“When You Use Social Media You Are Not Working”: Barriers for the Use of Metrics in Social Sciences

Authors: Lemke Steffen, Mehrazar Maryam, Mazarakis Athanasios, Peters Isabella

Abstract: The Social Sciences have long been struggling with quantitative forms of research assessment—insufficient coverage in prominent citation indices and overall lower citation counts than in STM subject areas have led to a widespread weariness regarding bibliometric evaluations among social scientists. Fueled by the rise of the social web, new hope is often placed on alternative metrics that measure the attention scholarly publications receive online, in particular on social media. But almost a decade after the coining of the term “altmetrics” for this new group of indicators, the uptake of the concept in the Social Sciences still seems to be low. Just like with traditional bibliometric indicators, one central problem hindering the applicability of altmetrics for the Social Sciences is the low coverage of social science publications on the respective data sources—which in the case of altmetrics are the various social media platforms on which interactions with scientific outputs can be measured. Another reason is that social scientists have strong opinions about the usefulness of metrics for research evaluation which may hinder broad acceptance of altmetrics too. We conducted qualitative interviews and online surveys with researchers to identify the concerns which inhibit the use of social media and the utilization of metrics for research evaluation in the Social Sciences. By analyzing the response data from the interviews in conjunction with the response data from the surveys, we identify the key concerns that inhibit social scientists from (1) applying social media for professional purposes and (2) making use of the wide array of metrics available. Our findings show that aspects of time consumption, privacy, dealing with information overload, and prevalent styles of communication are predominant concerns inhibiting Social Science researchers from using social media platforms for their work. Regarding indicators for research impact we identify a widespread lack of knowledge about existing metrics, their methodologies and meanings as a major hindrance for their uptake through social scientists. The results have implications for future developments of scholarly online tools and show that researchers could benefit considerably from additional formal training regarding the correct application and interpretation of metrics.V

Citation:   Lemke S, Mehrazar M, Mazarakis A and Peters I (2019) “When You Use Social Media You Are Not Working”: Barriers for the Use of Metrics in Social Sciences. Front. Res. Metr. Anal. 3:39. doi: 10.3389/frma.2018.00039

VIEW

 

Source: Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics

Conditions d’une dénationalisation et décolonisation des savoirs

Author: Rada Iveković

Abstract: Pour décoloniser les savoirs, il faudrait au minimum déconstruire l’origine nationale des savoirs et des pouvoirs. C’est leur enracinement national qui rend possible leur colonialité intrinsèque. Décoloniser les savoirs relève d’une démarche à long terme, infinie, qui n’est pas seulement d’ordre épistémologique, mais aussi politique : elle concerne la justice, l’économie, les rapports sociaux ; elle porte sur le passé, le présent et l’avenir. Puisque le colonialisme est partie prenante du devenir de l’État national, tous deux reposant sur une hiérarchie consensuelle et codifiée des sexes et sur d’autres types d’inégalités constitutives, Une condition indispensable de la décolonisation des savoirs est leur dénationalisation.

Citation:   Lemke S, Mehrazar M, Mazarakis A and Peters I (2019) “When You Use Social Media You Are Not Working”: Barriers for the Use of Metrics in Social Sciences. Front. Res. Metr. Anal. 3:39. doi: 10.3389/frma.2018.00039

VIEW

 

Source: Mouvements

Future of scholarly publishing and scholarly communication

Author: Directorate-General for Research and Innovation (European Commission)

Abstract:The report proposes a vision for the future of scholarly communication; it examines the current system -with its strengths and weaknesses- and its main actors. It considers the roles of researchers, research institutions, funders and policymakers, publishers and other service providers, as well as citizens and puts forward recommendations addressed to each of them. The report places researchers and their needs at the centre of the scholarly communication of the future, and considers knowledge and understanding created by researchers as public goods. Current developments, enabled primarily by technology, have resulted into a broadening of types of actors involved in scholarly communication and in some cases the disaggregation of the traditional roles in the system. The report views research evaluation as a keystone for scholarly communication, affecting all actors. Researchers, communities and all organisations, in particular funders, have the possibility of improving the current scholarly communication and publishing system: they should start by bringing changes to the research evaluation system. Collaboration between actors is essential for positive change and to enable innovation in the scholarly communication and publishing system in the future.

Citation:   Lemke S, Mehrazar M, Mazarakis A and Peters I (2019) “When You Use Social Media You Are Not Working”: Barriers for the Use of Metrics in Social Sciences. Front. Res. Metr. Anal. 3:39. doi: 10.3389/frma.2018.00039

 

VIEW

Source: Publications Office of the European Union

Library publisher resources: Making publishing approachable, sustainable, and values-driven

Authors: Jenny Hoops, Sarah Hare

Abstract: The Library Publishing Coalition (LPC) defines library publishing as the “creation, dissemination, and curation of scholarly, creative, and/or educational works” by college and university libraries. While providing a publishing platform, hosting, and services for editorial teams is key to any library publishing initiative, library publishing is also centered on furthering core library values. Thus library publishing activities are mission-driven, centered on education, and focused on finding and promoting sustainable approaches to open access publishing and building cooperative open infrastructure.

Citation: Hoops, J., & Hare, S. (2019). Library publisher resources: Making publishing approachable, sustainable, and values-driven. College & Research Libraries News, 80(2), 74. doi:https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.80.2.74

VIEW

 


Source: College & Research Libraries News

Seeking Sustainability and Inclusivity with Transparent Practices for Research Data Management

Author: Heather Soyka

Abstract: When thinking about how to encourage research data management education and activity, one option is to do that work in public. By demonstrating and modeling good practices, providing stepping stones and clear pathways from beginner to more advanced, and welcoming experimentation, questions, and contributions, communities can encourage public participation and a culture of growth and shared ownership for participants and future members.

Citation:   Lemke S, Mehrazar M, Mazarakis A and Peters I (2019) “When You Use Social Media You Are Not Working”: Barriers for the Use of Metrics in Social Sciences. Front. Res. Metr. Anal. 3:39. doi: 10.3389/frma.2018.00039

VIEW

 

Source: Research Library Issues

ARL-SSRC Meeting on Open Scholarship in the Social Sciences: Summary and Next Steps

Authors: Philip Cohen, Rebecca Kennison, Jason Rhody, Judy Ruttenberg, Virginia Steel, Shan Sutton, Penelope Weber

Abstract: Open scholarship and open research practices are gaining momentum in the social sciences and the academy broadly. The Association of Research Libraries (ARL) and the Social Science Research Council (SSRC) convened a meeting in December 2018 at a pivotal moment for social science leaders to discuss opportunities and commit to a shared agenda, with tangible next steps, to build on successes to date. By focusing on each participant sector’s distinctive roles, shared values, and objectives with respect to an open scholarly ecosystem, the action- oriented meeting explored how the community can increase access to social science research and ensure that scholars and scholarship thrive in an environment that is “inclusive, equitable, trustworthy, and durable.”

Citation: Cohen, P. et al. “ARL-SSRC Meeting on Open Scholarship in the Social Sciences: Summary and Next Steps.” Association of Research Libraries and Social Science Research Council. January 25, 2019. https://www.arl.org/storage/documents/publications/2019.01.25-arl-ssrc-meeting-on-open-scholarship.pdf

Source: arl.org

 

What is Open Science, and How Can Radical Collaboration Facilitate It?

Author: Meghan Potterbusch

Abstract: Open science is a multi-faceted movement serving as a goal and a motivation for many stakeholders, from researchers to information professionals and from funders to the general public. Aspects of open science include: open sharing of research materials such as data and code, collaborative research platforms, crowdsourcing platforms, blogs, open peer review, open educational resources, altmetrics, and more. These diverse aspects can be classified into schools of thought and are emphasized by members of various open-focused communities to different degrees (from intense belief to neutral to opposition in some cases). Regardless of the differences in views between diverse communities and differences in aspects or approaches, each of these forms of open science allows for additional levels of understanding, participation, or both by people external to the group producing the science.

Citation: Megan Potterbusch. “What is Open Science, and How Can Radical Collaboration Facilitate It?” Research Library Issues, no. 296 (2018): 44–48. https://doi.org/10.29242/rli.296.6

 

Source: Research Library Issues

The F3-index. Valuing reviewers for scholarly journals

Authors: Federico Bianchi, Francisco Grimaldo, Flaminio Squazzoni

Abstract: This paper presents an index that measures reviewer contribution to editorial processes of scholarly journals. Following a metaphor of ranking algorithms in sports tournaments, we created an index that considers reviewers on different context-specific dimensions, i.e., report delivery time, the length of the report and the alignment of recommendations to editorial decisions. To test the index, we used a dataset of peer review in a multi-disciplinary journal, including 544 reviewers on 606 submissions in six years. Although limited by sample size, the test showed that the index identifies outstanding contributors and weak performing reviewers efficiently. Our index is flexible, contemplates extensions and could be incorporated into available scholarly journal management tools. It can assist editors in rewarding high performing reviewers and managing editorial turnover.

Citation:   Lemke S, Mehrazar M, Mazarakis A and Peters I (2019) “When You Use Social Media You Are Not Working”: Barriers for the Use of Metrics in Social Sciences. Front. Res. Metr. Anal. 3:39. doi: 10.3389/frma.2018.00039

View

 

s

Source: Journal of Informetrics

The effect of publishing peer review reports on referee behavior in five scholarly journals

Authors: Giangiacomo Bravo, Francisco Grimaldo, Emilia López-Iñesta, Bahar Mehmani, & Flaminio Squazzoni

Abstract: To increase transparency in science, some scholarly journals are publishing peer review reports. But it is unclear how this practice affects the peer review process. Here, we examine the effect of publishing peer review reports on referee behavior in five scholarly journals involved in a pilot study at Elsevier. By considering 9,220 submissions and 18,525 reviews from 2010 to 2017, we measured changes both before and during the pilot and found that publishing reports did not significantly compromise referees’ willingness to review, recommendations, or turn-around times. Younger and non-academic scholars were more willing to accept to review and provided more positive and objective recommendations. Male referees tended to write more constructive reports during the pilot. Only 8.1% of referees agreed to reveal their identity in the published report. These findings suggest that open peer review does not compromise the process, at least when referees are able to protect their anonymity.

Citation:   Lemke S, Mehrazar M, Mazarakis A and Peters I (2019) “When You Use Social Media You Are Not Working”: Barriers for the Use of Metrics in Social Sciences. Front. Res. Metr. Anal. 3:39. doi: 10.3389/frma.2018.00039


View

 

The Radical Collaboration of RDA and What It Means for Developing Institutional Data Management Services

Author: Amy Nurnberger

Abstract: The Research Data Alliance (RDA) is an organization dedicated to
reducing barriers to data sharing and exchange. While there are many
technical barriers that must still be surmounted, it is a core principle of
RDA that technical impediments are not the only ones. Often the more
challenging barriers are the less visible social roadblocks and those
blockades constructed at the intersections of the technical and the
social. In my experience in developing and working in institutional data
management services, these services are also dedicated to easing the
way to data sharing and are likewise subject to a similar set of barriers.
The connections between how RDA works, how data management
services develop in institutions, and how radical collaboration happens
may map out a route to more successful service development practices.

Citation: Amy Nurnberger. “The Radical Collaboration of RDA and What It Means for Developing Institutional Data Management Services.” Research Library Issues, no. 296 (2018): 23–32. https://doi.org/10.29242/rli.296.3.

VIEW

 

Source: Research Library Issues