Digging for data: opportunities and challenges in an open research landscape_McLeish

Editor's Notes

• #2: Welcome Attendees. We’ll be taking a look at how Altmetric can help researchers, departments and institutions evaluate their research impact in a timely and comprehensive manner. Running time of 30 mins, plus questions at the end. Use the raise the hand feature for asking questions. Please feel free to ask questions via the Q&A feature. Please also use this for any audio issues you may have. Lets get started
• #4: What are “altmetrics”? “alternative metrics” new ways of measuring different, non-traditional forms of impact. “alternative to only using citations”, not “alternative to citations”. complementary to traditional citation-based analysis. Article-level metrics have come to refer to any metrics (e.g., including altmetrics) that surround a scholarly article.
• #5: Altmetric is data science company
• #7: We curate an extensive list of sources, making sure each source is relevant and valuable for judging scholarly impact across emerging media. We monitor more than 1300 news sites, and employ text mining and link tracking to pick up mentions of scholarly articles discussed in the press. List is global - Multilingual sources. - Add to them all the time. Read and comment on the rest of them – on Mendeley – mention latest addition of demographics.
• #8: The most recent addition to our list of sources is tracking policy docs. This way, the impact of research on public policy can be measured easily and clearly at an article level, department level or an institutional level overall. Some policy sources include: WHO – The IMF – GOV.uk, the Food and Agricultural Organisation, the UK’s Mental Health Association, the IPCC and many more. We add to this list on a continual basis. Aiming to track over 40 policy sites by end of the year.
• #14: In the era of print journals, citation counts and impact factors were developed as the main source of bibilometric data. They were never useful for applied research, aimed at practitioners and policymakers or non-traditional research outputs that don’t get published in journals. Interest in academic outputs can be now be expressed through online news sources, blog posts, Twitter and Facebook shares, bookmarking or reading in tools like Mendeley, and critiques on online peer review and recommendation sites. These alternative, article-level metrics metrics: complement traditional citation-based metrics give early intelligence about the level of interest in a research output find engagement beyond academia apply to all subject disciplines
• #15: In the era of print journals, citation counts and impact factors were developed as the main source of bibilometric data. They were never useful for applied research, aimed at practitioners and policymakers or non-traditional research outputs that don’t get published in journals. Interest in academic outputs can be now be expressed through online news sources, blog posts, Twitter and Facebook shares, bookmarking or reading in tools like Mendeley, and critiques on online peer review and recommendation sites. These alternative, article-level metrics metrics: complement traditional citation-based metrics give early intelligence about the level of interest in a research output find engagement beyond academia apply to all subject disciplines
• #16: In the era of print journals, citation counts and impact factors were developed as the main source of bibilometric data. They were never useful for applied research, aimed at practitioners and policymakers or non-traditional research outputs that don’t get published in journals. Interest in academic outputs can be now be expressed through online news sources, blog posts, Twitter and Facebook shares, bookmarking or reading in tools like Mendeley, and critiques on online peer review and recommendation sites. These alternative, article-level metrics metrics: complement traditional citation-based metrics give early intelligence about the level of interest in a research output find engagement beyond academia apply to all subject disciplines
• #17: In the era of print journals, citation counts and impact factors were developed as the main source of bibilometric data. They were never useful for applied research, aimed at practitioners and policymakers or non-traditional research outputs that don’t get published in journals. Interest in academic outputs can be now be expressed through online news sources, blog posts, Twitter and Facebook shares, bookmarking or reading in tools like Mendeley, and critiques on online peer review and recommendation sites. These alternative, article-level metrics metrics: complement traditional citation-based metrics give early intelligence about the level of interest in a research output find engagement beyond academia apply to all subject disciplines
• #22: In the era of print journals, citation counts and impact factors were developed as the main source of bibilometric data. They were never useful for applied research, aimed at practitioners and policymakers or non-traditional research outputs that don’t get published in journals. Interest in academic outputs can be now be expressed through online news sources, blog posts, Twitter and Facebook shares, bookmarking or reading in tools like Mendeley, and critiques on online peer review and recommendation sites. These alternative, article-level metrics metrics: complement traditional citation-based metrics give early intelligence about the level of interest in a research output find engagement beyond academia apply to all subject disciplines
• #23: In the era of print journals, citation counts and impact factors were developed as the main source of bibilometric data. They were never useful for applied research, aimed at practitioners and policymakers or non-traditional research outputs that don’t get published in journals. Interest in academic outputs can be now be expressed through online news sources, blog posts, Twitter and Facebook shares, bookmarking or reading in tools like Mendeley, and critiques on online peer review and recommendation sites. These alternative, article-level metrics metrics: complement traditional citation-based metrics give early intelligence about the level of interest in a research output find engagement beyond academia apply to all subject disciplines
• #24: In the era of print journals, citation counts and impact factors were developed as the main source of bibilometric data. They were never useful for applied research, aimed at practitioners and policymakers or non-traditional research outputs that don’t get published in journals. Interest in academic outputs can be now be expressed through online news sources, blog posts, Twitter and Facebook shares, bookmarking or reading in tools like Mendeley, and critiques on online peer review and recommendation sites. These alternative, article-level metrics metrics: complement traditional citation-based metrics give early intelligence about the level of interest in a research output find engagement beyond academia apply to all subject disciplines
• #25: In the era of print journals, citation counts and impact factors were developed as the main source of bibilometric data. They were never useful for applied research, aimed at practitioners and policymakers or non-traditional research outputs that don’t get published in journals. Interest in academic outputs can be now be expressed through online news sources, blog posts, Twitter and Facebook shares, bookmarking or reading in tools like Mendeley, and critiques on online peer review and recommendation sites. These alternative, article-level metrics metrics: complement traditional citation-based metrics give early intelligence about the level of interest in a research output find engagement beyond academia apply to all subject disciplines
• #26: In the era of print journals, citation counts and impact factors were developed as the main source of bibilometric data. They were never useful for applied research, aimed at practitioners and policymakers or non-traditional research outputs that don’t get published in journals. Interest in academic outputs can be now be expressed through online news sources, blog posts, Twitter and Facebook shares, bookmarking or reading in tools like Mendeley, and critiques on online peer review and recommendation sites. These alternative, article-level metrics metrics: complement traditional citation-based metrics give early intelligence about the level of interest in a research output find engagement beyond academia apply to all subject disciplines
• #29: As this gap has become wider, funders are now noticing that judging impact of research funded by them requires new tools, and the monitoring of new platforms. Need more evidence about attention their work is receiving Is funding going towards engaging work? What other areas are getting traction within alternative metrics? What are particular other funders getting traction with? Can new avenues for funding be approached, or engaged with?