IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jinfst/v70y2019i8p872-887.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Investigating familiarity and usage of traditional metrics and altmetrics

Author

Listed:
  • Htet Htet Aung
  • Han Zheng
  • Mojisola Erdt
  • Ashley Sara Aw
  • Sei‐Ching Joanna Sin
  • Yin‐Leng Theng

Abstract

As the online dissemination of scholarly outputs gets faster and easier, altmetrics, social media based indices, have emerged alongside traditional metrics for research evaluation. In a two‐phase survey, we investigate scholars' familiarity and usage of traditional metrics and altmetrics. In this paper, we present the second phase with 448 participants. We found few traditional metrics, like the Journal Impact Factor and number of citations, are familiar to and often used by scholars for research evaluation. Among altmetrics, only views/downloads, readers, and followers are known to more than half the respondents. Unseen benefits and lack of time are hindrances to using metrics for the evaluation of research outputs. Although social media are well‐known, scholars prefer promoting their research by publishing in journals and attending conferences. We found social media usage, perceived ease of use and usefulness of altmetrics affect the usage of altmetrics. Findings suggest altmetrics have attracted attention in academia and could be considered complementary to traditional metrics. We acknowledge that due to the limited sample size, statistics and demographics in this study, findings cannot be said to be representative of the entire academic population worldwide. Future studies are needed that cover a wider range of academic disciplines around the world.

Suggested Citation

  • Htet Htet Aung & Han Zheng & Mojisola Erdt & Ashley Sara Aw & Sei‐Ching Joanna Sin & Yin‐Leng Theng, 2019. "Investigating familiarity and usage of traditional metrics and altmetrics," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 70(8), pages 872-887, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jinfst:v:70:y:2019:i:8:p:872-887
    DOI: 10.1002/asi.24162
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24162
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/asi.24162?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jianhua Hou & Da Ma, 2020. "How the high-impact papers formed? A study using data from social media and citation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2597-2615, December.
    2. Mike Thelwall, 2021. "Measuring Societal Impacts Of Research With Altmetrics? Common Problems And Mistakes," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(5), pages 1302-1314, December.
    3. Liwei Zhang & Liang Ma, 2024. "Different open access routes, varying societal impacts: evidence from the Royal Society biological journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(6), pages 3407-3431, June.
    4. Mike Thelwall & Kayvan Kousha & Mahshid Abdoli & Emma Stuart & Meiko Makita & Paul Wilson & Jonathan Levitt, 2023. "Do altmetric scores reflect article quality? Evidence from the UK Research Excellence Framework 2021," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 74(5), pages 582-593, May.
    5. Dorte Drongstrup & Shafaq Malik & Naif Radi Aljohani & Salem Alelyani & Iqra Safder & Saeed-Ul Hassan, 2020. "Can social media usage of scientific literature predict journal indices of AJG, SNIP and JCR? An altmetric study of economics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(2), pages 1541-1558, November.
    6. Ramón A. Feenstra & Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, 2022. "Philosophers’ appraisals of bibliometric indicators and their use in evaluation: from recognition to knee-jerk rejection," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(4), pages 2085-2103, April.
    7. Steffen Lemke & Athanasios Mazarakis & Isabella Peters, 2021. "Conjoint analysis of researchers' hidden preferences for bibliometrics, altmetrics, and usage metrics," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 72(6), pages 777-792, June.
    8. Nigam, Achint & Dewani, Prem & Behl, Abhishek & Pereira, Vijay, 2022. "Consumer’s response to conditional promotions in retailing: An empirical inquiry," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 751-763.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jinfst:v:70:y:2019:i:8:p:872-887. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.asis.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.