Social media and academia


Published on

Published in: Education, Technology, Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Social media and academia

  1. 1. #zoogradseminar-
  2. 2. Can-social-media-help-your-academic-career?-
  3. 3. Can-social-media-help-your-academic-career?Probably-
  4. 4. Can-social-media-help-your-academic-career?ProbablyIf-you-are-smart-about-itIf-you-are-focused-&-not-easily-distracted-
  5. 5. THE$DATA$DELUGE$ •  <19th-century:- -- -recorded-knowledge-doubled-every-100-yrs•  Now:- -- - -recorded-knowledge-doubles-every-year•  Soon:- - -recorded-knowledge-will-double-every-12hrs --
  6. 6. $ $ALTERNATIVE$SEARCHES$(library)$ –-Use-social-media-(e.g.-twiKer)-in-a-scholarly-way–-Alerted-to-the-latest-papers–-Hear-about-jobs-/-funding-sources–-Get-inspired-about-new-research-quesSons$ $$ $-
  7. 7. $ $ALTERNATIVE$SEARCHES$(library)$ –-Use-social-media-(e.g.-twiKer)-in-a-scholarly-way–-Alerted-to-the-latest-papers–-Hear-about-jobs-/-funding-sources–-Get-inspired-about-new-research-quesSons$ $SELF$PROMOTION$(conference)$ –-Make-sure-your-stuff-comes-up-first-when-Googled–-Get-new-audience–-Interact-with-peers-&-fancy-Professors-$ $-
  8. 8. $ $ALTERNATIVE$SEARCHES$(library)$ –-Use-social-media-(e.g.-twiKer)-in-a-scholarly-way–-Alerted-to-the-latest-papers–-Hear-about-jobs-/-funding-sources–-Get-inspired-about-new-research-quesSons$ $SELF$PROMOTION$(conference)$ –-Make-sure-your-stuff-comes-up-first-when-Googled–-Get-new-audience–-Interact-with-peers-&-fancy-Professors-$ $ALTMETRICS$ –-Numbers-of-tweets-/-shares-/-blogs-/-media–-Impact-for-grant-applicaSons–-Might-be-important-for-jobs-in-the-future-
  9. 9. 1/40$Scholars-
  10. 10. AT E$D TH E$ UG EL $D A
  11. 11. $SEARCHES$
  12. 12. FAMOUS-FOLLOWERS?(I-Fucking-Love-Science)-
  14. 14. WHEN-TO-TWEET?-
  15. 15. TOP-TWEETS?-
  17. 17. Proceedings o number of journals differs between tables 1 and 2 because table 1 prediction su only includes journals with at least one non-null test. A Bonferroni accounted fo correction for multiple tests was used to hold constant the the most twe probability of incorrectly rejecting the null hypothesis. For the Sciences ha p = 0.05 level, this reduces the p value to 0.0046 and for the Altmetrics Work? Twitter and Ten0.0009. Social Web p = 0.01 level, this reduces the p value to Other respectively, Do Services Mike Thelwall1*, Stefanie Haustein2, Vincent Lariviere3, Cassidy R. Sugimoto4 Table 1. The number of` successes and failures scores. for comparisons of citations ´ ´conomie et des sciences de l’information, Universite de ´ 1 School of Technology, University of Wolverhampton, Wolverhampton, United Kingdom, 2 Ecole de bibliothe ´ cole de bibliothe ´al, ´al, ´bec, Canada and Science-Metrix Inc., Montre Que ´al, ´bec, Canada, 3 E ´conomie et des sciences de l’information, Universite de ´ Montre Montre Que ´al, ´al, ´bec, Canada and Observatoire des sciences et des technologies, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche sur la science et la technologie, Universite ´ Montre Montre Que ´bec a Montre Montre Que ` ´al, ´al, ´bec, Canada, 4 School of Information and Library Science, Indiana University Bloomington, Bloomington, Indiana, United States of du Que America More-shares-&more-citaSons- More-shares-&-less-citaSons- Metric Abstract Successes Failures Z Null Tweets** 24315 (57%) 18576 (43%) 27.7 159242 Altmetric measurements derived from the social web are increasingly advocated and used as early indicators of article FbWalls** 3229 (58%) 2383 (42%) 11.3 impact and usefulness. Nevertheless, there is a lack of systematic scientific evidence that altmetrics are valid proxies of either impact or utilityRH** although a few case studies have reported medium correlations between specific altmetrics and 3852 (56%) 3046 (44%) 9.7 citation rates for individual journals or fields. To fill this gap, this study compares 11 altmetrics with Web of Science citations for 76 to 208,739 PubMed articles with at least one altmetric mention in each case and (40%)1,891 journals per 11.8 It metric. Blogs** 1934 (60%) 1266 up to also introduces a simple sign test to overcome biases caused by different citation and usage windows. Statistically significant associationsGoogle+ between higher metric scores and higher citations for articles with positive 1.7 were found altmetric 426 (53%) 378 (47%) scores in all cases with sufficient evidence (Twitter, Facebook wall posts, research highlights, blogs, mainstream media and forums) except perhaps for Google+ posts. Evidence was insufficient for LinkedIn, 232 (41%) Pinterest, question and answer 4.4 and sites, MSM** 338 (59%) Reddit, and no conclusions should be drawn about articles with zero altmetric scores or the strength of any correlation Reddits 103 (56%) 81 (44%) 1.6 between altmetrics and citations. Nevertheless, comparisons between citations and metric values for articles published at different times, even within the same year, can remove or reverse this association and so publishers and scientometricians Forums** 19 (86%) 3 (14%) 3.4 should consider the effect of time when using altmetrics to rank articles. Finally, the coverage of all the altmetrics except for Twitter seems to be low and so it is not clear if they are prevalent enough to be useful in practice. Q&A 12 (67%) 6 (33%) 1.4 32037 57857 20383 2399 1651 1799 43 266 ` Citation: Thelwall M, Haustein Pinners V, Sugimoto CR (2013) Do Altmetrics Work? Twitter and Ten 1 (20%) Web Services. PLoS ONE 8(5): e64841. S, Lariviere Other Social 4 (80%) 1.3 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0064841 264 Editor: Lutz Bornmann, Max Planck Society, Germany LinkedIn 42 0 (-) 0 (-) - Received February 18, 2013; Accepted April 18, 2013; Published May 28, 2013 Copyright: ß 2013 Thelwall et al. This is are only compared against other articles from the same journal. which permits Articles an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
  18. 18. Social-media-for-communicaSng-science--–-28-February-