Tweets vs. Mendeley readers: How do these two social media metrics differ?

IT - Information Technology

Volumn 56, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 207-215

  Haustein, Stefanie ^a,b   Larivière, Vincent ^a,c   Thelwall, Mike ^d   Amyot, Didier ^b   Peters, Isabella ^e  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^b Science Metrix   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITÉ DU QUÉBEC À MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^d UNIVERSITY OF WOLVERHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

^e Leibniz Informationszentrum Wirtschaft   (Germany)

Author keywords

ACM CCS Human centered computing Social networks; Altmetrics; Citation analysis; Mendeley; Scholarly communication; Social media; Twitter

Indexed keywords

INFORMATION ANALYSIS;

ACM CCS→HUMAN-CENTERED COMPUTING→SOCIAL NETWORK; ALTMETRIC; CITATION ANALYSIS; HUMAN-CENTERED COMPUTING; MENDELEY; MICRO-BLOGGING PLATFORMS; RESEARCH IMPACTS; SCHOLARLY COMMUNICATION; SOCIAL MEDIA; USER GROUPS;

SOCIAL NETWORKING (ONLINE);

EID: 85117039151     PISSN: 16112776     EISSN: 21967032     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1515/itit-2014-1048     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Adie, E. & Roe, W. (2013): Altmetric: Enriching scholarly content with article-level discussion and metric. Learned Publishing 26(1), 11-17.
2. Bar-Ilan, J., Haustein, S., Peters, I., Priem, J., Shema, H., & Terliesner, J. (2012). Beyond citations: Scholars' visibility on the social web. In E. Archambault, Y. Gingras & V. Larivière (Eds.), 17th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators (STI2012) (pp. 98-109). Montreal: Science- Metrix and OST.
3. Birkholz, J.M., Wang, S., Groth, P., & Magliacane, S. (2013). Who are we talking about? Identifying scientific populations online. In J. Li et al. (eds.), Semantic Web and Web Science, Springer Proceedings on Complexity (pp. 237-250). New York: Springer Science and Business Media.
4. Cronin, B. (2013). The evolving indicator space (iSpace). Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(8), 1523-1525.
5. 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.
6. Frass, W., Cross, J., & Gardner, V. (2013). Open access survey: Exploring the views of Taylor & Francis and Routledge authors (Supplement 6: Regional and subject breakdowns of views about article metrics). Taylor & Francis/ Routledge. Retrieved October 31, 2013 from: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/pdf/ open-access-survey-march2013.pdf.
7. Gunn, W. (2013). Social signals reflect academic impact: What it means when a scholar adds a paper to Mendeley. Information Standards Quarterly, 25(2), 33-39.
8. Haustein, S., Peters, I., Sugimoto, C. R., Thelwall, M., & Lariviere, V. (2014). Tweeting biomedicine: An analysis of tweets and citations in the biomedical literature. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(4), 656-669. doi: 10.1002/asi.23101.
9. Henning, V. & Reichelt, J. (2008). Mendeley - A last.fm for research? IEEE fourth international conference on eScience (eScience '08) (pp. 327-328). Los Alamitos: IEEE.
10. Hull, D., Pettifer, S. R., & Kell, D. B. (2008). Defrosting the digital library: Bibliographic tools for the next generation web. PLoS Computational Biology, 4(10), e1000204. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000204.
11. Li, X., Thelwall, M., & Giustini, D. (2012). Validating online reference managers for scholarly impact measurement. Scientometrics, 91(2), 461-471.
12. Lin, J. & Fenner, M. (2013). Altmetrics in evolution: Defining and redefining the ontology of article-level metrics. Information Standards Quarterly, 25(2), 20-26.
13. Liu, J. & Adie, E. (2013). Five challenges in altmetrics: A toolmaker's perspective. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 39(4), 31-34. doi: 10.1002/bult.2013.1720390410.
14. Merton, R. K. (1973). The sociology of science. Theoretical and empirical investigations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
15. Mohammadi, E. & Thelwall, M. (in press). Mendeley readership altmetrics for the social sciences and humanities: Research evaluation and knowledge flows. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. doi: 10.1002/asi.23071.
16. Mohammadi, E., Thelwall, M, Haustein, S. & Larivière, V., (in press). Who reads research articles? An altmetrics analysis of Mendeley user categories. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology.
17. Pew Research Center (2011). The Future of the Global Muslim Population. http://www.pewforum.org/2011/01/27/the-futureof- the-global-muslim-population/.
18. Priem, J. & Costello, K. L. (2010). How and why scholars cite on twitter. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (ASIST 2010) (pp. 1-4) doi: 10.1002/meet.14504701201.
19. Priem, J., Taraborelli, D., Groth, P., & Neylon, C. (2011). Altmetrics: A manifesto, Retrieved December 14, 2011 from: http:// altmetrics.org/manifesto/.
20. Reher, S., & Haustein, S. (2010). Social bookmarking in STM. Putting services to the acid test. Online, 34(6), 34-42.
21. Schlögl, C., Gorraiz, J., Gumpenberger, C., Jack, K., & Kraker, P. (2013). Download vs. citation vs. readership data: The case of an Information Systems journal. Proceedings of the 14th International Society of Scientometrics and Informetrics Conference, Vol. 1, pp. 626-634.
22. Shuai, X., Pepe, A., & Bollen, J. (2012). How the scientific community reacts to newly submitted preprints: Article downloads, twitter mentions, and citations. PLOS ONE, 7(11), e47523. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0047523.
23. Thelwall, M., Haustein, S., Larivière, V., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2013). Do altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other social web services. Plos One, 8(5), e64841. doi: 10.1371/journal. pone.0064841.
24. Thelwall, M., Tsou, A., Weingart, S., Holmberg, K., & Haustein, S. (2013). Tweeting links to academic articles, Cybermetrics, 17(1), 1.
25. Weller, K., Dröge, E., & Puschmann, C. (2011). Citation analysis in twitter: Approaches for defining and measuring information flows within tweets during scientific conferences. 1st Workshop on Making Sense of Microposts.
26. Zahedi, Z., Costas, R., & Wouters, P. (2013b). What is the impact of the publications read by the different Mendeley users? Could they help to identify alternative types of impact? Presentation held at the PLoS ALM Workshop 2013 in San Francisco, http://lanyrd.com/2013/alm13/scrdpk/.