This page provides a starting point for anyone wanting to familiarise themselves with bibliometrics, from what bibiometrics are and where they came from to how bibliometrics are being used in practice and the library and information science roles and competencies evolving as a consequence.
Statements of responsible metrics
- University of Bath
- Imperial College London
- Indiana University
- Loughborough University
- University of Waterloo
Cronin, B. & Sugimoto, C. (Eds). (2014) Beyond Bibliometrics : Harnessing Multidimensional Indicators of Scholarly Impact. Massaschussets, MIT Press.
- This book describes recent theoretical and practical advances in metrics-based research, examining a variety of alternative metrics—or “altmetrics”—while also considering the ethical and cultural consequences of relying on metrics to assess the quality of scholarship.
Ochsner, M., Hug, S. E., & Daniel, H. D. (2016). Research assessment in the humanities: towards criteria and procedures. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/book/10.1007%2F978-3-319-29016-4.
- Open access book which analyses and discusses the recent developments for assessing research quality in the humanities and related fields in the social sciences.
Tattersall, A. (2016). Altmetrics: a practical guide for librarians, researchers and academics. London: Facet Publishing.
- «An overview of altmetrics, its tools and how to implement them successfully to boost and measure research outputs.»
Metadata and Semantics Research Conference. Retrieved from http://www.mtsr-conf.org/
- An annual conference series bringing together scholars and practitioners with common interest in the interdisciplinary fields of metadata, data and semantics.
- firstname.lastname@example.org. Retrieved from https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=LIS-BIBLIOMETRICS. Set up with a particular focus on supporting library and information science workers charged with providing bibliometric services within their organisation, this discussion list now also encompasses, amongst others, staff from research and planning offices.
ARMA Metrics Special Interest Group
- email@example.com – only accessible to members of the Association of Research Managers and Administrators. Restrieved from https://www.arma.ac.uk/membership/sigs-networking. The Metrics Special Interest Group (SIG) is for all those interested in how we can meaningfully measure research activities and outcomes. That might include how we monitor compliance with the open access and research data requirements of funders, how we measure research income and PGR student activity, how we provide evidence of ‘impact’, and how we can sensibly analyse publication and citation data.
Costas, R., Zahedi, Z. & Wouters, P., 2013. Do altmetrics correlate with citations? Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology , 2014, pp.1–30.
Erikson, M.G. & Erlandson, P., 2014. A taxonomy of motives to cite. Social Studies of Science, 44, pp.625–637. Available at: http://sss.sagepub.com/cgi/doi/10.1177/0306312714522871.
Gunashekar, S. et al., 2004. Bilbliometric analysis of highly cited publications of biomedical and health research in England, 2004-2013.
Hill, S., 2015. Dimensions of quality research. Available at: http://blog.hefce.ac.uk/2015/07/27/dimensions-of-quality-research/.
Jump, P., 2015. The weight of numbers. Times HIgher Education, 9 July.
Kulkarni, A. V., Busse, J.W. & Shams, I., 2007. Characteristics associated with citation rate of the medical literature. PLoS ONE, 2(5), pp.1–5.
Long, J.S., 1992. Measures of sex differences in scientific productivity. Social Forces, 71(1), pp.159–178.
Ovseiko, P. V. et al., 2016. A global call for action to include gender in research impact assessment. Health Research Policy and Systems 2016 14:1, 14(1), pp.156–65. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-016-0126-z.
Priem, J., Piwowar, H. a & Hemminger, B.M., 2012. Altmetrics in the wild: Using social media to explore scholarly impact. arXiv12034745v1 csDL 20 Mar 2012, 1203.4745, pp.1–23. Available at: http://arxiv.org/abs/1203.4745\nhttp://arxiv.org/abs/1203.4745v1..
Smart, J.C. & Bayer, a. E., 1986. Author collaboration and impact: A note on citation rates of single and multiple authored articles. Scientometrics, 10(5-6), pp.297–305.
Symonds, M.R.E. et al., 2006. Gender differences in publication output: Towards an unbiased metric of research performance. PLoS ONE, 1(1), pp.1–5.
Thelwall, M. et al., 2013. Do Altmetrics Work? Twitter and Ten Other Social Web Services. PLoS ONE, 8(5), pp.1–7.
Petersohn, S. (2016). Professional competencies and jurisdictional claims in evaluative bibliometrics: the educational mandate of academic librarians, Education for Information, 32, 165-193
Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE). (2015). The Metric Tide: Report of the Independent Review of the Role of Metrics in Research Assessment and Management. Retrieved from http://www.hefce.ac.uk/media/HEFCE,2014/Content/Pubs/Independentresearch/2015/The,Metric,Tide/2015_metric_tide.pdf
- Published in July 2015, The Metric Tide is the seminal report which has informed much of the knowledge, understanding and subsequent development of bibliometrics and alt-metrics.
- The Supplementary Report to the Metric Tide http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/rereports/Year/2015/metrictide/
- Provides a detailed analysis of the correlation between Research Excellence Framework (REF) results and metrics.
Primary Research Group. (2016). International Benchmarks for Academic Library Use of Bibliometrics and Altmetrics, 2016-17.
- Provides detailed information on staffing, budgets, marketing, sources of demand and technology in bibliometric and altmetric service development including data on tools such as Google Scholar, Web of Science, Scimago and Plum Analytics.
Cox, A., & Petersohn, S. (2016). Development of a set of bibliometric competencies. University of Sheffield & Leibniz-Institut für Sozialwissenschaften: Elsevier Research Intelligence Division. Retrieved from https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/is/research/projects/bibliometrics
- Sponsored by a small research grant from Elsevier Research Intelligence Division, this project aims to develop a set of the competency statements to ensure that bibliometric practitioners are equipped to do their work responsibly and well. The project is due to report in early 2017.
- Delasalle, J. (2016). Librarian quick reference cards for research impact metrics. Retrieved from https://libraryconnect.elsevier.com/metrics.
- A poster and set of cards presenting definitions of a range of metric.
- Green, E. (2016). What are the most-cited publications in the social sciences (according to Google Scholar)? Retrieved from http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2016/05/12/what-are-the-most-cited-publications-in-the-social-sciences-according-to-google-scholar/.
- An example of bibliometrics in action, presenting the top 25 most cited books and top ten journal articles in social sciences.
- Latham, M., & Bentley, S. (2016). Bibliometrics: an overview.
- Provides an overview of the University of Hull’s Research Services team created to meet the needs of the research community and contribute to a key strategic aim of increasing the quantity and quality of research outputs.
- Rapple, C. (2016). Hootsuite for academia? How to increase the visibility, downloads and impact of pulbications using Kudos. Retrieved from http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2016/06/24/hootsuite-for-academia-how-to-increase-the-visibility-downloads-and-impact-of-publications-using-kudos/
- Presents the background of Kudos, a service providing researchers, publishers and institutions with insight into how to optimise their communications activity.
Disclaimer: This web page was originally kindly developed by Maria J Grant, Centre for Applied Research in Health, Welfare and Policy, University of Salford. http://www.seek.salford.ac.uk/profiles/MGRANT.jsp
Please feel free to suggest other items for this resource list via firstname.lastname@example.org