Do Altmetrics Work? Twitter and Ten Other Social Web Services

Summary

Altmetric measurements derived from the social web are increasingly advocated and used as early indicators of article impact and usefulness. Nevertheless, there is a lack of systematic scientific evidence that altmetrics are valid proxies of either impact or utility although a few case studies have reported medium correlations between specific altmetrics and citation rates for individual journals or fields. To fill this gap, this study compares 11 altmetrics with Web of Science citations for 76 to 208,739 PubMed articles with at least one altmetric mention in each case and up to 1,891 journals per metric. It also introduces a simple sign test to overcome biases caused by different citation and usage windows. Statistically significant associations were found between higher metric scores and higher citations for articles with positive altmetric scores in all cases with sufficient evidence (Twitter, Facebook wall posts, research highlights, blogs, mainstream media and forums) except perhaps for Google+ posts. Evidence was insufficient for LinkedIn, Pinterest, question and answer sites, and Reddit, and no conclusions should be drawn about articles with zero altmetric scores or the strength of any correlation between altmetrics and citations. Nevertheless, comparisons between citations and metric values for articles published at different times, even within the same year, can remove or reverse this association and so publishers and scientometricians should consider the effect of time when using altmetrics to rank articles. Finally, the coverage of all the altmetrics except for Twitter seems to be low and so it is not clear if they are prevalent enough to be useful in practice.

Key Points

• 1Altmetrics may provide rapid insights into article impact, but evidence for their validity as proxies for citation is mixed
• 2Significant associations were found between certain altmetrics and citation rates
• 3The study introduces a novel sign test to address biases in comparing altmetric scores and citations
• 4Findings suggest low coverage for most altmetrics, challenging their practical utility
• 5The relationship between altmetrics and citations varies over time and requires careful consideration.

Related articles

• Purposive Communication Analiza Salud | 1st SEM

  This document offers a comprehensive overview of purposive communication, exploring its principles, the influence of technology and culture, and various communication models. It also addresses globalization in communication and highlights the evolution of language, particularly among Gen Z.

• Types of Communication

  This document provides an overview of various types of communication, including their modes, contexts, purposes, and styles, emphasizing the importance of effective verbal, nonverbal, and visual communication.

• Bridging the communication gap between Generation Y and the Baby Boomer generation

  This article explores the generational communication gap between Generation Y and the Baby Boomer generation, highlighting the differences in their communication preferences and the impact of technology on interpersonal interactions. Through a literature review, it addresses how these differences can create conflicts and explores potential solutions for bridging the gap.

• Purposive Communication Reviewer Part 1: Nature, Process, and Principles of Communication

  This document serves as a comprehensive review of the nature, process, and principles of communication, addressing various models, elements, and forms of communication, along with ethical considerations pertinent to effective sharing of information.

• Code-switching in text and speech challenges information-theoretic speaker design

  This article investigates the linguistic phenomenon of code-switching in multilingual contexts, emphasizing the relationship between predictability in primary and secondary languages and the motivations behind code-switching behavior. It uses bilingual data to challenge existing theories of speaker-driven code-switching by examining audience-driven factors.