SOCIAL MEDIA USE AMONG RESEARCHERS FROM EASTERN EUROPE DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC: A CROSS-SECTIONAL SURVEY STUDY

Social media platforms are essential for online scholarly activities in the time of the COVID-19 pandemic. Their use is critical in countries of non-mainstream science. This study aimed to evaluate the role of social media in scholarly activities in Eastern Europe. We collected responses from 127 scholars from Ukraine, Poland, Lithuania, and other Eastern European countries. They mainly reported spending 1-2 hours on social media activities. ResearchGate, Facebook, and LinkedIn were the most popular channels for post-publication article promotion. Only 17.3% of respondents were familiar with metrics generated by Altmetric.com and Plum Analytics. Increasing awareness of the role of social media platforms and metrics for scholarly purposes requires more attention in Eastern Europe

Availability of altmetrics of Russian academic journals (geosciences subject area)

The authors use an example of Russian journals in Earth sciences to analyze the availability of altmetrics for additional evaluation of different features of serials. The set of altmetrics aggregated by Plum Analytics on the Scopus platform was studied. We demonstrate the availability and applicability of the altmetrics like abstract views, full-text views, and a share of viewed items for journal assessment; high dependence between these altmetrics and traditional citation-based approaches is detected. Providing enhanced possibilities of automatic processing of altmetrics and wider covering of Russian sources, altmetrics may become a valuable scientometric tool in some complicated cases.

Cross-sectional analysis of bibliometrics and altmetrics: comparing the impact of qualitative and quantitative articles in the British Medical Journal

ObjectivesIn comparison to quantitative research, the impact of qualitative articles in the medical literature has been questioned by the BMJ; to explore this, we compared the impact of quantitative and qualitative articles published in BMJ.DesignCross-sectional survey.SettingArticles published in the BMJ between 2007 and 2017.Main outcome measuresBibliometric and altmetric measures of research impact were collected using Web of Science, Google Scholar, Scopus, Plum Analytics and ProQuest Altmetric. Bibliometric measures consisted of citation numbers, field weighted citation impact and citation percentile. Altmetric measures consisted of article usage, captures, mentions, readers, altmetric attention score and score percentile. Scores were compared using the Wilcoxon Rank-sum test.ResultsWe screened a total of 7777 articles and identified 42 qualitative articles. Each qualitative article was matched to 3 quantitative articles published during the same year (126 quantitative articles). Citation numbers were not statistically different between the two research types; the median number of citations (google scholar) per quantitative article was 62 (IQR 38–111) versus 58 (IQR 36–85) per qualitative article (p=0.47). Using Plum Analytics, qualitative articles were found to have a significantly higher usage, with a median of 984 (IQR 581–1351) versus 379 (IQR 177–763) for quantitative (p<0.001). The Altmetric Attention Score was higher for quantitative articles at 16 (IQR 7–37) versus qualitative articles at 9 (IQR 5–23, p=0.05), as was the Altmetric Score percentile 93 (IQR 87–96) versus 88 (IQR 76–95; p=0.02).ConclusionQualitative and quantitative articles published in the BMJ between 2007 and 2017 both have a high impact. No article type was consistently superior in terms of bibliometric or altmetric measures, suggesting that type of article is not the major driver of impact.

Journals and PlumX Metrics

Information technology is at the core of how you do your business and how your business model itself evolves. —Satya Nadella CEO, Microsoft Plum Analytics (also known as PlumX) is an online tool which belongs to altmetrics (full term: alternative metrics) data providers and measures of hidden research impact based on online activity – such as saving of papers in Mendeley, downloads, social media sites (Facebook, Twitter), and blogs.1, 2 PlumX history: founded in 2012 by Andrea Michalek and Mike Buschman, acquired by EBSCO Information Services in 2014, and final acquisition by Elsevier happened in 2017.3 PlumX was successfully integrated into Elsevier`s products, including Scopus, ScienceDirect, Pure, Mendeley, and SciVal.4 PlumX categories of metrics are: citations, usage, captures, mentions, and social media.5 So, how PlumX works we can see on the example of Elsevier’s gold open access journal focused on head and neck surgery – Otolaryngology Case Reports. 6 The journal’s official webpage contains PlumX link to the article of Barber et al.7 Article`s metrics details included: usage – 13 (twelve abstract views and one link-out), captures – 2, and social media – 1 (in Twitter).8 Category ‘Usage’ represents clicks, downloads, views, library holdings, and video plays.5 Category ‘Captures’ shows bookmarks, favorites, reference manager saves, and watchers.5 Category ‘Social media’ means likes, shares, and tweets.5 So, it`s an honor to editorial staff of DTJournal and OMF Publishing company to congratulate Elsevier with implementation of a powerful altmetrics tool which definitely helps individual researchers uncover the full impact of their work.1 Furthermore, researchers who know how their project is impacting the scientific community get inspired to do their best in future projects.

The presence of academic journals on Twitter and its relationship with dissemination (tweets) and research impact (citations)

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze the relationship between dissemination of research papers on Twitter and its influence on research impact. Design/methodology/approach Four types of journal Twitter accounts (journal, owner, publisher and no Twitter account) were defined to observe differences in the number of tweets and citations. In total, 4,176 articles from 350 journals were extracted from Plum Analytics. This altmetric provider tracks the number of tweets and citations for each paper. Student’s t-test for two-paired samples was used to detect significant differences between each group of journals. Regression analysis was performed to detect which variables may influence the getting of tweets and citations. Findings The results show that journals with their own Twitter account obtain more tweets (46 percent) and citations (34 percent) than journals without a Twitter account. Followers is the variable that attracts more tweets (ß=0.47) and citations (ß=0.28) but the effect is small and the fit is not good for tweets (R2=0.46) and insignificant for citations (R2=0.18). Originality/value This is the first study that tests the performance of research journals on Twitter according to their handles, observing how the dissemination of content in this microblogging network influences the citation of their papers.

Взгляд на альтметрику и ее растущую важность для исследовательских библиотек

В настоящее время в процессе научной коммуникации участвуют больше людей, чем когда-либо. Кроме того, возможность передачи и распространения данных в цифровом виде позволяют учитывать количественные показатели влияния различных материалов наразвитие науки. Альтметрика – показатели, основанные на данных из социальных сетей, дают возможность отслеживать изменения научных связей более оперативно и пересмотреть в целом вопрос о том, как именно мы измеряем воздействие работы ученых на научную среду в целом. В этом докладе обобщены основные тенденции, возможности и вызовы альтметрики, с которыми сталкиваются исследователи и научные библиотеки.Также определены способы, с помощью которых научные библиотеки могут принимать полноправное участие в использовании и развитии альтернативных методов для оценки исследований. Кроме этого, в материале представлены результаты совместного исследования Университета Питтсбурга и Plum Analytics, которое демонстрирует несколькоспособов планирования работы библиотек в этой области.Оригинал публикации: Rodgers, E.P. and S. Barbrow. A look at altmetrics and its growing significance to research libraries. The University of Michigan University Library. 2013. http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/99709Перевод этого доклада распространяется под лицензией СС BY 3.0