Role of Information Professional for the Growth of Altmetrics in the Digital Era

P. Sankar; E. S. Kavitha

doi:10.51983/ajist-2015.5.2.113

Authors

P. Sankar Research Scholar, Department of Library and Information Science, Periyar University, Salem and Librarian, SNT Global Academy of Management Studies and Technology, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India
E. S. Kavitha Assistant Professor, Department of Library and Information Science, Periyar University, Salem, Tamil Nadu, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51983/ajist-2015.5.2.113

Abstract

Any librarian in this field will need to continue not only filling these roles, but also ensuring that they themselves are part of the conversation as it moves forward and staying up-to-date with developments within this area. The concept of library involvement pertaining to metrics did not originate with altmetrics. Impact Factor was originally created primarily for use by librarians in making collection development and retention decisions. Libraries continue to bear primary responsibility for the acquisition of bibliometrics tools, most notably Web of Science, Journal Citation Reports, and Scopus, as well as the training of people in their use. As a result, librarians are already familiar with providing support for these tools, so it makes sense that librarians have expanded to support the variety of altmetrics sources and tools. Additionally, librarians serve as natural leaders when it comes to altmetrics, not only due to familiarity with resources, but also because of the relationships they maintain with several disparate groups. The article detailed about the various tools, section, evaluation methods in which libraries and librarians are supporting and interacting with altmetrics.

References

Garfield, E. (1999). Journal Impact Factor: A Brief Overview. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 161(8), 979–980.

Haustein, S., Peters, I., Sugimoto, C. R., Thelwall, M., & Larivière, V. (2014). Tweeting biomedicine: An analysis of tweets and citations in the biomedical literature. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(4), 656–669.

Holmberg, K., & Thelwall, M. (2014). Disciplinary differences in Twitter scholarly communication. Scientometrics.

Konkiel, S. (2012). Robust 'altmetrics' as a framework for measuring item usage and researcher impact in institutional repositories. Poster presentation at 2012 LITA National Forum. Columbus, OH, USA. October 5-7, 2012.

Mohammadi, E., & Thelwall, M. (in press). Mendeley readership altmetrics for the social sciences and humanities: Research evaluation and knowledge flows. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology.

Peters, I., Jobmann, A., Eppelin, A., Hoffmann, C. P., Künne, S., & Wollnik-Korn, G. (2014). Altmetrics for large, interdisciplinary research groups: A case study of the Leibniz Association. In Proceedings of Libraries in the Digital Age, Zadar, Croatia. Retrieved from http://ozk.unizd.hr/proceedings/index.php/lida/article/view/162/138

Priem, J., Taraborelli, D., Groth, P., & Neylon, C. (2011). Altmetrics: A manifesto. Version 1.01, September 28, 2011. Retrieved from altmetrics.org/manifesto

Sud, P., & Thelwall, M. (2014). Evaluating altmetrics. Scientometrics, 98(2), 1131-1143.

Thelwall, M. (2009). Introduction to Webometrics: Quantitative Web Research for the Social Sciences. San Rafael, CA: Morgan & Claypool.

Thelwall, M., Haustein, S., Larivière, V., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2013). Do altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other social web services. PloS ONE, 8(5), e64841.

Zahedi, Z., Fenner, M., & Costas, R. (2014). How consistent are altmetrics providers? Study of 1000 PLOS ONE publications using the PLOS ALM, Mendeley and Altmetric.com APIs. In: altmetrics 14. Workshop at the Web Science Conference.