Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Altmetrics culs 2014
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Altmetrics culs 2014

245

Published on

Published in: Technology, Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
245
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
6
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • Most publishers (with the exception of PLoS, see above), rely on aggregators to provide article level data. PLoS collects its own article level metrics (rather than purchasing them from an aggregator).
  • Not all aggregators (or publishers) use the same data points or sources which allows them to compliment one another when used simultaneously but also has the potential for creating inconsistencies. "For example, PLOS, ImpactStory, Altmetric, and PlumAnalytics collect article-level metrics for some of the same data sources. But are the numbers they present to users consistent for the same paper or are they different due to different collection dates, data sources, or methods of collection? Each of the aggregate article-level metrics providers may collect and present article-level metrics as relevant for their target audience. Thus, as article-level metrics consumers and researchers, we need to have a clear understanding of the potential pitfalls when using article-level metrics data" (Chamberlain, 2013, p. 7).

    Some of these are free, some are paid.
  • Almetrics.com (not to be confused with Altmetric.org) where you can download a free API that will (in theory) provide you with an altmetric score for any article you find on the web.
  • New insights: "The new metrics offer the possibility to discover new insights into impact that have been previously impossible to obtain” (Galligan & Dyas-Correia, 2013, p. 56)

    Open data: The difference between altmetrics and traditional metrics is that altmetrics "use mostly publically available data, making the process and calculations completely transparent" where as traditional metrics like the journal impact factor is made available only by subscription (from Thomson Reuters) and calculated using a less transparent algorithm (even though the equation has been published many times). Other traditional metrics are generally made available only to those libraries that subscribed to particular data sources and are, now, regulated by industry standards (Project Counter).

    Speed: nearly real-time metrics of scholarly impact; according to a study Jason Priem presented at ASIST in 2010, 15% of Twitter citations occurred on the same day an article was published, 39% in the same week, and 56% in the same month.

    Diversity: more than just citations, altmetrics include discussion by the media, mentions in the news, discussion by the public as well as importance to colleagues.

    (Galligan & Dyas-Correia, 2013, p. 56)
    (Chamberlain, 2013)

  • Transcript

    • 1. Altmetrics: What Good are They to Academic Libraries? Sarah W. Sutton Kanas Library Association – College & University Libraries Section Spring Conference 2014 Emporia State University May 21, 2014
    • 2.  Transitions in scholarly communications  What are altmetrics?  Advantages and disadvantages  Uses in academic libraries Objectives
    • 3. Transitions in scholarly communication
    • 4.  Alternative metrics  Article-level  Alterative to Journal Impact Factor, H-Index  Proxy for importance? Impact? Attention?  Measure of quality? What are altmetrics?
    • 5. Journal Impact Factor (JIF): 2008 2-year journal impact factor = the number of times the articles published in a journal in 2006 and 2007, were cited by journal articles during 2008 -- Divided by – the total number of "citable items" published by that journal in 2006 and 2007 What are altmetrics? H-Index:
    • 6.  Publishers:  Wiley  Nature  PLoS  Frontiers  Biomed Central  Springer  Elsevier Where can I get them?
    • 7.  Aggregators  PLoS  ImpactStory  Altmetric  PlumAnalytics  ResearchGate  CitedIn  ScienceCard  ReaderMeter  PaperCritic Where can I get them?
    • 8. Where can I get them?
    • 9. Advantages  New insights in impact  Based on open data  Speed  Diversity of sources Advantages & Disadvantages
    • 10. Disadvantages  Too many variations; uncontrolled  “Gaming”  Bias  Establishing standards Advantages & Disadvantages
    • 11.  Big data  Research impact  Collection development  Marketing  Return on investment (ROI)  Grants & funding  Ebooks  Open Access Use in academic libraries
    • 12. …more research is needed  One size fits all?  Triangulation  Bridging the gap  Establishing standards A word of caution…
    • 13. Questions? Comments? Sarah W. Sutton, Ph.D. School of Library and Information Management Emporia State University ssutton3@emporia.edu Slides:
    • 14. Adie, E., & Roe, W. (2013). Altmetric: Enriching scholarly content with article-level discussion and metrics. Learned Publishing, 26(1), 11–17. Article-Level Metrics: An ill-conceived and meretricious Idea. (2013). Scholarly Open Access. Retrieved from http://scholarlyoa.com/2013/08/01/article-level-metrics/ Chamberlain, S. (2013). Consuming article-level metrics: Observations and lessons. Information Standards Quarterly, 25(2), 4. doi:10.3789/isqv25no2.2013.02 Crotty, D. (2014). Altmetrics: Mistaking the means for the end. The Scholarly Kitchen. Retrieved from http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2014/05/01/altmetrics-mistaking-the- means-for-the-end/ Ebsco Information Sevices. (2014). PlumTM Analytics Becomes Part of EBSCO Information Services. Retrieved May 20, 2014, from http://www.ebscohost.com/newsroom/stories/plum-analytics-becomes-part-of-ebsco- information-services Bibliography
    • 15. Galligan, F., & Dyas-Correia, S. (2013). Altmetrics: Rethinking the way we measure. Serials Review, 39(1), 56–61. Luther, J. (2014). Altmetrics boosted by EBSCO’s acquisition of Plum Analytics. The Scholarly Kitchen. Retrieved from http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2014/02/05/altmetrics-boosted- by-ebscos-acquisitions-of-plum-analytics/ Konkiel, S. (2013). Altmetrics: A 21st-century solution to determining research quality. (Online Searcher, 37(4), 11–15. Liu, J., & Adie, E. (2013). Five challenges in altmetrics: A toolmaker’s perspective. Bulletin of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 39(4), 31–34. NISO. (2014). NISO Alternative Assessment Metrics (Altmetrics) Project. NISO. Retrieved from http://www.niso.org/topics/tl/altmetrics_initiative/ Piwowar, H., 2. (2013). Introduction altmetrics: What, why and where? Bulletin of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 39(4), 8–9. References
    • 16. Plum Analytics. (2014). Retrieved May 4, 2014, from http://www.plumanalytics.com/ Priem, J., & Costello, K. L. (2010). How and why scholars cite on Twitter. Retrieved from https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/15J41q9EzK3CiMMoIPKY545ACndORpa6Wtj75v1Yj rzQ/edit#slide=id.i0 Priem, J., Taraborelli, D., Groth, P., & Neylon, C. (2010). Altmetrics: A manifesto. Retrieved from http://altmetrics.org/manifesto/ Project COUNTER Code of Practice for Electronic Resources: Release 4. (2012). Project COUNTER. Retrieved from http://www.projectcounter.org/r4/COPR4.pdf ResearchGate. (2014). Retrieved May 9, 2014, from http://www.researchgate.net/ San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment. (2014, April 15). In Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved from http://am.ascb.org/dora/files/sfdeclarationfinal.pdf Thomson Reuters Statement Regarding the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment - Research Analytics - Thomson Reuters. (n.d.). Retrieved May 4, 2014, from http://researchanalytics.thomsonreuters.com/statement_re_sfdra/ References

    ×