icsti tacc 2014: how mendeley illuminates a broader definition of impact
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
How Mendeley illuminates a broader definition of impactWilliam Gunn, Ph.D.Head of Academic OutreachMendeley
@mrgunnhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-3555-2054
...and aggregates research
data in the cloud
Mendeley extracts research data…
Install Mendeley Desktop
Collecting rich signals from domain experts.
Home Work Mobile
Cloud Library
Shared Folder
Read papers + keep track of notes
470M documents
Taking some misery out of writing
Mendeley Research Catalog
Mendeley Research Catalog
New forms of discovery
• Mendeley Suggest– personalized recommendations based
on reading history• related articles
– relatedness based on document similarity
• recommender frameworks– implement recommendations as a
service• third-party recommender services
– serve niche audiences
Information Extraction
We are publishing this data to the LOD cloud
http://code-research.eu/
Connecting researchers
Search
ReadAnnotateOrganize
Write
Import
Data we collect
• Metadata about the paper–title, author, tags, annotations, reads, shares, groups
• Metadata about the researcher–discipline, educational status, country, papers they’ve authored, presentations, expertise
2.7M researchers
Defining readership
• Each document addition is a “read”
• stamped with metadata describing the context of the read event
• a read is like a citation, but faster and captures more
research impacts more than authors
Problems with Impact Factor
Highly Tweeted articles are 11x more likely to be highly cited. (Eysenbach 2011) http://www.jmir.org/2011/4/e123/
The higher the impact factor, the more likely the research is to be retracted, partly due to intense competition.http://bjoern.brembs.net/news766.html.11
What matters is who is reading your work!
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0030291
Problems with Impact Factor
During discussions with Thomson Scientific over which article types in PLoS Medicine the company deems as “citable,” it became clear that the process of determining a journal's impact factor is unscientific and arbitrary.”
Citations are slow
Mendeley is fast
Readership vs. citations
• it comes with a payload of metadata
• it accrues faster• it illuminates previously hidden impact
http://arxiv.org/html/1203.4745v1
altmetrics show broader impact
http://dx.do
i.org/10.37
89/isqv
25no
2.20
13.04
http://www.asis.org/Bulletin/Apr-13/AprMay13_Lin_Fenner.html
altmetrics show broader impact
Issues To Be Addressed
• Identity• Privacy• Attribution• Gaming• Filtration
standards/best practice
Amgen: 47 of 53 “landmark” oncology publications could not be reproduced
Bayer: 43 of 67 oncology & cardiovascular projects were based on contradictory results
Dr. John Ioannidis: 432 publications purporting sex differences in hypertension, multiple sclerosis, or lung cancer. Only one data set was reproducible
There is no gold standard
Cultural skew is important
South America is weak on N.A. social media, strong on Mendeley
What would people build if they could get the data?
• Impact Story – get credit for all your work
• PLOS ALM – article-level metrics for papers
• Plum Analytics – bespoke analytics for libraries (EBSCO)
• Altmetric.com – altmetrics for publishers. (Digital Science)
