IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v46y2019i4p479-489..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Making sense of altmetrics: The perceived threats and opportunities for academic identity

Author

Listed:
  • Ã ine Regan
  • Maeve Henchion

Abstract

How research impact is defined and evaluated is much-debated at research policy level. Offering one avenue for capturing societal research impact, altmetrics are proposed as quantitative indicators providing a measure of the reach and attention that a research output, such as a peer-reviewed paper, is receiving online. Eighty publicly-funded food researchers participated in an online mixed-methods engagement study. The analytical framework of sensemaking was used to explore participants’ views of altmetrics as a threat or opportunity for their perceived professional identities. The identities important to our participants included ensuring rigour and quality in knowledge production; communicating and engaging with non-academic audiences; and bringing about tangible and meaningful changes in society. While an appetite for changes to research evaluation was apparent in our study, altmetrics was perceived to introduce a number of different threats as well as opportunities to the academic identity, which will influence its potential uptake and use.

Suggested Citation

  • Ã ine Regan & Maeve Henchion, 2019. "Making sense of altmetrics: The perceived threats and opportunities for academic identity," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 46(4), pages 479-489.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:46:y:2019:i:4:p:479-489.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scz001
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Noam Obermeister, 2020. "Tapping into science advisers’ learning," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 6(1), pages 1-9, December.
    2. Zhihong Huang & Qianjin Zong & Xuerui Ji, 2022. "The associations between scientific collaborations of LIS research and its policy impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(11), pages 6453-6470, November.
    3. Zhang, Xinyuan & Xie, Qing & Song, Min, 2021. "Measuring the impact of novelty, bibliometric, and academic-network factors on citation count using a neural network," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2).
    4. Hashem Atapour & Robabeh Maddahi & Rasoul Zavaraqi, 2024. "Policy citations of scientometric articles: an altmetric study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(7), pages 4423-4436, July.

    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:oup:scippl:v:46:y:2019:i:4:p:479-489.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    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.