The Altmetrics Collection

School of Information & Library Science, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America.
PLoS ONE (Impact Factor: 3.23). 11/2012; 7(11):e48753. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048753
Source: PubMed
16 Reads
    • "It is sometimes used for " article level metrics " and sometimes for " alternative metrics " . A very widely accepted definition of altmetrics is " the study of scholarly impact measures based on activity in online tools and environments " (Priem et al., 2012). Others regard it as a subfield of informetrics and webometrics (Bar-Ilan et al., 2012). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose – The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, the study aims to investigate the relationship between the altmetric indicators from ResearchGate (RG) and the bibliometric indicators from the Scopus database. Second, the study seeks to examine the relationship amongst the RG altmetric indicators themselves. RG is a rich source of altmetric indicators such as Citations, RGScore, Impact Points, Profile Views, Publication Views, etc. Design/methodology/approach – For establishing whether RG metrics showed the same results as the established sources of metrics, Pearson’s correlation coefficients were calculated between the metrics provided by RG and the metrics obtained from Scopus. Pearson’s correlation coefficients were also calculated for the metrics provided by RG. The data were collected by visiting the profile pages of all the members who had an account in RG under the Department of Physics, Panjab University, Chandigarh (India). Findings – The study showed that most of the RG metrics showed strong positive correlation with the Scopus metrics, except for RGScore (RG) and Citations (Scopus), which showed moderate positive correlation. It was also found that the RG metrics showed moderate to strong positive correlation amongst each other. Research limitations/implications – The limitation of this study is that more and more scientists and researchers may join RG in the future, therefore the data may change. The study focuses on the members who had an account in RG under the Department of Physics, Panjab University, Chandigarh (India). Perhaps further studies can be conducted by increasing the sample size and by taking a different sample size having different characteristics. Originality/value – Being an emerging field, not much has been conducted in the area of altmetrics. Very few studies have been conducted on the reach of academic social networks like RG and their validity as sources of altmetric indicators like RGScore, Impact Points, etc. The findings offer insights to the question whether RG can be used as an alternative to traditional sources of bibliometric indicators, especially with reference to a rapidly developing country such as India.
    New Library World 09/2015; 116(9/10):564 - 577. DOI:10.1108/NLW-03-2015-0017
  • Source
    • "Altmetrics is the research area that investigates these possibilities. While altmetrics still lacks a widely agreed definition, the concept is typically used to describe the measurement of impact or visibility of scientific articles and other scholarly activities in social media such as blogs, tweets, Facebook ‘likes’ and social bookmarks [8]. While scholars are using many different social media sites for scholarly communication, Twitter seems to be one of the most promising contexts in which to perform altmetric research because it contains more scientific content than many other social media sites [9]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Because Twitter and other social media are increasingly used for analyses based on altmetrics, this research sought to understand what contexts, affordance use, and social activities influence the tweeting behavior of astrophysicists. Thus, the presented study has been guided by three research questions that consider the influence of astrophysicists' activities (i.e., publishing and tweeting frequency) and of their tweet construction and affordance use (i.e. use of hashtags, language, and emotions) on the conversational connections they have on Twitter. We found that astrophysicists communicate with a variety of user types (e.g. colleagues, science communicators, other researchers, and educators) and that in the ego networks of the astrophysicists clear groups consisting of users with different professional roles can be distinguished. Interestingly, the analysis of noun phrases and hashtags showed that when the astrophysicists address the different groups of very different professional composition they use very similar terminology, but that they do not talk to each other (i.e. mentioning other user names in tweets). The results also showed that in those areas of the ego networks that tweeted more the sentiment of the tweets tended to be closer to neutral, connecting frequent tweeting with information sharing activities rather than conversations or expressing opinions.
    PLoS ONE 08/2014; 9(8):e106086. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0106086 · 3.23 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "tes are personal information management tools that some researchers use in their daily activities . User interactions in social bookmarking sites can provide valuable data that could be useful for research evaluation ( Neylon & Wu , 2009 ) . For example , there seems to be plentiful data about biomedicine articles in social bookmarking platforms ( Priem et al . , 2012 ) . A case study of BibSonomy revealed that the most bookmarked publication types were journal articles ( Borrego & Fry , 2012 ) . Haustein and Siebenlist ( 2011 ) used bookmarking data for 45 physics journals from CiteULike , Connotea and BibSonomy in order to evaluate the journals . There is evidence that at least some altmetrics can "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although there is evidence that counting the readers of an article in the social reference site, Mendeley, may help to capture its research impact, the extent to which this is true for different scientific fields is unknown. This study compares Mendeley readership counts with citations for different social sciences and humanities disciplines. The overall correlation between Mendeley readership counts and citations for the social sciences was higher than for the humanities. Low and medium correlations between Mendeley bookmarks and citation counts in all the investigated disciplines suggest that these measures reflect different aspects of research impact. Mendeley data was also used to discover patterns of information flow between scientific fields. Comparing information flows based on Mendeley bookmarking data and cross disciplinary citation analysis for the disciplines revealed substantial similarities and some differences. Thus, the evidence from this study suggests that Mendeley readership data could be used to help capture knowledge transfer across scientific disciplines, especially for people that read but do not author articles, as well as giving impact evidence at an earlier stage than is possible with citation counts.
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 08/2014; 65(8). DOI:10.1002/asi.23071 · 1.85 Impact Factor
Show more


16 Reads
Available from