Do altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other social web services.

Altmetric measurements derived from the social web are increasingly advocated and used as early indicators of article impact and usefulness. Nevertheless, there is a lack of systematic scientific evidence that altmetrics are valid proxies of either impact or utility although a few case studies have...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mike Thelwall, Stefanie Haustein, Vincent Larivière, Cassidy R Sugimoto
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2013
Materias:
R
Q
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/af3e23e5567e4e12a613e5798e4f9fce
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
id oai:doaj.org-article:af3e23e5567e4e12a613e5798e4f9fce
record_format dspace
spelling oai:doaj.org-article:af3e23e5567e4e12a613e5798e4f9fce2021-11-18T07:44:03ZDo altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other social web services.1932-620310.1371/journal.pone.0064841https://doaj.org/article/af3e23e5567e4e12a613e5798e4f9fce2013-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/23724101/?tool=EBIhttps://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203Altmetric measurements derived from the social web are increasingly advocated and used as early indicators of article impact and usefulness. Nevertheless, there is a lack of systematic scientific evidence that altmetrics are valid proxies of either impact or utility although a few case studies have reported medium correlations between specific altmetrics and 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 up to 1,891 journals per metric. It also introduces a simple sign test to overcome biases caused by different citation and usage windows. Statistically significant associations were found between higher metric scores and higher citations for articles with positive altmetric 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, Pinterest, question and answer sites, and Reddit, and no conclusions should be drawn about articles with zero altmetric scores or the strength of any correlation 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 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.Mike ThelwallStefanie HausteinVincent LarivièreCassidy R SugimotoPublic Library of Science (PLoS)articleMedicineRScienceQENPLoS ONE, Vol 8, Iss 5, p e64841 (2013)
institution DOAJ
collection DOAJ
language EN
topic Medicine
R
Science
Q
spellingShingle Medicine
R
Science
Q
Mike Thelwall
Stefanie Haustein
Vincent Larivière
Cassidy R Sugimoto
Do altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other social web services.
description Altmetric measurements derived from the social web are increasingly advocated and used as early indicators of article impact and usefulness. Nevertheless, there is a lack of systematic scientific evidence that altmetrics are valid proxies of either impact or utility although a few case studies have reported medium correlations between specific altmetrics and 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 up to 1,891 journals per metric. It also introduces a simple sign test to overcome biases caused by different citation and usage windows. Statistically significant associations were found between higher metric scores and higher citations for articles with positive altmetric 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, Pinterest, question and answer sites, and Reddit, and no conclusions should be drawn about articles with zero altmetric scores or the strength of any correlation 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 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.
format article
author Mike Thelwall
Stefanie Haustein
Vincent Larivière
Cassidy R Sugimoto
author_facet Mike Thelwall
Stefanie Haustein
Vincent Larivière
Cassidy R Sugimoto
author_sort Mike Thelwall
title Do altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other social web services.
title_short Do altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other social web services.
title_full Do altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other social web services.
title_fullStr Do altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other social web services.
title_full_unstemmed Do altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other social web services.
title_sort do altmetrics work? twitter and ten other social web services.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate 2013
url https://doaj.org/article/af3e23e5567e4e12a613e5798e4f9fce
work_keys_str_mv AT mikethelwall doaltmetricsworktwitterandtenothersocialwebservices
AT stefaniehaustein doaltmetricsworktwitterandtenothersocialwebservices
AT vincentlariviere doaltmetricsworktwitterandtenothersocialwebservices
AT cassidyrsugimoto doaltmetricsworktwitterandtenothersocialwebservices
_version_ 1718423055982657536