Scholarly Metrics with a Heart

I attended last week the PLOS workshop on Article Level Metrics (ALM). As a disclaimer, I am part of  the PLOS ALM advisory Technical Working Group (not sure why :). Alternative article level metrics refer to any set of indicators that might be used to judge the value of a scientific work (or researcher or institution, etc). As a simple example, an article that is read more than average might correlate with scientific interest or popularity of the work. There are many interesting questions around ALMs, starting even with simplest - do we need any metrics ? The only clear observation is that more of the scientific process is captured online and measured so we should at least explore the uses of this information.

[more]

Source and Full Text and Links Available At 

[http://pbeltrao.blogspot.com/2012/11/scholarly-metrics-with-heart.html]

Open Post-Publication Peer Review

Synopsis

Beyond open access, which is generally considered desirable, the essential drawbacks of the current system of scientific publishing are all connected to the particular way that peer review is used to evaluate papers. In particular, the current system suffers from a lack of quality and transparency of the peer review process, a lack of availability of evaluative information about papers to the public, and excessive costs incurred by a system, in which private publishers are the administrators of peer review. These problems can all be addressed by open post-publication peer review.


[more]

Source and Links To Full Text and Brief and Full Arguments Available At

[http://futureofscipub.wordpress.com/open-post-publication-peer-review/]

Beyond Open Access: Visions for Open Evaluation of Scientific Papers by Post-Publication Peer Review

[snip]

This Research Topic in Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience collects visions for a future system of open evaluation. Because critical arguments about the current system abound, these papers will focus on constructive ideas and comprehensive designs for open evaluation systems. Design decisions include: Should the reviews and ratings be entirely transparent, or should some aspects be kept secret? Should other information, such as paper downloads be included in the evaluation? How can scientific objectivity be strengthened and political motivations weakened in the future system? Should the system include signed and authenticated reviews and ratings? Should the evaluation be an ongoing process, such that promising papers are more deeply evaluated? How can we bring science and statistics to the evaluation process (e.g. should rating averages come with error bars)? How should the evaluative information about each paper (e.g. peer ratings) be combined to prioritize the literature? Should different individuals and organizations be able to define their own evaluation formulae (e.g. weighting ratings according to different criteria)? How can we efficiently transition toward the future system?

[snip]

Source and Full Text and Articles Links Available At 

[http://www.frontiersin.org/Computational_Neuroscience/researchtopics/Beyond_open_access_visions_for/137]

Comment

[http://www.sciencecodex.com/does_science_need_open_evaluation_in_addition_to_open_access-102138]

The Digital Scholar: How Educators Can Be Part of the Digital Transformation / Martin Weller

Publication Date: 2011 / Pages: 256 /DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5040/9781849666275

While industries such as music, newspapers, film and publishing have seen radical changes in their business models and practices as a direct result of new technologies, higher education has so far resisted the wholesale changes we have seen elsewhere. However, a gradual and fundamental shift in the practice of academics is taking place. Every aspect of scholarly practice is seeing changes effected by the adoption and possibilities of new technologies. This book will explore these changes, their implications for higher education, the possibilities for new forms of scholarly practice and what lessons can be drawn from other sectors.

Table of Contents

• Acknowledgements
• Digital, Networked and Open
• Is the Revolution Justified?
• Lessons from Other Sectors
• The Nature of Scholarship
• Researchers and New Technology
• Interdisciplinarity and Permeable Boundaries
• Public Engagement as Collateral Damage
• A Pedagogy of Abundance
• Openness in Education
• Network Weather
• Reward and Tenure
• Publishing
• The Medals of Our Defeats
• Digital Resilience
• References

Source and Full Text Available At 

[http://www.bloomsburyacademic.com/view/DigitalScholar_9781849666275/book-ba-9781849666275.xml]

Review

[http://onlinelearninginsights.wordpress.com/2012/11/27/the-digital-scholar-how-educators-can-be-part-of-the-digital-transformation/]

Article-level Metrics: Which Service to Choose?

26 Oct, 12 /  Claire Bower, Digital Comms Manager

Article-level metrics (or ALMs) were a hot topic at this week’s HighWire publisher meeting in Washington. (Highwire hosts both the BMJ and its stable of 42 specialist journals). From SAGE to eLife, publishers seem sold on the benefits of displaying additional context to articles, thereby enabling readers to assess their impact. These statistics range from traditional indicators, such as usage statistics and citations, to alternative values (or altmetrics) like mentions on Twitter and in the mainstream media.

So, what services are available to bring this information together in one simple interface? There are quite a few contenders in this area, including Plum Analytics, PLoS Article-Level Metrics application, Science Card, CitedIn and ReaderMeter. One system in particular has received a good deal of attention in the past few weeks; ImpactStory, a relaunched version of total-impact. It’s a free, open-source webapp that’s been built with financial help from the Sloan Foundation (and others) “to help researchers uncover data-driven stories about their broader impacts”.

[more]

Source and Full Text Available At 

[http://blogs.bmj.com/bmj-journals-development-blog/2012/10/26/article-level-metrics-which-service-to-choose/]

Scientists Seek New Credibility Outside of Established Journals

Altmetrics: An App Review > Stacy Konkiel

Keywords: altmetrics; bibliometrics

URI: http://hdl.handle.net/2022/14714

Date: 2012-10-07

Rights: Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 Generic (CC BY-NC 2.0)

Rights URL: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/

Type: Presentation

Abstract:

In a university culture increasingly influenced by metrics, academic libraries can use altmetrics to highlight scholarship’s hidden value. This session will cover the apps and services that can help faculty, administration, and librarians learn the full, true impact of research.

Description:

Presented at OCLC Innovation in Libraries post-conference event, LITA Forum 2012.

Source and Links Available At 

[https://scholarworks.iu.edu/dspace/handle/2022/14714]

YouTube Video 

[http://bit.ly/U8xKEB]

Duration = ~23:30