altmetrics for kla final
Post on 15-Apr-2017
233 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Altmetrics and their Influence on Collection Development
Sarah SuttonRachel MilesStacy Konkiel
Michael Levine-Clark
Outline
•What are altmetrics?
• Introduction to our research study
• Study Results:
–Subject liaison duties
–Use of metrics for collection development
• Questions
Alternative Metrics, or Altmetrics: What are they?
•Altmetrics use a varied number of methods for measuring scholarly impact including:
•Web-based references
•Article views/downloads
•Mentions in the news and on social media (Sutton, 2014).– Twitter, Facebook, Blogs, Mainstream media & forums.
– Evidence for LinkedIn & Pinterest, Q&A sites insufficient (Thelwall et al, 2013).
• Social bookmarking services & social reference managers, like Mendeley.
•Examples of shared media:•Videos
•Conference presentations
•Data sets
•Infographics
•Source code
Image courtesy of altmetrics.org
Image courtesy of theguardian.com
Bibliometrics vs. Altmetrics• Journal Impact Factor (JIF)– Average # of Citations to Articles Published in a Journal
– Academic articles and reviews within a journal– Limitation: Impact measured within a single field of study
Image courtesy of sciencetechblog.com
Bibliometrics vs. Almetrics• H-index
– Individual Researcher’s # of Articles Published to the # of Citations– Ex of sources: Web of Science, Google Scholar Metrics, Microsoft Academic Search
• Criticisms
–Easily manipulated
–Single field of study
–Incapable of measuring online impact
Example of an h-index. Image courtesy of Microsoft Academic Search.
Bibliometrics vs. Altmetrics• Citation counts
– Google Scholar and many digital libraries • Sort search matches by most highly cited articles.• Offer other faceted search options, such as “most recent” or a specific year/range.
– Citations accrue over months and years, and therefore are not an indication of recent research impact.– Researchers are interested in important and current research in their fields (Thelwall et al., 2013).
Image courtesy of scholar.google.com
Advantages of Measuring Online Impact
• Impact measured more rapidly than citation counts• Measures immediate impact of research & current trends
– Social media mentions→directly after being published, or even before
• Supports Open Access (OA) Initiatives– Encourages sharing research across news media platforms via social media and communicating research to the general public.– Most research measured by altmetrics uses nontechnical language– Could measure societal impact of research (Thelwall et al., 2013).
Image courtesy of plos.org/open-access
Advantages of Measuring Online Impact
• Rather than predicting future citations, altmetrics likely capture a different and unique “aspect of research visibility and impact” (Thelwall et al., 2013).– Bornmann (2015) found that the more tags an article had in the F1000Prime, the more likely the articles were to be used for instruction, rather than as scholarly citations.
• Possible indicator of translating complicated research into unambiguous information for the public’s use and in the classroom (Bornmann, 2015).
Image courtesy of humancapitalist.com
Advantages of Measuring Online Impact
• Supports faculty in understanding the impact of their research.• Assists faculty in pursuing tenure or promotion.• Assists evaluation committees and administrators in measuring research and scholarly and creative achievements for tenure. Image courtesy of Texas Tech University
Disadvantages and controversies surrounding altmetrics
• Gaming altmetrics: the potential to manipulate the popularity of an article (Roemer & Borchardt, 2015).
–Can cause damage to the purpose and accuracy of altmetrics.
–Publishers can provide funding to draw attention to articles.
• Lacks standardization (Roemer & Borchardt, 2015).
– NISO’s Altmetrics Assessment Initiative
• Estimating future citations not a reality yet.
– Correlations between citations and altmetrics scores is still weak, (Barnes, 2015). • However, this may not be the ultimate purpose of
altmetrics.
Image courtesy of jansimon.com
Preliminary Data: Subject/Liaison Librarians
• 210 liaison librarians • 575 liaison areas identified• Most liaison librarians responsible for multiple
liaison areas.• Some liaison librarians mentioned liaison areas
in multiple disciplines, (e.g. humanities, engineering, and life sciences.)
• However, most liaison librarians were responsible for liaison areas in the same or similar disciplines.
– Ex: One survey participant was responsible for the liaison areas astronomy, biochemistry, chemistry & physics.
The Survey
Purposes:
–Assess academic librarians’ current usage of research metrics in the course of their work
– Gather information about how librarians who conduct their own research or read others’ research articles use such metrics
The Survey
• Population:
–13,000 academic librarians at 4 year college or university
• Respondents
–709 librarians
–~ 5% response rate
The Survey: What We Asked
• Title and job duties
• Tenure status
• Familiarity with evaluative research metrics (JIF, usage, altmetrics)
• Uses for evaluative research metrics (JIF, usage, altmetrics)
–for professional duties
–when evaluating their own scholarly work
The Survey: Preliminary Results
• Title: Liaison Librarian/Subject Specialist
• Job duties: Collection Development
• Familiarity with
–Journal Impact Factors
–Citation Counts, Usage Metrics, Altmetrics
• Use of metrics for collection development
–Journal Impact Factors
–Citation Counts, Usage Metrics, Altmetrics
Percentage of Liaison Areas Identified
Percentage of Liaison Areas Identified in the Hard Sciences
Health Sciences: 74 mentions:● Medicine● Veterinary Science● Dentistry● Dietics● Food Science● Surgery● Human Sciences● Nursing● +36 Others!
Applied Sciences, 47 mentions:● Engineering (30)● Architecture (9)● Agronomy (6)● Other (3)
Formal Sciences, 37 mentions:● Mathematics (17)● Computer Science (13)● Statistics (7)
Physical Sciences, 39 mentions:● Chemistry (17)● Biochemistry (7)● Physics (13)● Physical Sciences, General
(2)Life Sciences, 27 mentions:
● Biology (21)● Plant Science (3)● Other (2)
Earth & Space Sci., 26 mentions: ● Earth & Environ. Sci. (19)● Astronomy & Astrophysics (7)
Science, unspecified, 3 mentions
Percentage of Liaison Areas Identified in the Humanities
Cultural and Gender studies, with 53 mentions, had 30 different types of studies!
Overall, the humanities had 174 mentions, or 30 percent of all mentions.
Percentage of Liaison Areas Identified in the Social Sciences
Social sciences had the fewest mentions in the survey, with 60 mentions, or 30 percent.
Political science had the most mentions, at 19 mentions, and also included world politics, global/international studies, global affairs, European Union studies, and peace studies.
Percentage of Liaison Areas Identified in the Professions
Professional areas had 89 mentions, or 16 percent.
Business had the most mentions but also included economics, finance, management, and marketing.
More about our respondents
• Almost all (97.3%) work full time in academic libraries at a 4 year college or university.
• Most (62.3%) have worked as a librarian for 11 or more years and almost half of those (49.1%) have been working as a librarian for more than 21 years.
• More than 50% have collection development duties.
Those with Collection Development Responsibilities' Familiarity with
Metrics
All Respondents' Familiarity with Metrics
Have you ever used journal impact factors for any of the following purposes?
How often do you evaluate materials using the following indicators of research impact in the context of your
collection
What we still want to know...
• Are there variances in use of altmetrics for collection development between liaison areas?
• Are there variances in FAMILIARITY WITH altmetrics between librarians with duties other than collection development (e.g. reference, instruction, assessment, scholarly communication)?
• Are there variances in THE USE OF altmetrics between librarians with duties other than collection development (e.g. reference, instruction, assessment, scholarly communication)?
THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION!
CAN WE ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS FOR YOU NOW?
LATER?
Sarah Sutton: ssutton3@emporia.edu
Rachel Miles: rmiles@emporia.edu
top related