Allegation of scientific misconduct increases Twitter attention

Bornmann, Lutz; Haunschild, Robin

doi:10.1007/s11192-018-2698-6

Cited by 14 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is the intention of the current study to test whether altmetrics can really be used in research evaluation practice. If metrics are not related to scientific quality, there is the risk that bad or fraudulent research is rated high, because it simply received attention in society [ 37 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do altmetrics correlate with the quality of papers? A large-scale empirical study based on F1000Prime data

Bornmann¹,

Haunschild²

2018

PLoS ONE

Self Cite

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, we address the question whether (and to what extent, respectively) altmetrics are related to the scientific quality of papers (as measured by peer assessments). Only a few studies have previously investigated the relationship between altmetrics and assessments by peers. In the first step, we analyse the underlying dimensions of measurement for traditional metrics (citation counts) and altmetrics–by using principal component analysis (PCA) and factor analysis (FA). In the second step, we test the relationship between the dimensions and quality of papers (as measured by the post-publication peer-review system of F1000Prime assessments)–using regression analysis. The results of the PCA and FA show that altmetrics operate along different dimensions, whereas Mendeley counts are related to citation counts, and tweets form a separate dimension. The results of the regression analysis indicate that citation-based metrics and readership counts are significantly more related to quality, than tweets. This result on the one hand questions the use of Twitter counts for research evaluation purposes and on the other hand indicates potential use of Mendeley reader counts.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do altmetrics correlate with the quality of papers? A large-scale empirical study based on F1000Prime data

Bornmann¹,

Haunschild²

2018

PLoS ONE

Self Cite

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As a result, predicting scientific success based on SM activity may not be appropriate (Ruano et al 2018). Simple counting of online mentions without taking into account the content can lead to wrong conclusions, for instance in case of scientific misconduct that might receive a lot of SM attention (Bornmann and Haunschild 2018) or in case of automated software used for SM or single use tweets and duplicate tweets (Robinson-Garcia et al 2017). Moreover, simply posting a title and a link to a publication is probably not as efficient as using the full possibilities of social media, such as hashtags, mentions and discussion threads.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

If I tweet will you cite later? Follow-up on the effect of social media exposure on article downloads and citations

Tonia

Oyen

Berger

et al. 2020

Int J Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives We previously reported that random assignment of scientific articles to a social media exposure intervention did not have an effect on article downloads and citations. In this paper, we investigate whether longer observation time after exposure to a social media intervention has altered the previously reported results. Methods For articles published in the International Journal of Public Health between December 2012 and December 2014, we updated article download and citation data for a minimum of 24-month follow-up. We re-analysed the effect of social media exposure on article downloads and citations. Results There was no difference between intervention and control group in terms of downloads (p = 0.72) and citations (p= 0.30) for all papers and when we stratified by open access status. Conclusions Longer observation time did not increase the relative differences in the numbers of downloads and citations between papers in the social media intervention group and papers in the control group. Traditional impact metrics based on citations, such as impact factor, may not capture the added value of social media for scientific publications.

show abstract

“…Open-access research reports are increasingly discussed on Twitter and other major social media platforms for educational purposes 8586. At the same time, social communication channels enable critical appraisal of published works, requiring corrections or even retractions 8788. Open Access complemented with social networking may speed up the whole process of ‘correcting and cleaning’ the literature.…”

Section: Social Mediamentioning

confidence: 99%

Comprehensive Approach to Open Access Publishing: Platforms and Tools

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Open Access Initiative is gaining momentum due to the worldwide availability of advanced digital tools, online publishing platforms, and systems for tracking academic contributions. Several declarations and initiatives, including Plan S, have already laid a foundation for moving away from subscription to full and immediate open-access publishing. The global initiatives imply targeting journals satisfying the upgraded quality and visibility criteria. To meet these criteria, a comprehensive approach to Open Access is recommended. This article overviews the essential components of the comprehensive approach, increasing transparency, adherence to ethical standards, and diversification of evaluation metrics. With the increasing volume of quality open-access journals, their indexing with free databases and search engines is becoming increasingly important. The Directory of Open Access Journals and PubMed Central currently free searches of open-access sources. These services, however, cannot fully satisfy the increasing demands of the users, and attempts are underway to upgrade the indexing and archiving of open-access sources in China, Japan, Korea, Russia, and elsewhere. The wide use of identifiers is essential for transparency of scholarly communications. Peer reviewers are now offered credits from Publons. These credits are transferrable to their Open Researcher and Contributor iDs. Various social media channels are increasingly used by scholars to comment on articles. All these comments are tracked by related metric systems, such as Altmetrics. Combined with traditional citation evaluations, the alternative metrics can help timely identify and promote publications influencing education, research, and practice.

show abstract

Allegation of scientific misconduct increases Twitter attention

Cited by 14 publications

References 12 publications

Do altmetrics correlate with the quality of papers? A large-scale empirical study based on F1000Prime data

Do altmetrics correlate with the quality of papers? A large-scale empirical study based on F1000Prime data

If I tweet will you cite later? Follow-up on the effect of social media exposure on article downloads and citations

Comprehensive Approach to Open Access Publishing: Platforms and Tools

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About