Interpreting “altmetrics": Viewing acts on social media through the lens of citation and social theories"

Merit, Expertise and Measuremen

Grand challenges in altmetrics : heterogeneity, data quality and dependencies

With increasing uptake among researchers, social media are finding their way into scholarly communication and, under the umbrella term altmetrics, are starting to be utilized in research evaluation. Fueled by technological possibilities and an increasing demand to demonstrate impact beyond the scientific community, altmetrics have received great attention as potential democratizers of the scientific reward system and indicators of societal impact. This paper focuses on the current challenges for altmetrics. Heterogeneity, data quality and particular dependencies are identified as the three major issues and discussed in detail with an emphasis on past developments in bibliometrics. The heterogeneity of altmetrics reflects the diversity of the acts and online events, most of which take place on social media platforms. This heterogeneity has made it difficult to establish a common definition or conceptual framework. Data quality issues become apparent in the lack of accuracy, consistency and replicability of various altmetrics, which is largely affected by the dynamic nature of social media events. Furthermore altmetrics are shaped by technical possibilities and are particularly dependent on the availability of APIs and DOIs, strongly dependent on data providers and aggregators, and potentially influenced by the technical affordances of underlying platforms

Tweeting about journal articles: Engagement, marketing or just gibberish?

This paper presents preliminary results on the analysis of tweets to journal articles in the field of Dentistry. We present two case studies in which we critically examine the contents and context that motivate the tweeting of journal articles. We then focus on a specific aspect, the role played by journals on self-promoting their contents and the effect this has on the total number of tweets their papers produce. In a context where many are pushing to the use of altmetrics as an alternative or complement to traditional bibliometric indicators. We find a lack of evidence (and interest) on critically examining the many claims that are being made as to their capability to trace evidences of 'broader forms of impact'. Our first results are not promising and question current approaches being made in the field of altmetrics.Comment: Paper accepted for oral presentation at the STI 2017 Conference held in Paris (France

Issues in the Interpretation of “Altmetrics” Digital Traces: A Review

Researchers leave traces of their behavior during many stages of their research process. Parts of this process were formerly invisible. With scholarship moving online, we can now access various types of altmetrics digital traces such as reading, organizing, sharing, and discussing scientific papers, thus develop a more holistic story about researchers and their work. However, a lack of in-depth interpretation of altmetrics digital traces is observed. Therefore, this paper focuses on reviewing some of the existing altmetrics research, with a particular emphasis on the issues that need to be taken into consideration in the interpretation of altmetrics digital traces. Taking a preliminary step toward a guideline for more in-depth analysis of digital traces of scholarly acts, this review aims to bring attention to these issues to avoid misuse of altmetrics indicators

Do altmetrics promote Open Access? An exploratory analysis on altmetric differences between types of access in the field of Physics

The promotion of Open Science needs new metrics that encourage openness in scientific practices, and can help institutions to monitor it. In 2017, the European Commission (EC) created an Expert Group with the task of informing the commission on the possibility of including altmetric indicators as potential metrics that could foster and monitor open science advancements, but it failed to show how these metrics can help to foster Open Science. The current paper analyses differences in altmetric scores between Green OA publications, Gold OA publications and non OA publications. The goal of the paper is to empirically study whether altmetric indicators reinforce Open Access practices regardless of the type of access. We report a preliminary analysis based on two Physics journals. Our results show that gold OA documents are best covered in Altmetric.com and receive higher mentions than documents with other types of access. This is especially troublesome in the case of green OA, as it reflects that altmetric indicators do promote a very specific type of access closely linked with the publishing industry

Do altmetrics promote Open Access? An exploratory analysis on altmetric differences between types of access in the field of Physics

The promotion of Open Science needs new metrics that encourage openness in scientific practices, and can help institutions to monitor it. In 2017, the European Commission (EC) created an Expert Group with the task of informing the commission on the possibility of including altmetric indicators as potential metrics that could foster and monitor open science advancements, but it failed to show how these metrics can help to foster Open Science. The current paper analyses differences in altmetric scores between Green OA publications, Gold OA publications and non OA publications. The goal of the paper is to empirically study whether altmetric indicators reinforce Open Access practices regardless of the type of access. We report a preliminary analysis based on two Physics journals. Our results show that gold OA documents are best covered in Altmetric.com and receive higher mentions than documents with other types of access. This is especially troublesome in the case of green OA, as it reflects that altmetric indicators do promote a very specific type of access closely linked with the publishing industry

Authorship, citations, acknowledgments and visibility in social media : symbolic capital in the multifaceted reward system of science

The reward system of science is undergoing significant changes, as traditional indicators compete with initiatives that offer novel means of disseminating and assessing scholarly impact. This paper considers a number of aspects of this reward system, including authorship, citations, acknowledgements, and the growing use of social media platforms by academics, with an eye towards identifying contemporary issues relating to scholarly communication practices, as understood through the perspectives of Bourdieu’s symbolic capital and Merton’s recognition paradigms. This paper posits that, while scientific capital remains the foundation upon which the reward system of science is built, this system is revealing itself to be more and more multifaceted, extremely complex, and facing increasing tension between its traditional means of evaluation and the potential of new indicators in the digital era. The paper presents an extended literature review, as well as recommendations for further considerations and empirical research. A better understanding of the perceptions of academics would be necessary to properly assess the effects of these new indicators on scholarly communication practices and the reward system of science

A climate of sharing : Who are the users engaging with climate research on Twitter?

altmetrics18: Science & the public : public interactions with science through the lens of social medi