-
about
What's altmetrics?
Tools
Media
Press
Tweet #altmetrics
-
workshop
altmetrics15 workshop
Amsterdam • 9 October 2015 -
call for papers
The Altmetrics Collection
A PLOS One Collection
-
resources
- altmetrics @Mendeley
- altmetrics @Google Groups
- altmetrics @FriendFeed
- altmetrics @LinkedIn
-
upcoming events
- 7—8 October 2015:
2:AM 2nd Altmetrics Conference
(Amsterdam) - 9 October 2015:
altmetrics15 workshop
(Amsterdam)
- 7—8 October 2015:
-
past events
- 4-6 December 2014:
ALM Workshop 2014
(San Francisco) - 25-26 September 2014:
1st Altmetrics Conference
(London) - 23 June 2014:
altmetrics14 workshop
(ACM Web Science Conference 2014) - 11-12 April 2013:
Rigour and Openness in 21st Century Science
(Oxford) - 19-20 March 2013:
Beyond the PDF 2
(Amsterdam) - 15 February 2013:
A New Social (Media) Contract for Science
(AAAS '13, Boston) - 4 December 2012:
Future of Academic Impacts #LSEimpact
(London) - 1-3 November 2012:
ALM Workshop and Hackathon #alm12
(San Francisco) - 10-12 October 2012:
Occupy Impact
(Montreal) - 21 June 2012:
altmetrics12 workshop
(ACM Web Science Conference 2012) - 15 June 2012:
Disrupting Scientific Communication
StartUpScience
(South San Francisco) - 19-21 January 2012:
Science Online 2012
(NC State University) - 24-25 October 2011:
Transforming Scholarly Communication
(Harvard & Microsoft Research) - 22-23 October 2011:
Open Science Summit 2011
(Mountain View, CA) - 2-3 September 2011:
Science Online London 2011
(British Library) - 15 June 2011:
altmetrics11 workshop
(ACM Web Science Conference 2011) - 9-11 May 2011:
Beyond Impact Workshop
(OSI/Wellcome Trust) - 22-25 March 2011:
Mining the Digital Traces of Science
(Workshop + data challenge) - 19-21 January 2011:
Beyond the PDF
(UCSD Workshop) - 15 January 2011:
How is the Web changing the way we identify scientific impact?
(Science Online 2011)
- 4-6 December 2014:
-
latest #altmetrics references
- Boko Haram : the emergence of a terrorist sect in Nigeria 2009–2013African Identities (2013). Volume: 11, Issue: 3. Pages: 260-273. Femi Adegbulu et al.Published using Mendeley: The research tool for desktop & web
- PLOS, Please publish our articles on Wednesdays: A look at altmetrics by day of publicationThe Winnower (2015). Juan Pablo Alperin, Alessandra Bordini, Sophie Pouyanne et al.Published using Mendeley: The reference software for researchers
- Building Buzz: (Scientists) Communicating Science in New Media EnvironmentsJournalism & Mass Communication Quarterly (2014). Volume: 91, Issue: 4. Pages: 772-791. X. Liang, L. Y.-F. Su, S. K. Yeo, D. A. Scheufele, D. Brossard, M. Xenos, P. Nealey, E. A. Corley et al.Public communication about science faces novel challenges, including the increasing complexity of research areas and the erosion of traditional journalistic infrastructures. Although […]
- () - 0810.4672v2.pdfNo description available.Published using Mendeley: The bibliography manager for researchers
- Building Buzz: (Scientists) Communicating Science in New Media EnvironmentsJournalism & Mass Communication Quarterly (2014). Volume: 91, Issue: 4. Pages: 772-791. X. Liang, L. Y.-F. Su, S. K. Yeo, D. A. Scheufele, D. Brossard, M. Xenos, P. Nealey, E. A. Corley et al.Public communication about science faces novel challenges, including the increasin
- Boko Haram : the emergence of a terrorist sect in Nigeria 2009–2013
Characteristics of Researchblogging.org science Blogs and Bloggers [v0]
This is version 0 of an abstract to be presented at altmetrics11.
Hadas Shema
Judit Bar-Ilan
Department of Information Science, Bar-Ilan University, Israel
Introduction
Researchblogging.org (2008) is an aggregator of science blogs. Bloggers discussing peer-reviewed research can register with the aggregator, and when they mark relevant posts in their blog, these posts appear on the aggregator’s site, allowing one-stop access to research reviews to interested readers. The site’s editors ensure that posts follow the guidelines and are of appropriate quality. In this study, our objective was to learn about these bloggers and the type of research they choose to review in order to get insights into scientific blogging in general.
Method
Following Groth and Gurney (2010) we chose to use an aggregator of science blogs called ResearchBlogging.org (RB for short) for characterizing science blogs and bloggers. Blogs chosen for the study were non-commercial blogs written by 1-2 individuals and had a minimum of twenty entries posted at the RB aggregator between January 1, 2010 and January 15, 2011. There were 133 bloggers in 126 blogs satisfying our criteria (two bloggers had two blogs each and 9 blogs had two authors each). We collected the data from the blogs and bloggers’ RB pages as well as the “About” and “Profile” parts of the blogs themselves. In cases the “About” or “Profile” parts were unclear we searched the Internet for mentions of the blogger’s name in different contexts. The publicly available parts of profiles from LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter and other social networks were used as additional sources of information on the bloggers. The blog post characterization was based on the bloggers’ last five posts appearing on RB at the time of the data collection in March, 2011.
Gender
In the academic year 2008-2009 women earned 50.4% of the doctorates in the U.S. Council of Graduate Schools, 2010). Despite the large percentage of doctorates earned by women, men dominate the science blogging arena (Fig. 1). About two-third of the blogs have one male authors, 18.25% have one female author, 4.76% have two male authors and almost 4% have one female and one male author. The gender of 5.56% of the writers of blogs is unknown. The gender disparities in science blogs authorship seem similar to those of Wikipedia contributors: 12.64% of the contributors to Wikipedia are women (Glott, Schmidt & Ghosh, 2010). Our findings are in line with those of Munger (2010) who studied the general gender ratio of RB and found that “male bloggers outnumber female bloggers by over three to one.”
Figure 1: Gender distribution of sampled RB bloggers:
Anonymity
Bloggers who do not supply a name or only supply a nickname/first name are referred to as anonymous. It must be noted that we have not made inquiries about the authenticity of each name, so it is possible that names which appear to be authentic may be pseudonyms. Most bloggers choose to blog under their full name. Out of the 133 bloggers in our sample only 24 (18.05%) blog anonymously.
Blog Networks
A scientific blog can be an independent venture, or be a part of a larger group of science blogs. There have been several launches of science blog networks by traditional media outlets. For example, the British newspaper the Guardian launched its own science blogs network in August 2010 Sneyd, 2010) and Wired magazine followed suit (Mason, 2010). In our sample 87 (69.05%) were independent blogs and 39 (30.95%) were part of a bigger group of blogs. Out of the 39 blogs, 15 (38.46%) belong to one of the three networks ran by Seed Magazine (in English, German and Portuguese).
Language
English is the dominant language of scientific blogs. Out of the 126 blogs in the Sample 108 (85.71%) were written in English (Fig. 2)
Figure 2: Language distribution of the sampled blogs:
Journals reviewed The references appearing in the last five blog posts in each of the 126 blogs were extracted. This resulted in 913 references to articles appearing in 429 journals, 9 references to articles uploaded to arxiv.org, 3 references to conference proceedings and 2 references to books. The distribution of the number of times journals were referenced appears in Table 1. The journals that were referenced ten times or more, were Science (61 times), Nature (53 times), PNAS (42 times), PLoS ONE (37 times), Psychological Science (16 times), Proceedings of the Royal Society B (15 times), BMJ, JAMA and Physical Review Letters (10 times each).
Table 1: Number of times journals were referenced in the sample:
No. of references to journal | # journals | % journals |
10 times or more | 9 | 2.10% |
9 times | 2 | 0.47% |
7 times | 2 | 0.47% |
6 times | 3 | 0.70% |
5 times | 8 | 1.86% |
4 times | 14 | 3.26% |
3 times | 29 | 6.76% |
twice | 57 | 13.29% |
once | 305 | 71.10% |
Table 2: Subject categories:
Major category | # articles | % articles |
Life sciences | 190 | 29.92% |
Multidisciplinary | 156 | 24.57% |
Psychology, psychiatry, neurosciences, behavioral sci. | 132 | 20.79% |
Medicine | 94 | 14.80% |
Sciences | 36 | 5.67% |
Engineering | 10 | 1.57% |
Social sciences | 17 | 2.68% |
Subject categories
For each of the journals that was referenced twice or more we identified the JCR subject category/categories they belong to (601 articles). Only 7 journals were not in ISI’s JCR for 2009. Based on the JCR journal categorization, the articles were classified into seven major classes (see Table 2). In a few cases the journal was categorized into more than one major category.
Conclusions
Science blogs have some of the characteristics of traditional scientific discourse. Science bloggers show a preference for high-impact, multidisciplinary journals (Science, Nature, PNAS and PLoS ONE). This preference is similar to that found by Groth and Gurney (2010) for RB chemistry blogs. Nevertheless, a wide variety of journals were discussed, with almost three quarters of journals only being referenced once in the time period. About 85% of the blogs are written in English, the language of most scientific discourse. Although bloggers can choose to post anonymously, more than four-fifths of them apparently use their own name. We have confirmed Munger’s (2010) findings about the gender gap in science blogging. Our study was limited by our sample (blogs from RB that had over 20 posts recorded in the aggregator) and by the number of references from these blogs that were analyzed.
References
Council of Graduate Schools (2010). Graduate Enrollment Continues Strong Growth in 2009. www.cgsnet.org/portals/0/pdf/N_pr_ED2009.pdf
Glott, R., Schmidt, P. & Ghosh, R. (2010). Wikipedia survey – Overview of results www.wikipediasurvey.org/docs/Wikipedia_ Overview_15March2010-FINAL.pdf
Groth, P. & Gurney, T. (2010) Studying Scientific Discourse on the Web using Bibliometrics: A Chemistry Blogging Case Study. In: Proceedings of the WebSci10., Raleigh, NC,US. journal.webscience.org/308/
Mason, B. (September 14th, 2010). Meet the New Wired Science All-Star Bloggers. www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/09/new-wired-science-blogs-network/
Munger, D. (September 22, 2010). Blogging out of balance. Seed Magazine. seedmagazine.com/content/article/blogging_out_of_balance/
Researchblogging.org (2008). About us. www.researchblogging.org/static/index/page/about
Sneyd, E. (August 31, 2010). The Guardian launches science blogs network blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2010/08/31/the- guardian-launches-science-blogs-network/
3 Comments
Broken link in reference to Mason, B. (September 14th, 2010). Meet the New Wired Science All-Star Bloggers.(Spurious space in URL),
Fixed, thank you!
What about an study on how much these blogs influence researchers in their work? I for once, get a lot of my ideas from blogs that later try to find in peer reviewed publications.
Furthermore, I think one particular use of research blogs is to keep track of fields that are not part of your work, but include topics that are interested to know at least superficially. Again, in my case, even though I’m not an astrophysics, i like it and follow it mainly through blogs.
It would be interesting to extend this work and study not only characteristics of the academic blogs, but also their impact, influence, usage and audience.