USE OF ALTMETRICS IN BIBLIOGRAPHIC SERVICES
https://doi.org/10.20913/2618-7515-2020-1-79-85
Abstract
Potentiality of using altmetrics in the academic library bibliographic services is examined. Free altmetric services such as Altmetric bookmar klet and tracking online-news about scientific articles (Paperbuzz, PLOS Article Level Metrics) and others are reviewed.
90 foreign and 30 Russian publications for the period of 2012 – 2019, which are dedicated to altmetric researches of works in library science or using altmetric tools in library activities, have been submitted to content analyses. Information and analytical systems such as Scopus, Web of Science and Russian Index of Scientific Citing (RISC) are its sources.
The main directions elicited in foreign publica tions are as follows: altmetric analysis of publications, comparison of altmetric indica tors with traditional ones, investigation of cases concerning provision of scientific activi ties with ailtmetric data, altmetrical analysis of online libraries and repositories, use of altmet ric facts for acquisition needs. The main directions elicited in Russian publications are as follows: altmetrics as an indicator of scientific influence, provision of librarians and researchers with information about altmetric opportunities, provision with altmetric infor mation from licensed databases. Libraries have an opportunity to generate altmetric informa tion, possibility of generating altmetric infor mation by libraries. The language barrier, paucity evidence about Russian publications, provoke doubts about favors of using altmetric information reduce Russian users’ interest to alternative metrics.
The described possible scripts of Russian scientific libraries`work with altmetrics are as follows: provision of users with specialized altmetric services by analogy with services on defining traditional indicators of publication activities, generation of own altmetric informa tion. Informing about possibility of using altmetrics is important for referencebibliographic servicing practice. For lack of direct inquiries for alternative metrics, they could be one of information criteria for thematic search or preparation of reviews.
About the Author
P. A. Chesnyalis
State Public Scientific Technological Library of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences (SPSTL SB RAS)
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Chesnyalis Polina Anatolyevna – Candidate of Philological Sciences, Researcher of the Laboratory of Information-Systematic Analysis
Novosibirsk
References
1. Priem J., Taraborelli D., Groth P., Neylon C. Altmetrics: a manifesto. Altmetrics. 2010. URL: http://altmetrics.org/manifesto/ (accessed 09.09.2019).
2. González-Valiente C. L., Pacheco-Mendoza J., ArencibiaJorge R. A review of altmetrics as an emerging discipline for research evaluation // Learned Publishing, 2016. Vol 29, N4. P. 229–238. DOI: 10.1002/leap.1043.
3. Altmetric. URL: https://www.altmetric.com/ (accessed 20.02.2019).
4. Plum Analytics. URL: https://plumanalytics.com/ (accessed 20.02.2019).
5. Our Research. URL: https://our-research.org/ (accessed 01.10.2019).
6. PLOS. URL: https://www.plos.org/ (accessed 01.10.2019).
7. Galyavieva M. S. Bibliometrics in library in estimations of librarians (on materials of foreign researches). Vestnik Kazanskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta kul’tury i isskustv, 2015, 1: 97–102. (In Russ.).
8. Sviryukova V. G., Remizova T. V. Information support of bibliometric studies in the region: the role of the reference and bibliographic department of SPSTL SB RAS. Bibliosfera, 2009, 4: 76–77. (In Russ.).
9. Jan R., Zainab T. The impact story of retracted articles: altmetric it! 5th International symposium on emerging trends and technologies in libraries and information services. Noida, 2018: 402–406. DOI: 10.1109/ETTLIS.2018.8485245.
10. Ezema I. J., Ugwu C. I. Correlating research impact of library and information science journals using citation counts and altmetrics attention. Information Discovery and Delivery, 2019, 47(3): 143–153. DOI: 10.1108/IDD-08-2018-0029.
11. John K. Journals on information literacy: citation analysis and social impact metrics. Serials Librarian, 2019. 77(1/2): 23–37. DOI: 10.1080/0361526X.2019.1641457.
12. Vinyard M., Colvin J. B. How research becomes impact: librarians helping faculty use scholarly metrics to select journals. College and Undergraduate Libraries, 2018, 25(2): 187–204. DOI: 10.1080/10691316.2018.1464995.
13. Haddow G., Mamtora J. Research support in Australian academic libraries: services, resources, and relationships. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 2017, 23(2/3): 89–109. DOI: 10.1080/13614533.2017.1318765.
14. Serrano-Vicente R., Melero R., Abadal E. Evaluation of Spanish institutional repositories based on criteria related to technology, procedures, content, marketing and personnel. Data Technologies and Applications, 2018, 52(3): 384–404. DOI: 10.1108/DTA-10-2017-0074.
15. Yang S. Q., Dawson P. H. Altmetrics and their potential as an assessment tool for digital libraries. 5th International symposium on emerging trends and technologies in libraries and information services. Noida, 2018: 351–354. DOI: 10.1109/ETTLIS.2018.8485273.
16. Sutton S. W., Miles R., Konkiel S. Is what’s “Trending” what’s worth purchasing? Insights from a national study of collection development librarians. Serials Librarian, 2017, 72(1/4): 134–143. DOI: 10.1080/0361526X.2017.1297593.
17. Busygina T. V. Altmetrics as a complex of new tools for the scientific activity products evaluation. Idei i idealy, 2016, 2(2): 79–87. DOI: 10.17212/2075-0862-2016-2.2-79-87. (In Russ.)
18. Gureyev V. N., Mazov N. A. Altmetrics’ rank among quantitative methods of evaluation of scientific work. Informatsiya and innovatsii, 2018, 1: P. 18–21. DOI: 10.31432/1994-2443-2018-13-1-8-21. (In Russ.)
19. Markusova V. A., Libkind A. N., Bogorov V. G., Mindeli L. E. The rate of altmetric as one of the indicators of publications scientific impact. Vestnik Rossiiskoi akademii nauk, 2018, 88(9): 811–818. DOI: 10.31857/S086958730001694-1. (In Russ.)
20. Galyavieva M. S. Scientific libraries in information support of scientific research: main trends. Trudy GPNTB SO RAN, 2017, 12(1): 221–227. (In Russ.)
21. Zemskov A. I. Main tasks for libraries in bibliometry. Informatsiya and innovatsii, 2017, sp. iss.: 79–83. (In Russ.)
22. Kupriyanov V. A., Shipovalova L. V. The crisis of representations. How is a successful outcome possible? The case of scientometrics. Epistemiologiya i filosofiya nauki, 2017, 51(1): 171–187. DOI: 10.5840/eps201751117. (In Russ.)
23. Mazov N. A., Gureyev V. N. Alternative approaches to assessing scientific results. Vestnik Rossiiskoi akademii nauk, 2015, 85(2): 115-122. DOI: 10.7868/S0869587315020103. (In Russ.)
24. Osipov I., Mal’kov D., Dolzhanskaya Ya., Zhirnova K. Analiz onlain-upominaemosti nauchnykh publikatsii rossiiskikh universitetov na osnove al’tmetrikov: al’ternativnyi podkhod k media benchmarkingu rossiiskikh vuzov za 2010–2016 gg. [Analysis of online mentions of scientific publications of Russian universities based on altmetrics: an alternative approach to media benchmarking of Russian universities for 2010-2016]. Saint Petersburg, ITMO [etc.], 2018. 42 p. (In Russ.)
25. Mal’kov D. Two against all: a new study of online mentioning Russian universities : interview with D. Mal’kov, Director of the Center for Scientific Communication (ITMO University). Indicator. 2018. URL: https://indicator.ru/engineering-science/onlajn-upominaemost-rossijskihvuzov-komlab-rvk.htm (accessed 11.11.2019). (In Russ.)
Review
For citations:
Chesnyalis P.A. USE OF ALTMETRICS IN BIBLIOGRAPHIC SERVICES. Proceedings of SPSTL SB RAS. 2020;(1):79-85. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.20913/2618-7515-2020-1-79-85
Views:
1056
Email this article 