Posts Tagged ‘altmetrics’

altmetrics library Lily Troia

Taking Altmetrics to the Next Level in Your Library’s Systems and Services

Instructor: Lily Troia, Engagement Manager, Altmetric
October 31, 2017, 1:00 pm – 2:30 pm Central time

Register here, courses are listed by date

This 90 minute webinar will bring participants up to speed on the current state of altmetrics, and focus in on changes across the scholarly ecosystem. Through sharing of use cases, tips, and open discussion, this session will help participants to develop a nuanced, strategic framework for incorporating and promoting wider adoption of altmetrics throughout the research lifecycle at their institution and beyond.


Definition by National Information Standards Organization NISO ( Altmetrics is a broad term that encapsulates the digital collection, creation, and use of multiple forms of assessment that are derived from activity and engagement among diverse stakeholders and scholarly outputs in the research ecosystem.”

Altmetrics are data that help us understand how often and by whom research objects are discussed, shared, and used on the social Web.”

PlumX Metrics – Plum Analytics

Altmetric Explorer

How are researchers & institutions using Altmetric?

  • Research and evaluation services – Identify & track influential research; assess impact & reach
  • Grants and reporting – Target new grants & grantees; demonstrate value to stakeholders
  • Communications and reputation management – Track press/social media; connect to opinion leaders
  • Marketing and promotion – Highlight vital findings; benchmark campaigns and outreach
  • Collaboration and partnerships – Discover disciplinary intersections & collaborative opportunities

DISCOVERY • Find trending research • Unearth conversations among new audiences • Locate collaborators & research opportunities • Identify key opinion leaders • Uncover disciplinary intersection

SHOWCASING • Identifying research to share • Share top mentions • Impact on public policy • Real-time tracking • Identifying key researchers • Recognizing early-career researchers

REPORTING • Grant applications • Funder reporting • Impact requirements • Reputation management • Benchmarking and KPIs (Key performance indicators) • Recruitment & review • Integration into researcher profiles/repositories



more on altmetrics in the library in this IMS blog

student data mining

Beyond the Horizon Webinar on Student Data

March 29, 2017 @ 12-1pm US Central Time

NMC Beyond the Horizon > Integrating Student Data Across Platforms

The growing use of data mining software in online education has great potential to support student success by identifying and reaching out to struggling students and streamlining the path to graduation. This can be a challenge for institutions that are using a variety of technology systems that are not integrated with each other. As institutions implement learning management systems, degree planning technologies, early alert systems, and tutor scheduling that promote increased interactions among various stakeholders, there is a need for centralized aggregation of these data to provide students with holistic support that improves learning outcomes. Join us to hear from an institutional exemplar who is building solutions that integrate student data across platforms. Then work with peers to address challenges and develop solutions of your own.

more on altmetrics in this IMS blog

more on big data in this IMS blog

social media research toolkit

thank you, Greg Jorgensen, an excellent list of tools for analytics + excellent background info (price, social media tools served, output format

Social Media Research Toolkit – Peer Tested & Peer Reviewed

Social Media Research Toolkit

Gephi, Hootsuite, NodeXL, Sysomos, Gnip, Issuecrawler, Brandwatch, Netvizz, Datasift, Crimson Hexagon, tweepy, streamR, Twitoxmy, Digmind, Twitris, yourTwapperKeeper, DiscoverText, Webometric Analyst, python-twitter, twurl, Tweet Archivist, vtracker, Netlytic, twython, OutWit Hub, Mozdeh, Affinio, Rfacebook, Facepager, Flocker, 140dev, Sodato,, Textexture, Hosebird, Websta, followthehashtag, Chorus, VOSON/Uberlink, Info Extractor, twarc, iScience Maps, Social Feed Manager, facebook-sdk, Socioviz, Naoyun, Visibrain Focus, TwitterGoogles, DD-CSS, YouTube Data Tools, SocialMediaMineR, tStreamingArchiver, Twitter Stream Downloader

more on social media analytics in this IMS blog
more on social media management in this blog
more on altmetrics in this blog

social media and altmetrics

Sugimoto, C. R., Work, S., Larivière, V., & Haustein, S. (2016). Scholarly use of social media and altmetrics: a review of the literature. Retrieved from
One of the central issues associated with altmetrics (short for alternative metrics) is the identification of communities engaging with scholarly content on social media (Haustein, Bowman, & Costas, 2015; Neylon, 2014; Tsou, Bowman, Ghazinejad, & Sugimoto, 2015) . It is thus of central importance to understand the uses and users of social media in the context of scholarly communication.
most identify the following major categori es: social networking, social bookmarking, blogging, microblogging, wikis , and media and data sharing (Gu & Widén -Wulff, 2011; Rowlands, Nicholas, Russell, Canty, & Watkinson, 2011; Tenopir et al., 2013) . Some also conside r conferencing, collaborative authoring, scheduling and meeting tools (Rowlands et al., 2011) or RSS and online documents (Gu & Widén -Wulff, 2011; Tenopir et al., 2013) as social media. The landscape of social media, as well as that of altmetrics, is constantly changing and boundaries with othe r online platforms and traditional metrics are fuzzy. Many online platforms cannot be easily classified and more traditional metrics , such as downloads and mentions in policy documents , have been referred to as altmetrics due to data pr ovider policies.
the Use of social media platforms for by researchers is high — ranging from 75 to 80% in large -scale surveys (Rowlands et al., 2011; Tenopir et al., 2013; Van Eperen & Marincola, 2011) .
less than 10% of scholars reported using Twitter (Rowlands et al., 2011) , while 46% used ResearchGate (Van Noorden, 2014) , and more than 55% use d YouTube (Tenopir et al., 2013) —it is necessary to discuss the use of various types of social media separately . Furthermore, there i s a distinction among types of us e, with studies showing higher uses of social media for dissemination, consumption, communication , and promotion (e.g., Arcila -Calderón, Piñuel -Raigada, & Calderín -Cruz, 2013; Van Noorden, 2014) , and fewer instances of use for creation (i.e., using social media to construct scholarship) (British Library et al., 2012; Carpenter, Wetheridge, Tanner, & Smith, 2012; Procter et al., 2010b; Tenopir et al., 2013) .
Frequently mentioned social platforms in scholarly communication research include research -specific tools such as Mendeley, Zotero, CiteULike, BibSonomy, and Connotea (now defunct) as well as general tools such as Delicious and Digg (Hammond, Hannay, Lund, & Scott, 2005; Hull, Pettifer, & Kell, 2008; Priem & Hemminger, 2010; Reher & Haustein, 2010) .
Social data sharing platforms provide an infrastructure to share various types of scholarly objects —including datasets, software code, figures, presentation slides and videos —and for users to interact with these objects (e.g., comment on, favorite, like , and reuse ). Platforms such as Figshare and SlideShare disseminate scholars’ various types of research outputs such as datasets, figures, infographics, documents, videos, posters , or presentation slides (Enis, 2013) and displays views, likes, and shares by other users (Mas -Bleda et al., 2014) . GitHub provides for uploading and stor ing of software code, which allows users to modify and expand existing code (Dabbish, Stuart, Tsay, & Herbsleb, 2012) , which has been shown to lead to enhanced collaboratio n among developers (Thung, Bissyande, Lo, & Jiang, 2013) . As w ith other social data sharing platforms, usage statistics on the number of view and contributions to a project are provided (Kubilius, 2014) . The registry of research data repositories,, ha s indexed more than 1,200 as of May 2015 2 . However, only a few of these repositories (i.e. , Figshare, SlideShare and Github) include social functionalities and have reached a certain level of participation from scholars (e.g., Begel, Bosch, & Storey, 2013; Kubilius, 2014) .
Video provide s yet another genre for social interaction and scholarly communication (Kousha, Thelwall, & Abdoli, 2012; Sugimoto & Thelwall, 2013) . Of the various video sharing platforms, YouTube, launched in 2005, is by far the most popular
A study of UK scholars reports that the majority o f respondents engaged with video for scholarly communication purposes (Tenopir et al., 2013) , yet only 20% have ever created in that genre. Among British PhD students, 17% had used videos and podcasts passively for research, while 8% had actively contributed (British Library et al., 2012) .
Blogs began in the mid -1990s and were considered ubiquitous by the mid- 200 0s (Gillmor, 2006; Hank, 2011; Lenhart & Fox, 2006; Rainie, 2005) . Scholarly blogs emerged during this time with their own neologisms (e.g., blogademia , blawgosphere , bloggership) and body of research (Hank, 2011) and were considered to change the exclusive structure of scholarly communication
Technorati, considered t o be on e of the largest ind ex of blogs, deleted their entire blog directory in 2014 3 . Individual blogs are also subject to abrupt cancellations and deletions, making questionable the degree to which blogging meets the permanence criteria of scholarly commu nication (Hank, 2011) . (RB) — “an aggregator of blog posts referencing peer -reviewed research in a structured manner” (Shema, Bar -Ilan, & Thelwall, 2015, p. 3) — was launched in 2007 and has been a fairly stable structure in the scholarly blogging environment. RB both aggregates and —through the use of the RB icon — credentials scholarly blogs (Shema et al., 2015) . The informality of the genre (Mewburn & Thomson, 2013) and the ability to circumve nt traditional publishing barr iers has led advocates to claim that blogging can invert traditional academic power hierarchies (Walker, 2006) , allow ing people to construct scholarly identities outside of formal institutionalization (Ewins, 2005; Luzón, 2011; Potter, 2012) and democratize the scientific system (Gijón, 2013) . Another positive characteristic of blogs is their “inherently social” nature (Walker, 2006, p. 132) (see also Kjellberg, 2010; Luzón, 2011 ). Scholars have noted the potential for “communal scholarship” (Hendrick, 2012) made by linking and commenting, calling the platform “a new ‘third place’ for academic discourse” (Halavais, 2006, p. 117) . Commenting functionalities were seen as making possible the “shift from public understanding to public engagement with science” (Kouper, 2010, p. 1) .
Studies have also provided evidence of high rate s of blogging among certain subpopulations: for example, approximately one -third of German university staff (Pscheida et al., 2013) and one fifth of UK doctoral students use blogs (Carpenter et al., 2012) .
Academics are not only producers, but also consumers of blogs: a 2007 survey of medical bloggers foundthat the large majority (86%) read blogs to find medical news (Kovic et al., 2008)

Mahrt and Puschmann (2014) , who defined science blogging as “the use of blogs for science communication” (p. 1). It has been similarly likened to a sp ace for public intellectualism (Kirkup, 2010; Walker, 2006) and as a form of activism to combat perceived biased or pseudoscience (Riesch & Mendel, 2014. Yet, there remains a tension between science bloggers and science journalists, with many science journals dismissing the value of science blogs (Colson, 2011)

while there has been anecdotal evidence of the use of blogs in promotion and tenure (e.g., (Podgor, 2006) the consensus seem s to suggest that most institutions do not value blogging as highly as publishing in traditional outlets, or consider blogging as a measure of service rather than research activity (Hendricks, 2010, para. 30) .
Microblogging developed out of a particular blogging practice, wherein bloggers would post small messages or single files on a blog post. Blogs that focused on such “microposts” were then termed “tumblelogs” and were described as “a quick and dirty stream of consciousness” kind of blogging (Kottke, 2005, para. 2)
most popular microblogs are Twitter (launched in 2006), tumblr (launched in 2007), FriendFeed (launched in 2007 and available in several languages), Plurk (launched in 2008 and popular in Taiwan), and Sina Weibo (launched in 2009 and popular in China).
users to follow other users, search tweets by keywords or hashtags, and link to other media or other tweets

Conference chatter (backchanneling) is another widely studied area in the realm of scholarly microblogging. Twitter use at conferences is generally carried out by a minority of participants

Wikis are collaborative content management platforms enabled by web browsers and embedded markup languages.
Wikipedia has been advocated as a replacement for traditional publishing and peer review models (Xia o & Askin, 2012) and pleas have been made to encourage experts to contribute (Rush & Tracy, 2010) . Despite this, contribution rates remain low — likely hindered by the lack of explicit authorship in Wikipedia, a cornerstone of the traditional academic reward system (Black, 2008; Butler, 2008; Callaway, 2010; Whitworth & Friedman, 2009) . Citations to scholarly documents —another critical component in the reward system —are increasingly being found i n Wikiped ia entries (Bould et al., 2014; Park, 2011; Rousidis et al., 2013) , but are no t yet seen as valid impact indicators (Haustein, Peters, Bar -Ilan, et al., 2014) .
The altmetrics manifesto (Priem et al., 2010, para. 1) , altmetrics can serve as filters , which “reflect the broad, rapid impact of scholarship in this burgeoning ecosystem”.
There are also a host of platforms which are being used informally to discuss and rate scholarly material. Reddit, for example, is a general topic platform where users can submit, discuss and rate online content. Historically, mentions of scientific journals on Reddit have been rare (Thelwall, Haustein, et al., 2013) . However, several new subreddits —e.g., science subreddit 4 , Ask Me Anything sessions 5 –have recently been launched, focusing on the discussion of scientific information. Sites like Amazon (Kousha & Thelwall, 2015) and Goodreads (Zuccala, Verleysen, Cornacchia, & Engels, 2015) , which allow users to comment on and rate books, has also been mined as potential source for the compilation of impact indicators
libraries provide services to support researchers’ use of social media tools and metrics (Lapinski, Piwowar, & Priem, 2013; Rodgers & Barbrow, 2013; Roemer & Borchardt, 2013). One example is Mendeley Institutional Edition,, which mines Mendeley documents, annotations, and behavior and provides these data to libraries (Galligan & Dyas -Correia, 2013) . Libraries can use them for collection management, in a manner similar to other usage data, such as COUNTER statistics (Galligan & Dyas -Correia, 2013) .
Factors affecting social media use; age, academic rank and status, gender, discipline, country and language,


more on altmetrics in this IMS blog:

digital literacy for SOE students

Digital literacy for SOE students

Class ED 610 Introduction to Curriculum and Instruction Summer 2018

Instructor:     Hsuehi(Martin) Lo

short link to this session:

for online participation, please use the following Zoom or Adobe Connect session (your instructor will direct you which one:

  1. For Zoom, please use the following URL to login:

My name is Plamen Miltenoff and I will be leading your digital literacy instruction today: Here is more about me: and more about the issues we will be discussing today:
As well as my email address for further contacts:

Here is a preliminary plan. We will not follow it strictly; it is just an idea about the topics we would like to cover. Shall there be points of interest, please feel free to contribute prior and during the session.

Keeping in mind the ED 610 Learning Goals and Objectives, namely:

  1. Understand and demonstrate how to write literature review in the field of the C&I research
  2. Understand the related research methods in both quantitative and qualitative perspectives from the explored research articles
  3. Understand how to use searching engine to find meaningful articles
  4. Interpret and do critical thinking in C&I research articles

lets review our search and research skills:

  1. How do we search?
    1. Google and Google Scholar (more focused, peer reviewed, academic content)
    2. Digg, Reddit , Quora
    3. SCSU Library search, Google, Professional organization, (NASSP), Stacks of magazines, csu library info, but need to know what all of the options mean on that page
  2. Custom Search Engine:
  3. Basic electronic (library) search information and strategies. Library research services

PICO framework to structure a question:
Population, Patient, Problem

prepare systematic review

  1. Subject Guides
    Please locate theEducation (Elementary)
    Education (Secondary)
    Educational Administration and Leadership (Doctoral)
    Educational Administration and Leadership (Masters)
    at the LRS web page:
    library research guide
    Look for “Research Assistance” and scroll to
    Educational Administration and Leadership or any of the four links related to education
  2. Electronic Journals & the DOI System

    What is a DOI? A Digital Object Identifier (DOI) is assigned to electronic journal articles (and selected other online content) to specifically and permanently identify and access that article. Most of the standard academic citation formats now require the inclusion of DOIs within a citation when available.

    How to find a DOI:   Most current academic journal articles include a DOI (usually listed on the first page of the article).  Most library databases list a DOI with the record for recent academic journal articles.  Most non-academic articles (including magazine and newspaper articles) as well as many older academic journal articles do not have a DOI. provides a DOI Lookup service that will search for a DOI based on citation information (author’s last name, journal name, article title, etc.).

    How to access an article via a DOI: Use the CSU Stanislaus Library DOI Look-up for options provided by the library, including access to the full-text via the publisher’s site or a library database service when available. Other, general DOI look-up systems (CrossRef & usually link to the article’s “homepage” on the publisher’s site (which usually include a free abstract but full-text access is restricted to subscribers).

shall more info be needed and or “proper” session with a reference librarian be requested.

-Strategies for conducting advanced searches (setting up filters and search criteria)
















Search criteria







  1. Books and Video
  2. Articles and databases
  3. Journal Title and Citation Finder
  4. Reference and Facts
  5. Institutional Repository
SCSU library web page snapshot with link to repository

SCSU library web page snapshot with link to repository

  1. Simple versus Advanced Search
  2. Interlibrary Loan ILL
  3. Ways to find research specific to doctoral student needs (ie: Ways to find dissertations, peer reviewed research sources, research-related information, etc.)
  4. Understand the responsibilities of authorship including copyright, intellectual property, and discipline-based expectations
  5. Basic Research Resources-Jan 2015 version edit pmConcept mapping:
  6. Explore and select citation management software to organize bibliographic information
  7. Refworks:
  8. Alternatives to Refworks (currently retired):
    1. Zotero, Mendeley, Endnote
    2. Fast and easy bibliographic tools:
  1. -Setting up social networking to gather articles and other research information
    slide 9 of the PPT Basic Research Resources

Social media and its importance for the topic research and the dissertation research:

Small business owners use social media primarily as a marketing and search engine optimization tool. However, more and more small businesses are using social media to get answers for business related questions. Specific industry related articles, and statistics are found useful for small business owners in 80% of the cases.


  1. Collaborative Tools
  2. Apps Anywhere (need installation of Citrix Receiver):


  1. File/Web space:
  2. Dropbox:
  3. Web 2.0 tools: e.g.;
  4. Facebook, Twitter

Other sources for information: and ResearchGate

  1. -Saving articles, saving quotes and other article information

Blogs – use tags

hands-on exercise:

learn how to use Zotero and/or Refworks in Microsoft Word

dissertation zotero
Refworks and/or Mendeley in Google Docs RefWorks ProQuest



Google Doc ProQuest RefWorks


Login into ProQuest Refworks AddOn for Google Doc:

login refworks google doc-y80ulf

Zotero, Mendeley, Refworks
Evernote, Diigo

If Twitter, Facebook or LinkedIn, use hashtags

  1. Share any other research-related resources available through the library or other sources

Plamen Miltenoff, Ph.D., MLIS
pedagogues under a minute: