I like to think of the research itself as the meat or food if you will,Pre heat- establish a good amount of published results before you dive into social media, creating an account with nothing to post wont accomplish anythingDon’t get burned- Publishers like JAMA and WMJ wont publish your research if they find it drifting around the internet alreadyAudience - what do we want to communicate? What’s your message? And to whom do you want to communicate this to? having a target audience will give you an idea of what social media sites to use and who to “follow” because inevitably you will have to follow to get followed until you have established a good followingIt would be nice to say that your audience consists of everyone but that’s just not fesable. It is smart to initially target other academic profiles, medical schools, health commitees, other researchers. And big public profiles, wall street journal, usa today, ap news. Most of these profiles will follow you back and you can repost eachother to promote their work as well as yours. A major news profile might even make your research a national story.It is also wise to follow your constituants directly. In the PHINEX case that is residents of wisconsin, especially Dane county, finding your locals is quite easy, either use a hashtag or find a common page that they would all follow i.e. UW-Madison
Social mediarefers to the means of interactions among people in which they create, share, and exchange information and ideas in virtual communities and networks, The Interactive web is reffered to as Web 2.0Are they the same?- No, although there are many social media sites that are nearly indistinguishable from each other, there are tons of different platforms in which to create and share ideasHow many? Its tough to be linked in to too many social media sites, the problem arises when you overpost. Users consider it spam if it blitzkriegs them when they log onTheres no exact number or time of when to post for the most impact, but generally during the afternoon to early evening hours on weekedays. Think of your audience, if your targeting people that are at work during the day maybe waiting til 5 or 6 pm is appropriate. If your targeting a younger audience then posting late at night is acceptable. I would avoid posting no more than once per hour unless conversing with another user or retweeting something you found interesting. The nice thing about the post scheduling sites is that they allow you to post on multiple social media sites in one postFeel free to converse with people, post directly to people, even privately message them. Conversing with people on a site like twitter is great because it puts your name out there without you having to post everything you have. It also puts a personality to your twitter account which helps comfort people in a cold digital world
There are hundreds of social media sites out there. It is smart and safe to start by using facebook, twitter and youtube. These three sites are easy to use and have the most users, which makes it very easy to establish a following. But depending on the specifics of your research you may want to join the more exotic media sites, Instagram/flickr for pictures, Stumbleupon/pinterest to target certain interests and so on…Once again a target audience will help to set you in the right directionA great site for researchers is academia.edu. It functions like most other social networks but it is a community specifically designed for those in academia, hence the name. it allows for peer review among other things right on the web site.Organizations such as COMPASS (http://www.compassonline.org) can be called in to offer social media training workshops for scientists
I know we are all scientists so we constantly dissect and quantify every detail, but at the end of the day, building a strong social media presence is not science, its good old fashioned marketing. There is no formula or protocol for how to grab someone’s attention, there is only experience. What catches your attention? There are so many posts flashing so quickly in front of the users eye creativity is the only way to catch their attentionUsing pictures is great because they can convey a lot of information quickly and can hold a viewers attention longer than words on a page because of the color and imagery.Videos are another great way to quickly capture peoples attention. Plus they put a face to an otherwise digital persona. Larry USE HASHTAGS, I cant stress it enough. Hashtags are designed to link similar posts. This allows people to search any hashtag and see every post that has used it. Once you use a hashtag you can click on it like a link. It will direct you to all posts using that hashtag, including yours. This is a great way to find out what other people have to say about your topic. You can also use it to find people to follow, others will find you in that way.Using tags and numbers and stats will help set your post apart from others.
Hashtags aren’t used on every social media service, but almost any platform that has a live feed of updated posts will use hashtags to group postsDon’t be afraid to click on your own hashtags
Although a video can go viral and turn an average Joe into a celebrity over night, these results are not typical.Followers will initially come at a painfully slow pace, but as you build followers and they pass on your posts to their followers the numbers will begin to grow faster and faster In order to build followers you must like or favorite peoples post as well as retweet posts to show them of to your followoers. Others will do the same to you.
Created by Garfield (1972), the Journal Impact Factor (JIF) is a measure of a journal’s average citations per article. Though originally conceived as a way to assess journals, it is now often used to establish the value of the articles published in those journals, and by extension the quality of individual scientists’ work (Fuyuno and Cyranoski, 2006). It is becoming increasingly apparent, however, that the JIF has serious shortcomings when used for any of these purposes. Perhaps the most important weakness is that the JIF examines journals, not articles (Priem)Today, citations are no longer the only source of impact metrics. The Web can be mined for impact indicators, just as the JIF mines the citations recorded in the Journal Citation Report (Thelwall, 2008)
Altmetrics are the data representing downloads, reposts, reads, citations and many others variables of social networks. Basically taking Journal downloads and citations to the 21st centuryGraph from MelissaTerras’s paper “The Impact of Social Media on the Dissemination of Research” in which she uploaded her previously published papers to twitter. This chart represents what happened when she posted her paper “Digital Curiosities”. She claims that prior to her upload onto social media the article had only been downloaded twice. It is clearly evident that posting her article to twitter dramatically increased the downloads.
It just comes down to preference. One analytics program is not much better or worse than the others. You just have to play around with them until you find one that you like.These are just a few, more and more startup analytics companies are popping up every month
Tweets, Blog reads, and other social media views can lead to serious money. Every year more and more funding organizations are taking into consideration the social media impact of research. It gives a more well rounded picture of the published research. Some funding organizations are even requiring altmetrics in your CV.Steven B. Roberts used his altmetrics to gain tenure as an associate professor at the University of Washington.The US National Science Foundation has recently changed their policy to include altmetrics in their funding decisions. Stating “Altmetrics give a fuller picture of how research products have influenced conversation, thought and behaviour.”
These numbers are from 2012, meaning that today more than 1 in 40 scholars is on twitter and the blog entries keep rising.Publication websites such as Plos are now including the “Altmetric” numbers as well as traditional metrics to show the impact of scientific articles
How to build a research program social media
A handful of your favorite social media
(Twitter, Facebook, Youtube, etc.)
A little creativity
And an insatiable appetite for metrics
It is wise to “pre-heat” your social media
presence with published research
Putting your research on the web too soon
can lead to burns
Who will be consuming your efforts?
What constitutes social media?
Are they all the same?
How many is too many?
When do I post?
◦ Using Buffer or Hootsuite to schedule posts
Someone tweeted at me, what do I do?
Get noticed- even with “posting overload”
Make it easy to digest
Ways to grab audience attention:
◦ Pictures, Images, Graphs
◦ White papers
Use #hashtags to link your posts with relevant posts from
around the world
Going viral is not typical
A scientific page needs to build rapport and
Building a following is a slow process
◦ Liking, favoriting, reposting
What is it?
Why it’s becoming obsolete
What’s replacing it?
Alternative Metrics Altmetrics
Linking social media (web 2.0) usage
statistics with scientific research
These analytics can be found at a variety of
Many social networks have analytics of their
◦ Twitter analytics, Facebook insights
Third party metrics are widely available
◦ Google analytics, SAS, Piwik, Impactstory
Altmetrics are playing an increasingly large
part in scientific research
Can “tweetations” lead to tenure?
National Science Foundation – Jan 14, 2013
◦ Asks PIs to list research “products” rather than
1 in 40 scholars active on Twitter
More than 25,000 blog entries have been
written about peer-reviewed research papers
1. Aberdeen CES. Social media for research impact. Available at:
Accessed June 6, 2013.
2. Bik HM, Goldstein MC. An Introduction to Social Media for Scientists. PLoS Biol. 2013;11(4).
3. Cheung MK. Altmetrics: Too soon for use in assessment. Nature. 2013;494(7436):176.
4. Chou WS, Prestin A, Lyons C, Wen K. Web 2.0 for health promotion: reviewing the current
evidence. Am J Public Health. 2013;103(1):e9–18. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2012.301071.
5. Donelle L, Booth RG. Health tweets: an exploration of health promotion on twitter. Online J
Issues Nurs. 2012;17(3):4.
6. Eysenbach G. Can Tweets Predict Citations? Metrics of Social Impact Based on Twitter and
Correlation with Traditional Metrics of Scientific Impact. J Med Internet Res. 2011;13(4).
7. Fausto S, Machado FA, Bento LFJ, Iamarino A, Nahas TR, Munger DS. Research blogging:
indexing and registering the change in science 2.0. PLoS ONE. 2012;7(12):e50109.
8. Garfield E. The history and meaning of the journal impact factor. JAMA. 2006;295(1):90–93.
9. Geeson N, Brandt J, Quaranta G, Salvia R. Designing a Public Web-Based Information System to
Illustrate and Disseminate the Development and Results of the DESIRE Project to Combat
Desertification. Environ Manage. 2013. doi:10.1007/s00267-013-0069-x.
10. Harris JK, Mueller NL, Snider D, Haire-Joshu D. Local health department use of twitter to
disseminate diabetes information, United States. Prev Chronic Dis. 2013;10:E70.
11. Harris Lygidakis. Use and Applications of Social Media in Research. 2012. Available at:
12009026. Accessed June 10, 2013.
12. Hirsch JE. An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proc Natl Acad Sci
USA. 2005;102(46):16569–16572. doi:10.1073/pnas.0507655102.
13. Holly Bik. Using Social Media in Research. 2012. Available at:
http://www.slideshare.net/hollybik/using-social-media-in-research. Accessed June 10, 2013.
14. Howard J. Rise of “Altmetrics” Revives Questions About How to Measure Impact of Research.
The Chronicle of Higher Education. 2013. Available at: http://chronicle.com/article/article-
content/139557/. Accessed June 5, 2013.
15. Lozano GA, Lariviere V, Gingras Y. The weakening relationship between the impact factor and
papers’ citations in the digital age. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol. 2012;63(11):2140–2145.
16. Moreno MA, Goniu N, Moreno PS, Diekema D. Ethics of Social Media Research: Common
Concerns and Practical Considerations. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2013.
17. Neylon C, Wu S. Article-level metrics and the evolution of scientific impact. PLoS Biol.
18. Oettl A. Sociology: Honour the helpful. Nature. 2012;489(7417):496–497.
19. Piwowar H. Altmetrics: Value all research products. Nature. 2013;493(7431):159.
20. Piwowar H. Introduction Altmetrics: What, Why and Where? Bulletin of the American Society for
Information Science and Technology (Online). 2013;39(4):8–9.
21. Priem J, Costello K, Dzuba T. Prevalence and use of Twitter among scholars. FigShare. 2012.
22. Priem J, Hemminger BH. Scientometrics 2.0: New metrics of scholarly impact on the social
Web. First Monday. 2010;15(7). doi:10.5210/fm.v15i7.2874.
23. Priem J, Piwowar HA, Hemminger BM. Altmetrics in the wild: Using social media to explore
scholarly impact.; 2012. Available at: http://arxiv.org/abs/1203.4745. Accessed June 11,
24. Tenopir C, Allard S, Douglass K, et al. Data sharing by scientists: practices and perceptions.
PLoS ONE. 2011;6(6):e21101. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0021101.
25. Terras M. The Impact of Social Media on the Dissemination of Research: Results of an
Experiment. Journal of Digital Humanities. 2012. Available at:
dissemination-of-research-by-melissa-terras/. Accessed June 6, 2013.
26. Thelwall M, Haustein S, Larivière V, Sugimoto CR. Do altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other
social web services. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(5):e64841. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0064841.
27. Viney I. Altmetrics: Research council responds. Nature. 2013;494(7436):176.
28. Zaid Alsagoff. Social Media for Research! 2013. Available at:
http://www.slideshare.net/zaid/social-media-for-research-17192868. Accessed June 6, 2013.
29. Using Social Media to Enhance Your Research. Krafty Librarian. Available at:
http://kraftylibrarian.com/?p=1524. Accessed June 10, 2013.
30. Using social media tools for research. Available at: http://www.biggerbrains.com/using-
social-media-tools-for-research#1. Accessed June 10, 2013.