Computers in Libraries 2018 Workshop on Scholarly Metrics
Download as PPTX, PDF1 like226 views
The document discusses various metrics tools used to measure scholarly impact, including bibliometrics, altmetrics, and their applications in assessing researcher performance and strategic planning. It outlines the strengths and limitations of different metrics, such as journal impact factors, author citation counts, and alternatives like the Eigenfactor and Altmetric scores. Best practices for utilizing these metrics responsibly and effectively in library contexts are emphasized, along with the importance of providing supportive resources for users.
Computers in Libraries 2018 Workshop on Scholarly Metrics
- 1. METRICS TOOLS: BIBLIOMETRICS & ALTMETRICS AMP RELEVANCE COMPUTERS IN LIBRARIES APRIL 15, 2018 Elaine Lasda elasda@albany.edu Associate Librarian @ElaineLibrarian University at Albany https://www.slideshare.net/librarian68/
- 2. AGENDA Photo credit: Phil Hallenbeck https://www.flickr.com/photos/phrenologist/731269430/
- 6. HOW CAN SCHOLARLY METRICS BE UTILIZED? • Qualitative Yet Objective • Evaluative • Assess Researcher Performance • Grant Evaluation • Strategic Planning • Hot Topics: in/across Fields • Institutional/Aspirational Peers • Allocation Of Resources
- 8. QUESTION, FOR YOU! What are some examples of reputational indicators of quality/impact?
- 9. REPUTATION APPROACH: BRIEFLY • Colleagues – Word Of Mouth • Colleagues – Published Surveys • Professional Associations • Ulrich’s – Database Indexing • Editorial Board Composition
- 10. CAVEATS • Subjective • Overlooks New Journals • Relies Heavily On JIF Metric • Not Always Surveys For Every Discipline • Outdated
- 13. SOME KEY RESOURCES • Web of Science • Scopus • Google Scholar (PoP)
- 14. Journal Level Metrics • Journal Impact Factor • Eigenfactor
- 16. EIGENFACTOR
- 17. QUESTIONS, FOR YOU! • What Are The Strengths Of The Journal Impact Factor? • What Are The Limitations Of Jif? • What Jif Limitations Are Addressed By Eigenfactor? • What Jif Limitations Are Not Addressed By Eigenfactor?
- 18. SIZE MATTERS . Eigenfactor score will always be higher if a journal is larger, i.e., publishes more articles.
- 19. BIGGER CONCERNS WITH JIF http://www.theguardian.com/science/political-science/2013/may/17/science-policy
- 21. IMPACT FACTOR SCAMS http://scholarlyoa.com/2013/08/06/bogus-impact-factor-companies/
- 22. OTHER JOURNAL LEVEL METRICS Source Normalized Impact Per Paper (SNIP) SCImago Journal Ranking (SJR)
- 23. CITESCORE
- 27. COMMON METRICS • Citation Count • Self-citations • H-index • Variations
- 28. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NumberofCitations Article Number H-index Scholar A Scholar B H-INDEX EXAMPLE Scholar A Scholar B 10 27 10 12 9 5 8 4 7 4 6 2 6 2 56 citations 56 citations 6 h-index 4 h-index
- 29. AUTHOR PROFILES • Google Scholar • WoS • Scopus • Altmetric/Author Identifier Sources
- 31. QUESTIONS, FOR YOU! • What is a “good” citation count? • How informative is a citation count? • Does h-index “fix” the limitations of citation count?
- 32. AUTHOR IDENTIFIERS • ORCID • ResearcherID • Disciplinary IDs (PubMed, Arxiv, etc.)
- 34. NAME DISAMBIGUATION • Elaine M. Lasda Bergman • Elaine M. Lasda • Elaine L. Bergman • ORCID ID 0000-0002-9498-7074
- 36. ARTICLE LEVEL METRICS • Citation Metrics http://www.sparc.arl.org/resource/sparc-article-level- metrics-primer
- 37. CAVEATS • Self citations • “Cartels” • Dataset variations • Rigid Disciplinary categories/subject headings
- 38. USAGE METRICS • COUNTER • Publisher Websites • Usage Consolidation Reports (ie, EBSCO)
- 39. CAVEATS • Multi-platform Access Points • Institution Based • Print Usage (?) • Disciplinary Variations • What Is Considered “Usage”?
- 41. ALTMETRIC • Measurement: “Attention Score” • How: Weights different types of “attention” (ie, news, blogs, tweets, citation mangers, etc.). Factors in the attention giver’s posting patterns. Always an integer. • Result: Shows where scholarly output is getting traction
- 44. PLUMX • Measurements: Usage, Captures, Mentions, Social Media, Citations • How: Robust sourcing, Separate interaction type counts • Result: Composite, holistic scoring
- 45. PLUMPRINT
- 47. IMPACTSTORY PROFILES • Measurement: Broad characteristics of scholar’s oeuvre • How: Data from Altmetric, BASE, ORCID, Twitter, CrossRef • Result: “Badging” rewards based on percentile levels amongst ImpactStory Users
- 49. ALTMETRIC CAVEATS • Not standardized • Not always transparent • Where are the scholars in your discipline • Who else is looking? • Proprietary Academic Social Media • Bots
- 50. LIBRARIAN/INFO-PRO ROLES •“Impact Literacy” • Context • Strengths/limitations • Responsible Use
- 52. BEST PRACTICES FOR USING SCHOLARLY METRICS • Use Metrics With Transparent Methodologies • Use Altmetrics as Supplemental to Other Metrics • Reputation Indicators vs. Objective Indicators • Contextualize the Metric
- 54. HOW WILL YOU HELP THIS USER? “I want a list of every single publication that cites me.”
- 55. QUESTION, FOR YOU! What is a METRIC?
- 57. HELPING OUR USERS • Instruction/Consultations • Reports/Dashboards/Analysis/Benchmarking • Peer/Aspirational Peers • ID Decisionmaking/KM Opportunities
- 58. QUICK HITS FOR YOUR USERS! • ORCID/Profiles • Open Access Scholarship • Altmetrics • Bibliometric Freebies
- 59. SCHOLARLY IMPACT COMPETENCIES FOR INFO- PROS/LIBRARIANS • Definitions • Best practices • Publication and Indexing Processes