A highlight from UKSG: Altmetrics session with Paul Groth
Writing about web page http://www.slideshare.net/UKSG/2-groth-uksg2013-altmetricsstory
These are my notes from a very well presented session at UKSG. I've linked to the slideshare presentation, too.
You can't rank researchers or research, using altmetrics. (Yet, I'm thinking!)
Presence on social media does seem to correlate with other measures of performance, however: Birkholz et al's research indicates that researchers with a presence on LinkedIn have a higher h-index. (I googled for this. Closest I could find was: http://altmetrics.org/workshop2011/birkholz-v0/)
1 in 40 scholars are active on Twitter. (This comes from an article by Heather Piwowar in Nature: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v493/n7431/full/493159a.html )
Like me, Paul thinks that academics should use all kinds of metrics to tell a good story about their work. He spoke about citations, Mendeley scores, html accesses and F1000 recommendations as an example of what a researcher could include on a CV. The measures that matter most will vary according to discipline.
The challenge seems to be to tie together activity around a published paper, such as the author's blog post announcing it and the pre-print on arxiv, and then to present all the measures surrounding the whole activity for that output of the research.
Media stories often never cite or link to the original research.
The Journal of Ecology apparently now ask for a 140 character, tweetable abstract for each article they publish. (Nice idea!)
In short, there are some really interesting things to keep an eye on, when it comes to altmetrics.