Friday, November 18, 2016

Altmetrics seminar shows where research evaluation will (need to) go in the future

I found the talk by Paul Wouters on responsible metrics for Open Science extremely interesting and thought provoking. A very good break-down of key-factors and elements that play a role.
I hope the recorded streams will be online soon!
Conclusions & take home messages for me:

  • I need to dive deeper in theory & sociological approach of research evaluation
  • I plan to read up on the papers mentioned & showed in Paul's talk.
  • uses impressive techniques (i.e. text-mining) to find references to scientific publications. Those slides are a MUST-SEE! Ben McLeish did a great job explaining what they do & how far they have come already.
  • Where shows all the attention outside the organisation connected to scientific publications, PlumX has a more focus on showing how people inside the organisation doing, including comparing them.
  • Kudos expects individual researchers to boost their own research in laymens term, giving them tools to promote, and measure the effect afterwards
  • It is annoying and confusing that all  parties have many simular sources for altmetrics data, but also unique resources not shared with others. In my opinion they NEED to collabarate even more in the future to complement into better altmetrics data for all.
  • Mendeley data seems to be pretty close to citation analysis in showing what are going to be higly cited publications!
  • As to our project in the UMCG: time to more forward.
    We now have a very neat dashboard which monitors all mentions of our researchers on the web & social media. The library will start the discussion about how to use it, and how to evaluate research output in the future.
    If people want to know more about our project, please contact me!


No comments: