R (2014) Academia goes facebook? The potential of social network sites in the scholarly realm. In: Bartling S, Friesike S (eds) Opening science. The evolving guide on how the internet is changing research, collaboration and scholarly publishing. Springer, Heidelberg; New York, pp 107–124
47. O’Reilly T (2005) What is Web 2.0? Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html. Accessed 14 June 2014
48. Pampel H, Dallmeier-Tiessen S (2014) Open research data. From vision to practice. In: Bartling S, Friesike S (eds) Opening science. The evolving guide on how the internet is changing research, collaboration and scholarly publishing. Springer, Heidelberg; New York, pp 213–224
49. Papacharissi Z (ed) (2009) Journalism and citizenship. New agendas in communication. Routledge, New York
50. Peters I (2009) Folksonomies. Indexing and retrieval in Web 2.0. De Gruyter/Saur, Berlin
51. Pinkowitz I (2002) Research dissemination and impact. Evidence from web site downloads. J Financ 57:485–499
52. Piwowar H (2013a) Altmetrics. What, why and where? Bull Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 39(4):8–9
53. Piwowar H (2013b) Altmetrics: value all research products. Nature 493(7431):159
54. Piwowar H, Priem J (2013) The power of altmetrics on a CV. Bull Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 39 (4):10–13
55. Priem J, Taborelli D, Groth P, Nylon C (2010) Alt-metrics. A manifesto. http://altmetrics.org/manifesto/. Accessed 15 June 2014
56. Priem J, Piwowar H, Hemminger B (2012) Altmetrics in the wild. Using social media to explore scholarly impact. arXiv:1203.4745v1. Accessed 15 June 2014
57. Procter R, Williams R, Stewart JK, Poschen M, Snee H, Voss A, Asgari-Targhi M (2010) Adoption and use of Web 2.0 in scholarly communications. Philos Trans R Soc A Math Phys Eng Sci 368(1926):4039–4056
58. Samoilenko A, Yasseri T (2013) The distorted mirror of Wikipedia. A quantitative analysis of Wikipedia coverage of academics. http://arxiv.org/abs/1310.8508. Accessed 15 June 2014
59. Shuai X, Jiang Z, Liu X, Bollen J (2013) A comparative study of academic and Wikipedia ranking. In: JCDL’13 Proceedings of the 13th ACM/IEEE-CS joint conference on digital libraries. ACM, Indianapolis, pp 25–28
60. Silverman C (ed) (2014) Verification handbook. A definitive guide to verifying digital content for emergency coverage. European Journalism Centre, Maastricht
61. Sitek D, Bertelmann R (2014) Open access. A state of the art. In: Bartling S, Friesike S (eds) Opening science. The evolving guide on how the internet is changing research, collaboration and scholarly publishing. Springer, Heidelberg; New York, pp 139–145
62. Thelwall M (2008) Bibliometrics to webometrics. J Inf Sci 34(4):605–621
63. Thelwall M, Kousha K (2008) Online presentations as a source of scientific impact? An analysis of PowerPoint files citing academic journals. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 59:805–815
64. Thelwall M, Kousha K (2014) Academia.edu: social network or academic network? J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 65(4):721–731
65. Thelwall M, Haustein S, Larivière V, Sugimoto C (2013) Do altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other social web services. PLoS ONE 8(5)
66. Tochtermann K (2014) How science 2.0 will impact on scientific libraries. Inf Technol 56(5) (in press)
67. Tokar A, Beurskens M, Keuneke S, Mahrt M, Peters I, Puschmann C, van Treeck T, Weller K (eds) (2012) Science and the internet. Düsseldorf University Press, Düsseldorf Viney I (2013) Altmetrics: research council responds. Nature 494(7436):176
68. Waldrop MM (2008) Science 2.0. Sci Am 298(5):68–73
69. Weller K, Peters I (2012) Twitter for scientific communication. How can citations/references be identified and measured? In: Tokar A, Beurskens M, Keuneke S, Mahrt M, Peters I, Puschmann C, van Treeck T, Weller K (eds) Science and the internet. Düsseldorf University Press, Düsseldorf, pp 211–224
70. Weller K, Mainz D, Mainz I, Paulsen I (2007) Wissenschaft 2.0? Social Software im Einsatz für die Wissenschaft. In: Ockenfeld M (ed) Information in Wissenschaft, Bildung und Wirtschaft. Proceedings der 29. Online-Tagung der DGI, Frankfurt am Main, pp 121–136
71. Weller K, Dornstädter R, Freimanis R, Klein RN, Perez M (2010) Social software in academia: three studies on users’ acceptance of Web 2.0 services. In: Proceedings of the 2nd web science conference (WebSci10), Raleigh
72. Zahedi Z, Costas R, Wouters P (2014) How well developed are altmetrics? A cross-disciplinary analysis of the presence of’alternative metrics’ in scientific publications. http://arxiv.org/abs/1404.1301. Accessed 15 June 2014