Altmetric indicators in Brazilian journals in Information Science: a research landscape
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.19132/1808-5245273.275-302Keywords:
Altmetric indicators, Reference Manager, Social media platforms, Brazilian journals in Information Science.Abstract
This study aims to analyze altmetric indicators in Brazilian journals in Information Science. With descriptive character and qualitative nature, it used, as a method, the literature review and, as a technique, data collection via Altmetric API and Mendeley data with the Webometric Analyst software. As a result, it was found that the journal Transinformação presented the largest number of articles with altmetric data for the entire analyzed corpus, that is, 98.7%, and Brajis the smallest, with 37.8%. The Informação & Sociedade, A1 in Qualis, presented the lowest percentage of altmetric records among the journals in its category, with 61.3%, while the Perspectiva em Ciência da Informação, in the same Qualis stratum, presented a high percentage, with 97 %. The journal Em Questão presented the highest number of altmetric data in the A2 strand of Qualis, with 84.8% of the articles receiving mentions, standing out in relation to the other two journals in this qualification - the Encontros Bibli, with 79.7%, and Informação & Informação, with 73.4%. Of the journals with Qualis B1, the INCID presented the largest number of articles with altmetric data, with 81.8%, closely followed by the RDBCI, which presented 80.9%. The reference manager and the social media platforms that presented altmetric records for the studied journals were: Mendeley, Twitter, Facebook, and Blogs, emphasizing the prevalence of data in Mendeley for all analyzed journals. The article understands that there is no single solution to the challenge of evaluating the results of journals in scientific communication, but understands the importance of digital ways of disseminating and sharing scientific information and that such practices can contribute to the complement of indicators and visibility of journals on referral managers and social media platforms.Downloads
References
ARAÚJO, R. F.; MURAKAMI, T. R. M.; PRADO, J. M. K. do. A repercussão de artigos de periódicos brasileiros de Ciência da Informação no Facebook: um estudo altmétrico. Revista Digital de Biblioteconomia e Ciência da Informação, Campinas, v. 16, n. 2, p. 365-379, 2018. Disponível em: <https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/rdbci/article/view/8650461/pdf>. Acesso em: 15 jul. 2019.
ARAUJO, R. F.; MURAKAMI, T. R. M. A. Atenção online de artigos de Ciência da Informação: análise a partir de dados altmétricos do Facebook. In: ENCONTRO BRASILEIRO DE BIBLIOMETRIA E CIENTOMETRIA, 5., 2016, São Paulo. Anais [...]. São Paulo: USP, 2016. Disponível em: <https://bdpi.usp.br/item/002803506> Acesso em: 15 jul. 2019.
ARAÚJO, R. F. Mídias sociais e comunicação científica: análise altmétrica em artigos de periódicos da ciência da informação. Em Questão, Porto Alegre, v. 21, n. 1, 2015. Disponível em: <https://seer.ufrgs.br/EmQuestao/article/view/47918>. Acesso em: 18 jul. 2019.
BAR-ILAN, J. Astrophysics publications on ArXiv, Scopus and Mendeley: a case study. Scientometrics, Budapest, v. 100, p. 217–225, 2014.
BORNMANN, L. Do altmetrics point to the broader impact of research? An overview of benefits and disadvantages of altmetrics. Journal of Informetrics, Amsterdam, v. 8, n. 4, p. 895-903, 2014.
CABRERA, D.; ROY, D; CHISOLM, M. S. Social Media Scholarship and Alternative Metrics for Academic Promotion and Tenure. Journal of the American College of Radiology, Amsterdam, v. 15, n. 1, jan. 2018.
COSTAS, R.; ZAHEDI, Z.; WOUTERS, P. The thematic orientation of publications mentioned on social media. Aslib Journal of Information Management, Bingley, UK, v. 67, n. 3, p. 260-288, 2015.
CRONIN, B.; SUGIMOTO, C. Beyond bibliometrics: Harnessing multidimensional indicators of scholarly impact. In: PRIEM, J. Altmetrics. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2014.
EBRAHIMY, S.; SETAREH, F. HOSSEINCHARI, M. Assessing the relationship between the alternative metrics of visibility and social bookmarking with citation index in PLOS altmetrics. Iranian Journal of Information Processing Management, Tehran, v. 31, n. 3, 2016.
ERDT, M. et al. Altmetrics: an analysis of the state-of-the-art in measuring research impact on social media. Scientometrics, Budapest, v. 109, n. 2, p. 1117-1166, 2016.
GARFIELD, E. Citation indexes for Science: a new dimension in documentation through association ideas. Science, Washington, v. 122, n. 3159, p. 108-111, 1955.
GONZÁLEZ-VALIENTE, C. L., PACHECO-MENDOZA, J.; ARENCIBIA-JORGE, R. A review of altmetrics as an emerging discipline for research evaluation. Learned Publishing, [S. l.], v. 29, n. 4, p. 229-238, 2016.
HAUNSCHILD, R.; BORNMANN, L. Normalization of Mendeley reader counts for impact assessment. Journal of Informetrics, Amsterdam, v. 10, p. 62-73, 2016.
HAUSTEIN, S. Grand challenges in altmetrics: heterogeneity, data quality and dependencies. Scientometrics, Budapest, v. 108, n. 1, p. 413-423, 2016.
HAUSTEIN, S. et al. Coverage and adoption of altmetrics sources in the bibliometric community. Scientometrics, New York, v. 101, n. 2, p. 1145-1163, 2014.
KEMP, S. Global digital report 2018. London: We are social, 2018. Disponível em: https://digitalreport.wearesocial.com. Acesso em: 15 abr. 2021.
KEMP, S. Digital 2021: global overview report. London: We are social, 2021. Disponível em: https://wearesocial.com/digital-2021. Acesso em: 18 abr. 2021.
MAFLAHI, N.; THELWALL, M. When are readership counts as useful as citation counts? Scopus versus Mendeley for LIS Journals. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, Hoboken, v. 67, n. 1, p. 191-199, 2016.
MANHIQUE, I. L. E.; RODRIGUES, F. de A. Indicadores altmétricos em periódicos brasileiros da Ciência da Informação no Brasil. Revista Ibero-Americana de Ciência da Informação, Brasília, v. 12, n. 2, p. 515-532, 2019. Disponível em: <http://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/RICI/article/view/9156>. Acesso em: 10 set. 2019.
MELERO, R. Altmetrics: a complement to conventional metrics. Biochemia Medica, Zagreb, v. 25, n. 2, p. 152–160, 2015.
MESCHEDE, C.; SIEBENLIST, T. Cross-metric compatibility and inconsistencies of altmetrics. Scientometrics, New York, v. 115, p. 283–297, 2018.
MOHAMMADI, E.; THELWALL, M. Mendeley readership altmetrics for the social sciences and humanities: Research evaluation and knowledge flows. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, Hoboken, v. 65, n. 8, 2014.
NASCIMENTO, A. G. do; ODDONE, N. E. Uso de altmetrics para avaliação de periódicos científicos brasileiros em Ciência da Informação. Ci. Inf. Rev., Maceió, v. 2, n. 1, p. 3-12, jan./abr. 2015.
NASCIMENTO, A. G. do; ODDONE, N. E. Uso de indicadores altmetrics na avaliação de periódicos científicos brasileiros em Ciência da Informação. In: ENCONTRO BRASILEIRO DE BIBLIOMETRIA E CIENTOMETRIA, 4., 2014, Recife. Anais [...] Recife: UFPE, 2014.
NISO. NISO RP-25-2016: Outputs of the NISO Alternative Assessment Metrics Project. Baltimore: NISO, 2016.
PETERS, I. et al. Scientific Bloggers under the Altmetric Microscope. American Society for Information Science and Technology, Silver Spring, v. 49, n. 1, 2012.
PRIEM, J. et al. Altmetrics: A manifesto. 2010. Disponível em: <http://altmetrics.org/manifesto>. Acesso em: 30 jul. 2017.
SUGIMOTO, C. R. et al. Scholarly use of social media and altmetrics: a review of the literature. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, Hoboken, v. 68, n. 9, p. 2037-2062, 2017.
SUD, P; THELWALL, M. Evaluating altmetrics. Scientometrics, Budapest, v. 98, p. 1131-1143, 2014.
THELWALL, M. Introduction to Webometrics: Quantitative Web Research for the Social Sciences. San Rafael: Morgan & Claypool, 2009.
THELWALL, M. et al. Do Altmetrics Work? Twitter and Ten Other Social Web Services. PLoS ONE, San Francisco, v. 8, n. 5, 2013.
WANG, X. et al. The open access advantage considering citation, article usage and social media attention. Scientometrics, Budapest, v. 103, n. 2, p. 555-564, 2015.
WILSDON, J. et al. The Metric Tide: Report of the Independent Review of the Role of Metrics in Research Assessment and Management. 2015. Disponível em: <http://www.hefce.ac.uk/media/HEFCE,2014/Content/Pubs/Independentresearch/2015/The,Metric,Tide/2015_metric_tide.pdf>. Acesso em: 15 jun. 2017.
YANG, S.; XING, X.; WOLFRAM, D. Difference in the impact of open-access papers published by China and the USA. Scientometrics, New York, v. 115, p. 1017-1037, 2018.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Vildeane da Rocha Borba, Sônia Elisa Caregnato

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors will keep their copyright and grant the journal with the right of first publication, the work licensed under License Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0), which allows for the sharing of work and the recognition of authorship.
Authors can take on additional contracts separately for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal, such as publishing in an institutional repository, acknowledging its initial publication in this journal.
The articles are open access and free. In accordance with the license, you must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.