ºÝºÝߣshows by User: StefanieHaustein / http://www.slideshare.net/images/logo.gif ºÝºÝߣshows by User: StefanieHaustein / Tue, 24 Jul 2018 20:56:10 GMT ºÝºÝߣShare feed for ºÝºÝߣshows by User: StefanieHaustein Scholarly Twitter metrics: How, when and what does the Twittersphere tweet about science? /slideshow/scholarly-twitter-metrics-how-when-and-what-does-the-twittersphere-tweet-about-science-107355811/107355811 ebbt2018-180724205610
Invited talk at EBBC6, Rio de Janeiro (Brazil), 18 July 2018 http://www.ebbc.inf.br/]]>
Invited talk at EBBC6, Rio de Janeiro (Brazil), 18 July 2018 http://www.ebbc.inf.br/]]> Tue, 24 Jul 2018 20:56:10 GMT /slideshow/scholarly-twitter-metrics-how-when-and-what-does-the-twittersphere-tweet-about-science-107355811/107355811 StefanieHaustein@slideshare.net(StefanieHaustein) Scholarly Twitter metrics: How, when and what does the Twittersphere tweet about science? StefanieHaustein Invited talk at EBBC6, Rio de Janeiro (Brazil), 18 July 2018 http://www.ebbc.inf.br/ <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/ebbt2018-180724205610-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> Invited talk at EBBC6, Rio de Janeiro (Brazil), 18 July 2018 http://www.ebbc.inf.br/
Scholarly Twitter metrics: How, when and what does the Twittersphere tweet about science? from Stefanie Haustein
]]> 623 6 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/ebbt2018-180724205610-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 Haustein, S. (2017). Temporalité et publication savante : le cycle de vie des articles en ligne et sur les médias sociaux https://fr.slideshare.net/slideshow/haustein-s-2017-temporalit-et-publication-savante-le-cycle-de-vie-des-articles-en-ligne-et-sur-les-mdias-sociaux/75821410 hausteinacfas2017-170509161036
Haustein, S. (2017, May). Temporalité et publication savante : le cycle de vie des articles en ligne et sur les médias sociaux. Paper presented at the 85e Congrès de l’Acfas, Colloque 16 – Production et transmission des savoirs scientifiques à l’ère du numérique : acteurs, pratiques et outils, 9 May 2017, Montréal (Canada). http://www.acfas.ca/evenements/congres/programme/85/enjeux-recherche/16/c ]]>
Haustein, S. (2017, May). Temporalité et publication savante : le cycle de vie des articles en ligne et sur les médias sociaux. Paper presented at the 85e Congrès de l’Acfas, Colloque 16 – Production et transmission des savoirs scientifiques à l’ère du numérique : acteurs, pratiques et outils, 9 May 2017, Montréal (Canada). http://www.acfas.ca/evenements/congres/programme/85/enjeux-recherche/16/c ]]> Tue, 09 May 2017 16:10:36 GMT https://fr.slideshare.net/slideshow/haustein-s-2017-temporalit-et-publication-savante-le-cycle-de-vie-des-articles-en-ligne-et-sur-les-mdias-sociaux/75821410 StefanieHaustein@slideshare.net(StefanieHaustein) Haustein, S. (2017). Temporalité et publication savante : le cycle de vie des articles en ligne et sur les médias sociaux StefanieHaustein Haustein, S. (2017, May). Temporalité et publication savante : le cycle de vie des articles en ligne et sur les médias sociaux. Paper presented at the 85e Congrès de l’Acfas, Colloque 16 – Production et transmission des savoirs scientifiques à l’ère du numérique : acteurs, pratiques et outils, 9 May 2017, Montréal (Canada). http://www.acfas.ca/evenements/congres/programme/85/enjeux-recherche/16/c <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteinacfas2017-170509161036-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> Haustein, S. (2017, May). Temporalité et publication savante : le cycle de vie des articles en ligne et sur les médias sociaux. Paper presented at the 85e Congrès de l’Acfas, Colloque 16 – Production et transmission des savoirs scientifiques à l’ère du numérique : acteurs, pratiques et outils, 9 May 2017, Montréal (Canada). http://www.acfas.ca/evenements/congres/programme/85/enjeux-recherche/16/c
from Stefanie Haustein
]]> 652 39 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteinacfas2017-170509161036-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 Haustein, S. (2017). The evolution of scholarly communication and the reward system of science /slideshow/haustein-s-2017-the-evolution-of-scholarly-communication-and-the-reward-system-of-science/72450290 hausteinknowescape2017-170222091216
Haustein, S. (2017, February). The evolution of scholarly communication and the reward system of science. Fourth Annual KnoweScape Conference 2017, 22–24 February 2017, Sofia (Bulgaria). keynote http://knowescape.org/knowescape2017/ ]]>
Haustein, S. (2017, February). The evolution of scholarly communication and the reward system of science. Fourth Annual KnoweScape Conference 2017, 22–24 February 2017, Sofia (Bulgaria). keynote http://knowescape.org/knowescape2017/ ]]> Wed, 22 Feb 2017 09:12:15 GMT /slideshow/haustein-s-2017-the-evolution-of-scholarly-communication-and-the-reward-system-of-science/72450290 StefanieHaustein@slideshare.net(StefanieHaustein) Haustein, S. (2017). The evolution of scholarly communication and the reward system of science StefanieHaustein Haustein, S. (2017, February). The evolution of scholarly communication and the reward system of science. Fourth Annual KnoweScape Conference 2017, 22–24 February 2017, Sofia (Bulgaria). keynote http://knowescape.org/knowescape2017/ <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteinknowescape2017-170222091216-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> Haustein, S. (2017, February). The evolution of scholarly communication and the reward system of science. Fourth Annual KnoweScape Conference 2017, 22–24 February 2017, Sofia (Bulgaria). keynote http://knowescape.org/knowescape2017/
Haustein, S. (2017). The evolution of scholarly communication and the reward system of science from Stefanie Haustein
]]> 1487 9 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteinknowescape2017-170222091216-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 Haustein, S., Smith, E., Mongeon, P., Shu, F., & Larivière, V. (2016): Access to global health research. Prevalence and cost of open access /slideshow/haustein-s-smith-e-mongeon-p-shu-f-larivire-v-2016-access-to-global-health-research-prevalence-and-cost-of-open-access/71079083 hausteinsti-oaghr-170117002832
Conference presentation Haustein, S., Smith, E., Mongeon, P., Shu, F., & Larivière, V. (2016). Access to global health research. Prevalence and cost of gold and hybrid open access. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators (p. 410–418). Valencia, Spain.]]>
Conference presentation Haustein, S., Smith, E., Mongeon, P., Shu, F., & Larivière, V. (2016). Access to global health research. Prevalence and cost of gold and hybrid open access. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators (p. 410–418). Valencia, Spain.]]> Tue, 17 Jan 2017 00:28:32 GMT /slideshow/haustein-s-smith-e-mongeon-p-shu-f-larivire-v-2016-access-to-global-health-research-prevalence-and-cost-of-open-access/71079083 StefanieHaustein@slideshare.net(StefanieHaustein) Haustein, S., Smith, E., Mongeon, P., Shu, F., & Larivière, V. (2016): Access to global health research. Prevalence and cost of open access StefanieHaustein Conference presentation Haustein, S., Smith, E., Mongeon, P., Shu, F., & Larivière, V. (2016). Access to global health research. Prevalence and cost of gold and hybrid open access. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators (p. 410–418). Valencia, Spain. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteinsti-oaghr-170117002832-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> Conference presentation Haustein, S., Smith, E., Mongeon, P., Shu, F., &amp; Larivière, V. (2016). Access to global health research. Prevalence and cost of gold and hybrid open access. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators (p. 410–418). Valencia, Spain.
Haustein, S., Smith, E., Mongeon, P., Shu, F., & Larivi竪re, V. (2016): Access to global health research. Prevalence and cost of open access from Stefanie Haustein
]]> 712 4 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteinsti-oaghr-170117002832-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 Haustein, Paul-Hus, Sugimoto & Larivière (2016). Is the gender gap in science mirrored in altmetrics? /slideshow/haustein-paulhus-sugimoto-larivire-2016-is-the-gender-gap-in-science-mirrored-in-altmetrics/63987643 hausteinaltmetricsgender-160713125948
Presentation of Work in Progress (WiP) research at Social Media & Society, 13 July 2016 https://socialmediaandsociety.org http://sched.co/7G8u http://sched.co/7G8u]]>
Presentation of Work in Progress (WiP) research at Social Media & Society, 13 July 2016 https://socialmediaandsociety.org http://sched.co/7G8u http://sched.co/7G8u]]> Wed, 13 Jul 2016 12:59:47 GMT /slideshow/haustein-paulhus-sugimoto-larivire-2016-is-the-gender-gap-in-science-mirrored-in-altmetrics/63987643 StefanieHaustein@slideshare.net(StefanieHaustein) Haustein, Paul-Hus, Sugimoto & Larivière (2016). Is the gender gap in science mirrored in altmetrics? StefanieHaustein Presentation of Work in Progress (WiP) research at Social Media & Society, 13 July 2016 https://socialmediaandsociety.org http://sched.co/7G8u http://sched.co/7G8u <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteinaltmetricsgender-160713125948-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> Presentation of Work in Progress (WiP) research at Social Media &amp; Society, 13 July 2016 https://socialmediaandsociety.org http://sched.co/7G8u http://sched.co/7G8u
Haustein, Paul-Hus, Sugimoto & Larivi竪re (2016). Is the gender gap in science mirrored in altmetrics? from Stefanie Haustein
]]> 1469 4 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteinaltmetricsgender-160713125948-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 Haustein, S. (2016). Les « altmetrics » et les médias sociaux dans la communication savante https://fr.slideshare.net/StefanieHaustein/haustein-s-2016-les-altmetrics-et-les-mdias-sociaux-dans-la-communication-savante hausteinconferencemidi2016-uploaded-160324175120
Conférences-midi à l'EBSI, Université de Montréal, 24 mars 2016]]>
Conférences-midi à l'EBSI, Université de Montréal, 24 mars 2016]]> Thu, 24 Mar 2016 17:51:20 GMT https://fr.slideshare.net/StefanieHaustein/haustein-s-2016-les-altmetrics-et-les-mdias-sociaux-dans-la-communication-savante StefanieHaustein@slideshare.net(StefanieHaustein) Haustein, S. (2016). Les « altmetrics » et les médias sociaux dans la communication savante StefanieHaustein Conférences-midi à l'EBSI, Université de Montréal, 24 mars 2016 <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteinconferencemidi2016-uploaded-160324175120-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> Conférences-midi à l&#39;EBSI, Université de Montréal, 24 mars 2016
from Stefanie Haustein
]]> 907 7 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteinconferencemidi2016-uploaded-160324175120-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 Haustein, S. (2016). Analyzing, measuring and visualizing the success of interdisciplinarity. /slideshow/haustein-s-2016-analyzing-measuring-and-visualizing-the-success-of-interdisciplinarity/59849464 haustein3rdpostdocday2016-160321225512
Presentation at Third Annual Postdoctoral Research Day, Université de Montréal http://fesp.umontreal.ca/fileadmin/Documents/PDF/Programme3eJRSPD.pdf]]>
Presentation at Third Annual Postdoctoral Research Day, Université de Montréal http://fesp.umontreal.ca/fileadmin/Documents/PDF/Programme3eJRSPD.pdf]]> Mon, 21 Mar 2016 22:55:12 GMT /slideshow/haustein-s-2016-analyzing-measuring-and-visualizing-the-success-of-interdisciplinarity/59849464 StefanieHaustein@slideshare.net(StefanieHaustein) Haustein, S. (2016). Analyzing, measuring and visualizing the success of interdisciplinarity. StefanieHaustein Presentation at Third Annual Postdoctoral Research Day, Université de Montréal http://fesp.umontreal.ca/fileadmin/Documents/PDF/Programme3eJRSPD.pdf <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/haustein3rdpostdocday2016-160321225512-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> Presentation at Third Annual Postdoctoral Research Day, Université de Montréal http://fesp.umontreal.ca/fileadmin/Documents/PDF/Programme3eJRSPD.pdf
Haustein, S. (2016). Analyzing, measuring and visualizing the success of interdisciplinarity. from Stefanie Haustein
]]> 680 7 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/haustein3rdpostdocday2016-160321225512-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 Lés médias sociaux dans la communication et l'évaluation scientifique : résultats de recherche et conseils pour les chercheurs https://fr.slideshare.net/slideshow/ls-mdias-sociaux-dans-la-communication-et-lvaluation-scientifique-rsultats-de-recherche-et-conseils-pour-les-chercheurs/58208620 hausteincirst2016uploaded-160212211731
Les médias sociaux et leur introduction dans un contexte académique ont généré de nouvelles opportunités pour les chercheurs de diffuser leur recherche plus rapidement et à une audience plus grande. Twitter, Facebook, ainsi que les plateformes spécialisées comme ResearchGate et Academia.edu, offrent plusieurs possibilités aux chercheurs d’augmenter leur visibilité et celle de leur recherche. Ces plateformes constituent aussi certains défis pour les chercheurs : leur multiplication fait en sorte qu’ils peuvent s’y perdre et entraîner des pertes de temps. Dans certains cas extrêmes, des commentaires inappropriés émis par les chercheurs sur les médias sociaux ont même mené à des licenciements. Dans un contexte où l’évaluation de la recherche prend une place de plus en plus importante, les activités associées aux contenus savants partagés sur les médias sociaux ont été proposées par certains comme étant des indicateurs de l’impact de ces contenus. Ces indicateurs, appelés «altmetrics» incluent, par exemple, le nombre de tweets, de liens Facebook, de lecteurs sur Mendeley, de mentions dans les blogs, d’évaluations d’experts sur F1000, de vues sur figshare ainsi que de nombreux autres événements en ligne qui se réfèrent aux documents ou acteurs scientifiques. L’idée derrière les altmetrics était de rendre l’évaluation de la recherche plus englobante, d’aller au-delà du nombre de publications et de citations, afin de capturer l’impact social sur le grand public. Ce lien entre médias sociaux et impact social demeure toutefois à prouver. Cette formation fournira un aperçu des résultats de recherche récents sur les altmetrics et donnera quelques conseils sur l’utilisation professionnelle des médias sociaux dans un contexte académique.]]>
Les médias sociaux et leur introduction dans un contexte académique ont généré de nouvelles opportunités pour les chercheurs de diffuser leur recherche plus rapidement et à une audience plus grande. Twitter, Facebook, ainsi que les plateformes spécialisées comme ResearchGate et Academia.edu, offrent plusieurs possibilités aux chercheurs d’augmenter leur visibilité et celle de leur recherche. Ces plateformes constituent aussi certains défis pour les chercheurs : leur multiplication fait en sorte qu’ils peuvent s’y perdre et entraîner des pertes de temps. Dans certains cas extrêmes, des commentaires inappropriés émis par les chercheurs sur les médias sociaux ont même mené à des licenciements. Dans un contexte où l’évaluation de la recherche prend une place de plus en plus importante, les activités associées aux contenus savants partagés sur les médias sociaux ont été proposées par certains comme étant des indicateurs de l’impact de ces contenus. Ces indicateurs, appelés «altmetrics» incluent, par exemple, le nombre de tweets, de liens Facebook, de lecteurs sur Mendeley, de mentions dans les blogs, d’évaluations d’experts sur F1000, de vues sur figshare ainsi que de nombreux autres événements en ligne qui se réfèrent aux documents ou acteurs scientifiques. L’idée derrière les altmetrics était de rendre l’évaluation de la recherche plus englobante, d’aller au-delà du nombre de publications et de citations, afin de capturer l’impact social sur le grand public. Ce lien entre médias sociaux et impact social demeure toutefois à prouver. Cette formation fournira un aperçu des résultats de recherche récents sur les altmetrics et donnera quelques conseils sur l’utilisation professionnelle des médias sociaux dans un contexte académique.]]> Fri, 12 Feb 2016 21:17:31 GMT https://fr.slideshare.net/slideshow/ls-mdias-sociaux-dans-la-communication-et-lvaluation-scientifique-rsultats-de-recherche-et-conseils-pour-les-chercheurs/58208620 StefanieHaustein@slideshare.net(StefanieHaustein) Lés médias sociaux dans la communication et l'évaluation scientifique : résultats de recherche et conseils pour les chercheurs StefanieHaustein Les médias sociaux et leur introduction dans un contexte académique ont généré de nouvelles opportunités pour les chercheurs de diffuser leur recherche plus rapidement et à une audience plus grande. Twitter, Facebook, ainsi que les plateformes spécialisées comme ResearchGate et Academia.edu, offrent plusieurs possibilités aux chercheurs d’augmenter leur visibilité et celle de leur recherche. Ces plateformes constituent aussi certains défis pour les chercheurs : leur multiplication fait en sorte qu’ils peuvent s’y perdre et entraîner des pertes de temps. Dans certains cas extrêmes, des commentaires inappropriés émis par les chercheurs sur les médias sociaux ont même mené à des licenciements. Dans un contexte où l’évaluation de la recherche prend une place de plus en plus importante, les activités associées aux contenus savants partagés sur les médias sociaux ont été proposées par certains comme étant des indicateurs de l’impact de ces contenus. Ces indicateurs, appelés «altmetrics» incluent, par exemple, le nombre de tweets, de liens Facebook, de lecteurs sur Mendeley, de mentions dans les blogs, d’évaluations d’experts sur F1000, de vues sur figshare ainsi que de nombreux autres événements en ligne qui se réfèrent aux documents ou acteurs scientifiques. L’idée derrière les altmetrics était de rendre l’évaluation de la recherche plus englobante, d’aller au-delà du nombre de publications et de citations, afin de capturer l’impact social sur le grand public. Ce lien entre médias sociaux et impact social demeure toutefois à prouver. Cette formation fournira un aperçu des résultats de recherche récents sur les altmetrics et donnera quelques conseils sur l’utilisation professionnelle des médias sociaux dans un contexte académique. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteincirst2016uploaded-160212211731-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> Les médias sociaux et leur introduction dans un contexte académique ont généré de nouvelles opportunités pour les chercheurs de diffuser leur recherche plus rapidement et à une audience plus grande. Twitter, Facebook, ainsi que les plateformes spécialisées comme ResearchGate et Academia.edu, offrent plusieurs possibilités aux chercheurs d’augmenter leur visibilité et celle de leur recherche. Ces plateformes constituent aussi certains défis pour les chercheurs : leur multiplication fait en sorte qu’ils peuvent s’y perdre et entraîner des pertes de temps. Dans certains cas extrêmes, des commentaires inappropriés émis par les chercheurs sur les médias sociaux ont même mené à des licenciements. Dans un contexte où l’évaluation de la recherche prend une place de plus en plus importante, les activités associées aux contenus savants partagés sur les médias sociaux ont été proposées par certains comme étant des indicateurs de l’impact de ces contenus. Ces indicateurs, appelés «altmetrics» incluent, par exemple, le nombre de tweets, de liens Facebook, de lecteurs sur Mendeley, de mentions dans les blogs, d’évaluations d’experts sur F1000, de vues sur figshare ainsi que de nombreux autres événements en ligne qui se réfèrent aux documents ou acteurs scientifiques. L’idée derrière les altmetrics était de rendre l’évaluation de la recherche plus englobante, d’aller au-delà du nombre de publications et de citations, afin de capturer l’impact social sur le grand public. Ce lien entre médias sociaux et impact social demeure toutefois à prouver. Cette formation fournira un aperçu des résultats de recherche récents sur les altmetrics et donnera quelques conseils sur l’utilisation professionnelle des médias sociaux dans un contexte académique.
from Stefanie Haustein
]]> 2200 26 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteincirst2016uploaded-160212211731-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 Interpreting social media acts. The various meanings of altmetrics /StefanieHaustein/interpreting-social-media-acts-the-various-meanings-of-altmetrics hausteinasist-selfprespanel-151109153007-lva1-app6892
Haustein, S. (2015). "Interpreting social media acts. The various meanings of altmetrics" Presentation at #ASIST2015 #SIGMET15 panel "Self-Presentation in Academia Today: From Peer-Reviewed Publications to Social Media" https://www.asist.org/SIG/SIGMET/2015/11/09/panel2015/]]>
Haustein, S. (2015). "Interpreting social media acts. The various meanings of altmetrics" Presentation at #ASIST2015 #SIGMET15 panel "Self-Presentation in Academia Today: From Peer-Reviewed Publications to Social Media" https://www.asist.org/SIG/SIGMET/2015/11/09/panel2015/]]> Mon, 09 Nov 2015 15:30:07 GMT /StefanieHaustein/interpreting-social-media-acts-the-various-meanings-of-altmetrics StefanieHaustein@slideshare.net(StefanieHaustein) Interpreting social media acts. The various meanings of altmetrics StefanieHaustein Haustein, S. (2015). "Interpreting social media acts. The various meanings of altmetrics" Presentation at #ASIST2015 #SIGMET15 panel "Self-Presentation in Academia Today: From Peer-Reviewed Publications to Social Media" https://www.asist.org/SIG/SIGMET/2015/11/09/panel2015/ <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteinasist-selfprespanel-151109153007-lva1-app6892-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> Haustein, S. (2015). &quot;Interpreting social media acts. The various meanings of altmetrics&quot; Presentation at #ASIST2015 #SIGMET15 panel &quot;Self-Presentation in Academia Today: From Peer-Reviewed Publications to Social Media&quot; https://www.asist.org/SIG/SIGMET/2015/11/09/panel2015/
Interpreting social media acts. The various meanings of altmetrics from Stefanie Haustein
]]> 900 7 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteinasist-selfprespanel-151109153007-lva1-app6892-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 Identifying Twitter audiences: Who is tweeting about scientific papers? /slideshow/identifying-twitter-audiences-who-is-tweeting-about-scientific-papers/54860541 hausteincostassigmet2015-151107193000-lva1-app6892
Haustein, S. & Costas, R. (2015). Identifying Twitter audiences: Who is tweeting about scientific papers? Presentation at METRICS2015 ASIS&T SIG/MET Workshop https://www.asist.org/SIG/SIGMET/]]>
Haustein, S. & Costas, R. (2015). Identifying Twitter audiences: Who is tweeting about scientific papers? Presentation at METRICS2015 ASIS&T SIG/MET Workshop https://www.asist.org/SIG/SIGMET/]]> Sat, 07 Nov 2015 19:30:00 GMT /slideshow/identifying-twitter-audiences-who-is-tweeting-about-scientific-papers/54860541 StefanieHaustein@slideshare.net(StefanieHaustein) Identifying Twitter audiences: Who is tweeting about scientific papers? StefanieHaustein Haustein, S. & Costas, R. (2015). Identifying Twitter audiences: Who is tweeting about scientific papers? Presentation at METRICS2015 ASIS&T SIG/MET Workshop https://www.asist.org/SIG/SIGMET/ <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteincostassigmet2015-151107193000-lva1-app6892-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> Haustein, S. &amp; Costas, R. (2015). Identifying Twitter audiences: Who is tweeting about scientific papers? Presentation at METRICS2015 ASIS&amp;T SIG/MET Workshop https://www.asist.org/SIG/SIGMET/
Identifying Twitter audiences: Who is tweeting about scientific papers? from Stefanie Haustein
]]> 2147 8 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteincostassigmet2015-151107193000-lva1-app6892-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 Rodrigo Costas & Stefanie Haustein: Citation theories and their application to altmetrics /slideshow/rodrigo-costas-stefanie-haustein-citation-theories-and-their-application-to-altmetrics/53647326 2amcostashaustein-final-151007132902-lva1-app6891
Presentation at #2AMconf Rodrigo Costas, (CWTS-Leiden University, the Netherlands) & Stefanie Haustein (Université de Montréal, Canada) Related paper: http://arxiv.org/abs/1502.05701]]>
Presentation at #2AMconf Rodrigo Costas, (CWTS-Leiden University, the Netherlands) & Stefanie Haustein (Université de Montréal, Canada) Related paper: http://arxiv.org/abs/1502.05701]]> Wed, 07 Oct 2015 13:29:02 GMT /slideshow/rodrigo-costas-stefanie-haustein-citation-theories-and-their-application-to-altmetrics/53647326 StefanieHaustein@slideshare.net(StefanieHaustein) Rodrigo Costas & Stefanie Haustein: Citation theories and their application to altmetrics StefanieHaustein Presentation at #2AMconf Rodrigo Costas, (CWTS-Leiden University, the Netherlands) & Stefanie Haustein (Université de Montréal, Canada) Related paper: http://arxiv.org/abs/1502.05701 <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/2amcostashaustein-final-151007132902-lva1-app6891-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> Presentation at #2AMconf Rodrigo Costas, (CWTS-Leiden University, the Netherlands) &amp; Stefanie Haustein (Université de Montréal, Canada) Related paper: http://arxiv.org/abs/1502.05701
Rodrigo Costas & Stefanie Haustein: Citation theories and their application to altmetrics from Stefanie Haustein
]]> 1369 6 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/2amcostashaustein-final-151007132902-lva1-app6891-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 Communities of attention' around journal papers: Who is tweeting about scientific publications? /StefanieHaustein/communities-of-attention-around-journal-papers-who-is-tweeting-about-scientific-publications hausteinsms2015-150728182459-lva1-app6891
Work-in-progress presentation at Social Media & Society 2015 Haustein, S., Bowman, T.D. & Costas, R. (2015). Communities of attention' around journal papers: Who is tweeting about scientific publications? https://socialmediaandsociety.com/ http://smsociety15.sched.org/event/91e44f025248a9f40e64302c12ce567d/edit#.VbfKfBNViko Background: ‘Altmetrics’ have been introduced as a way to capture scientific output and impact beyond papers and citations based on traces on various social media platforms (Priem, Taraborelli, Groth, & Neylon, 2010), of which Twitter is believed to have a particular potential to reflect societal impact of research. The analysis and application of various altmetrics such as tweets to scientific papers, however, still lack adequate interpretative frameworks mainly because the processes behind the metrics are not yet fully understood. Currently each tweet is counted equally on platforms such as Altmetric.com or ImpactStory and studies tend to ignore user type and tweet content, although tweets have been shown to range from serious discussions to humour and self-promotion to automated mentions (Haustein et al., 2015). Objective: Communities of attention around scientific publications on Twitter are identified based on engagement and exposure of users. Engagement is measured as the degree to which the tweet text differs from the title of the tweeted paper. Exposure refers to the potential audience of the tweet as measured by the number of the user’s followers. Methods: Publications from 2012 covered by Web of Science were matched to tweets (until June 2014, excluding retweets) recorded by Altmetric.com via DOI resulting in 660,149 tweets, 237,222 tweeted papers, and 125,083 Twitter users. Engagement was calculated based on the dissimilarity between the tweet text (excluding user names and URLs) and the title of the tweeted document. User data (including the number of followers representing exposure) was collected from Altmetric.com and the Twitter API. Four user categories were defined, classifying users into four quadrants A, B, C and D according to engagement and exposure values above and below the median of the whole dataset (Figure 1). Statistics based on the tweeting behaviour of users were calculated for each of the categories. The connections between 708 users with more than 100 publications based on co-mentions of the same papers were visualized in a network graph in Figure 1.   Results: Users in the four categories differ according to tweeting behavior (Figure 1). Users in A have the highest mean tweets per day (based on all tweets) and those in D tweet more about scientific papers (typical for bots identified by Haustein et al. (2015)), while users in A and B discuss publications with slightly higher relative citation rates. ]]>
Work-in-progress presentation at Social Media & Society 2015 Haustein, S., Bowman, T.D. & Costas, R. (2015). Communities of attention' around journal papers: Who is tweeting about scientific publications? https://socialmediaandsociety.com/ http://smsociety15.sched.org/event/91e44f025248a9f40e64302c12ce567d/edit#.VbfKfBNViko Background: ‘Altmetrics’ have been introduced as a way to capture scientific output and impact beyond papers and citations based on traces on various social media platforms (Priem, Taraborelli, Groth, & Neylon, 2010), of which Twitter is believed to have a particular potential to reflect societal impact of research. The analysis and application of various altmetrics such as tweets to scientific papers, however, still lack adequate interpretative frameworks mainly because the processes behind the metrics are not yet fully understood. Currently each tweet is counted equally on platforms such as Altmetric.com or ImpactStory and studies tend to ignore user type and tweet content, although tweets have been shown to range from serious discussions to humour and self-promotion to automated mentions (Haustein et al., 2015). Objective: Communities of attention around scientific publications on Twitter are identified based on engagement and exposure of users. Engagement is measured as the degree to which the tweet text differs from the title of the tweeted paper. Exposure refers to the potential audience of the tweet as measured by the number of the user’s followers. Methods: Publications from 2012 covered by Web of Science were matched to tweets (until June 2014, excluding retweets) recorded by Altmetric.com via DOI resulting in 660,149 tweets, 237,222 tweeted papers, and 125,083 Twitter users. Engagement was calculated based on the dissimilarity between the tweet text (excluding user names and URLs) and the title of the tweeted document. User data (including the number of followers representing exposure) was collected from Altmetric.com and the Twitter API. Four user categories were defined, classifying users into four quadrants A, B, C and D according to engagement and exposure values above and below the median of the whole dataset (Figure 1). Statistics based on the tweeting behaviour of users were calculated for each of the categories. The connections between 708 users with more than 100 publications based on co-mentions of the same papers were visualized in a network graph in Figure 1.   Results: Users in the four categories differ according to tweeting behavior (Figure 1). Users in A have the highest mean tweets per day (based on all tweets) and those in D tweet more about scientific papers (typical for bots identified by Haustein et al. (2015)), while users in A and B discuss publications with slightly higher relative citation rates. ]]> Tue, 28 Jul 2015 18:24:59 GMT /StefanieHaustein/communities-of-attention-around-journal-papers-who-is-tweeting-about-scientific-publications StefanieHaustein@slideshare.net(StefanieHaustein) Communities of attention' around journal papers: Who is tweeting about scientific publications? StefanieHaustein Work-in-progress presentation at Social Media & Society 2015 Haustein, S., Bowman, T.D. & Costas, R. (2015). Communities of attention' around journal papers: Who is tweeting about scientific publications? https://socialmediaandsociety.com/ http://smsociety15.sched.org/event/91e44f025248a9f40e64302c12ce567d/edit#.VbfKfBNViko Background: ‘Altmetrics’ have been introduced as a way to capture scientific output and impact beyond papers and citations based on traces on various social media platforms (Priem, Taraborelli, Groth, & Neylon, 2010), of which Twitter is believed to have a particular potential to reflect societal impact of research. The analysis and application of various altmetrics such as tweets to scientific papers, however, still lack adequate interpretative frameworks mainly because the processes behind the metrics are not yet fully understood. Currently each tweet is counted equally on platforms such as Altmetric.com or ImpactStory and studies tend to ignore user type and tweet content, although tweets have been shown to range from serious discussions to humour and self-promotion to automated mentions (Haustein et al., 2015). Objective: Communities of attention around scientific publications on Twitter are identified based on engagement and exposure of users. Engagement is measured as the degree to which the tweet text differs from the title of the tweeted paper. Exposure refers to the potential audience of the tweet as measured by the number of the user’s followers. Methods: Publications from 2012 covered by Web of Science were matched to tweets (until June 2014, excluding retweets) recorded by Altmetric.com via DOI resulting in 660,149 tweets, 237,222 tweeted papers, and 125,083 Twitter users. Engagement was calculated based on the dissimilarity between the tweet text (excluding user names and URLs) and the title of the tweeted document. User data (including the number of followers representing exposure) was collected from Altmetric.com and the Twitter API. Four user categories were defined, classifying users into four quadrants A, B, C and D according to engagement and exposure values above and below the median of the whole dataset (Figure 1). Statistics based on the tweeting behaviour of users were calculated for each of the categories. The connections between 708 users with more than 100 publications based on co-mentions of the same papers were visualized in a network graph in Figure 1.   Results: Users in the four categories differ according to tweeting behavior (Figure 1). Users in A have the highest mean tweets per day (based on all tweets) and those in D tweet more about scientific papers (typical for bots identified by Haustein et al. (2015)), while users in A and B discuss publications with slightly higher relative citation rates. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteinsms2015-150728182459-lva1-app6891-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> Work-in-progress presentation at Social Media &amp; Society 2015 Haustein, S., Bowman, T.D. &amp; Costas, R. (2015). Communities of attention&#39; around journal papers: Who is tweeting about scientific publications? https://socialmediaandsociety.com/ http://smsociety15.sched.org/event/91e44f025248a9f40e64302c12ce567d/edit#.VbfKfBNViko Background: ‘Altmetrics’ have been introduced as a way to capture scientific output and impact beyond papers and citations based on traces on various social media platforms (Priem, Taraborelli, Groth, &amp; Neylon, 2010), of which Twitter is believed to have a particular potential to reflect societal impact of research. The analysis and application of various altmetrics such as tweets to scientific papers, however, still lack adequate interpretative frameworks mainly because the processes behind the metrics are not yet fully understood. Currently each tweet is counted equally on platforms such as Altmetric.com or ImpactStory and studies tend to ignore user type and tweet content, although tweets have been shown to range from serious discussions to humour and self-promotion to automated mentions (Haustein et al., 2015). Objective: Communities of attention around scientific publications on Twitter are identified based on engagement and exposure of users. Engagement is measured as the degree to which the tweet text differs from the title of the tweeted paper. Exposure refers to the potential audience of the tweet as measured by the number of the user’s followers. Methods: Publications from 2012 covered by Web of Science were matched to tweets (until June 2014, excluding retweets) recorded by Altmetric.com via DOI resulting in 660,149 tweets, 237,222 tweeted papers, and 125,083 Twitter users. Engagement was calculated based on the dissimilarity between the tweet text (excluding user names and URLs) and the title of the tweeted document. User data (including the number of followers representing exposure) was collected from Altmetric.com and the Twitter API. Four user categories were defined, classifying users into four quadrants A, B, C and D according to engagement and exposure values above and below the median of the whole dataset (Figure 1). Statistics based on the tweeting behaviour of users were calculated for each of the categories. The connections between 708 users with more than 100 publications based on co-mentions of the same papers were visualized in a network graph in Figure 1.   Results: Users in the four categories differ according to tweeting behavior (Figure 1). Users in A have the highest mean tweets per day (based on all tweets) and those in D tweet more about scientific papers (typical for bots identified by Haustein et al. (2015)), while users in A and B discuss publications with slightly higher relative citation rates.
Communities of attention' around journal papers: Who is tweeting about scientific publications? from Stefanie Haustein
]]> 1318 8 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteinsms2015-150728182459-lva1-app6891-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 When is an article actually published? An analysis of online availability, publication, and indexation dates /slideshow/when-is-an-article-actually-published-an-analysis-of-online-availability-publication-and-indexation-dates/50568136 hausteinbowmancostasissi2015-150715192436-lva1-app6891
Presentation at ISSI2015 Haustein, S., Bowman, T.D. & Costas, R. (2015). When is an article actually published? An analysis of online availability, publication, and indexation dates Abstract. With the acceleration of scholarly communication in the digital era, the publication year is no longer a sufficient level of time aggregation for bibliometric and social media indicators. Papers are increasingly cited before they have been officially published in a journal issue and mentioned on Twitter within days of online availability. In order to find a suitable proxy for the day of online publication allowing for the computation of more accurate benchmarks and fine-grained citation and social media event windows, various dates are compared for a set of 58,896 papers published by Nature Publishing Group, PLOS, Springer and Wiley-Blackwell in 2012. Dates include the online date provided by the publishers, the month of the journal issue, the Web of Science indexing date, the date of the first tweet mentioning the paper as well as the Altmetric.com publication and first-seen dates. Comparing these dates, the analysis reveals that large differences exist between publishers, leading to the conclusion that more transparency and standardization is needed in the reporting of publication dates. The date on which the fixed journal article (Version of Record) is first made available on the publisher's website is proposed as a consistent definition of the online date.]]>
Presentation at ISSI2015 Haustein, S., Bowman, T.D. & Costas, R. (2015). When is an article actually published? An analysis of online availability, publication, and indexation dates Abstract. With the acceleration of scholarly communication in the digital era, the publication year is no longer a sufficient level of time aggregation for bibliometric and social media indicators. Papers are increasingly cited before they have been officially published in a journal issue and mentioned on Twitter within days of online availability. In order to find a suitable proxy for the day of online publication allowing for the computation of more accurate benchmarks and fine-grained citation and social media event windows, various dates are compared for a set of 58,896 papers published by Nature Publishing Group, PLOS, Springer and Wiley-Blackwell in 2012. Dates include the online date provided by the publishers, the month of the journal issue, the Web of Science indexing date, the date of the first tweet mentioning the paper as well as the Altmetric.com publication and first-seen dates. Comparing these dates, the analysis reveals that large differences exist between publishers, leading to the conclusion that more transparency and standardization is needed in the reporting of publication dates. The date on which the fixed journal article (Version of Record) is first made available on the publisher's website is proposed as a consistent definition of the online date.]]> Wed, 15 Jul 2015 19:24:35 GMT /slideshow/when-is-an-article-actually-published-an-analysis-of-online-availability-publication-and-indexation-dates/50568136 StefanieHaustein@slideshare.net(StefanieHaustein) When is an article actually published? An analysis of online availability, publication, and indexation dates StefanieHaustein Presentation at ISSI2015 Haustein, S., Bowman, T.D. & Costas, R. (2015). When is an article actually published? An analysis of online availability, publication, and indexation dates Abstract. With the acceleration of scholarly communication in the digital era, the publication year is no longer a sufficient level of time aggregation for bibliometric and social media indicators. Papers are increasingly cited before they have been officially published in a journal issue and mentioned on Twitter within days of online availability. In order to find a suitable proxy for the day of online publication allowing for the computation of more accurate benchmarks and fine-grained citation and social media event windows, various dates are compared for a set of 58,896 papers published by Nature Publishing Group, PLOS, Springer and Wiley-Blackwell in 2012. Dates include the online date provided by the publishers, the month of the journal issue, the Web of Science indexing date, the date of the first tweet mentioning the paper as well as the Altmetric.com publication and first-seen dates. Comparing these dates, the analysis reveals that large differences exist between publishers, leading to the conclusion that more transparency and standardization is needed in the reporting of publication dates. The date on which the fixed journal article (Version of Record) is first made available on the publisher's website is proposed as a consistent definition of the online date. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteinbowmancostasissi2015-150715192436-lva1-app6891-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> Presentation at ISSI2015 Haustein, S., Bowman, T.D. &amp; Costas, R. (2015). When is an article actually published? An analysis of online availability, publication, and indexation dates Abstract. With the acceleration of scholarly communication in the digital era, the publication year is no longer a sufficient level of time aggregation for bibliometric and social media indicators. Papers are increasingly cited before they have been officially published in a journal issue and mentioned on Twitter within days of online availability. In order to find a suitable proxy for the day of online publication allowing for the computation of more accurate benchmarks and fine-grained citation and social media event windows, various dates are compared for a set of 58,896 papers published by Nature Publishing Group, PLOS, Springer and Wiley-Blackwell in 2012. Dates include the online date provided by the publishers, the month of the journal issue, the Web of Science indexing date, the date of the first tweet mentioning the paper as well as the Altmetric.com publication and first-seen dates. Comparing these dates, the analysis reveals that large differences exist between publishers, leading to the conclusion that more transparency and standardization is needed in the reporting of publication dates. The date on which the fixed journal article (Version of Record) is first made available on the publisher&#39;s website is proposed as a consistent definition of the online date.
When is an article actually published? An analysis of online availability, publication, and indexation dates from Stefanie Haustein
]]> 2349 10 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteinbowmancostasissi2015-150715192436-lva1-app6891-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 Altmetrics: opportunités et défis associés à l’usage des médias sociaux dans la communication savante https://fr.slideshare.net/slideshow/altmetrics-opportunits-et-dfis-associs-lusage-des-mdias-sociaux-dans-la-communication-savante/48586507 hausteinacfas-f-150526005148-lva1-app6892
350 ans après sa création, la revue savante demeure le principal moyen de diffusion des connaissances savantes, et les citations reçues par les articles constituent la mesure principale de leur impact scientifique. Les médias sociaux et leur introduction dans un contexte académique ont généré de nouvelles opportunités pour capturer l’impact sur un public potentiellement plus large—pas simplement les auteurs qui citent—et plus rapide, compte tenu de la vitesse avec laquelle l’activité dans les médias sociaux peut être mesurée. Le nombre de tweets, de publications Facebook, de lecteurs sur Mendeley, d’évaluations d’experts sur F1000, et de vues sur ºÝºÝߣshare sont des exemples d’indicateurs considérés comme des «altmetrics». De nombreuses revues fournissent également les «altmetrics» associées à chacun de leurs articles, certains chercheurs les présentent sur leurs CVs, et certains organismes subventionnaires commencent à envisager leur utilisation. Même s’il est devenu évident que ces nouvelles mesures sont très hétérogènes et ne peuvent remplacer les citations, on sait encore peu de choses sur leur signification et le type d’impact qu’ils reflètent. Cette communication fera un tour d’horizon des opportunités et des défis associés à l’utilisation de médias sociaux dans la communication savante.]]>
350 ans après sa création, la revue savante demeure le principal moyen de diffusion des connaissances savantes, et les citations reçues par les articles constituent la mesure principale de leur impact scientifique. Les médias sociaux et leur introduction dans un contexte académique ont généré de nouvelles opportunités pour capturer l’impact sur un public potentiellement plus large—pas simplement les auteurs qui citent—et plus rapide, compte tenu de la vitesse avec laquelle l’activité dans les médias sociaux peut être mesurée. Le nombre de tweets, de publications Facebook, de lecteurs sur Mendeley, d’évaluations d’experts sur F1000, et de vues sur ºÝºÝߣshare sont des exemples d’indicateurs considérés comme des «altmetrics». De nombreuses revues fournissent également les «altmetrics» associées à chacun de leurs articles, certains chercheurs les présentent sur leurs CVs, et certains organismes subventionnaires commencent à envisager leur utilisation. Même s’il est devenu évident que ces nouvelles mesures sont très hétérogènes et ne peuvent remplacer les citations, on sait encore peu de choses sur leur signification et le type d’impact qu’ils reflètent. Cette communication fera un tour d’horizon des opportunités et des défis associés à l’utilisation de médias sociaux dans la communication savante.]]> Tue, 26 May 2015 00:51:48 GMT https://fr.slideshare.net/slideshow/altmetrics-opportunits-et-dfis-associs-lusage-des-mdias-sociaux-dans-la-communication-savante/48586507 StefanieHaustein@slideshare.net(StefanieHaustein) Altmetrics: opportunités et défis associés à l’usage des médias sociaux dans la communication savante StefanieHaustein 350 ans après sa création, la revue savante demeure le principal moyen de diffusion des connaissances savantes, et les citations reçues par les articles constituent la mesure principale de leur impact scientifique. Les médias sociaux et leur introduction dans un contexte académique ont généré de nouvelles opportunités pour capturer l’impact sur un public potentiellement plus large—pas simplement les auteurs qui citent—et plus rapide, compte tenu de la vitesse avec laquelle l’activité dans les médias sociaux peut être mesurée. Le nombre de tweets, de publications Facebook, de lecteurs sur Mendeley, d’évaluations d’experts sur F1000, et de vues sur ºÝºÝߣshare sont des exemples d’indicateurs considérés comme des «altmetrics». De nombreuses revues fournissent également les «altmetrics» associées à chacun de leurs articles, certains chercheurs les présentent sur leurs CVs, et certains organismes subventionnaires commencent à envisager leur utilisation. Même s’il est devenu évident que ces nouvelles mesures sont très hétérogènes et ne peuvent remplacer les citations, on sait encore peu de choses sur leur signification et le type d’impact qu’ils reflètent. Cette communication fera un tour d’horizon des opportunités et des défis associés à l’utilisation de médias sociaux dans la communication savante. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteinacfas-f-150526005148-lva1-app6892-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> 350 ans après sa création, la revue savante demeure le principal moyen de diffusion des connaissances savantes, et les citations reçues par les articles constituent la mesure principale de leur impact scientifique. Les médias sociaux et leur introduction dans un contexte académique ont généré de nouvelles opportunités pour capturer l’impact sur un public potentiellement plus large—pas simplement les auteurs qui citent—et plus rapide, compte tenu de la vitesse avec laquelle l’activité dans les médias sociaux peut être mesurée. Le nombre de tweets, de publications Facebook, de lecteurs sur Mendeley, d’évaluations d’experts sur F1000, et de vues sur ºÝºÝߣshare sont des exemples d’indicateurs considérés comme des «altmetrics». De nombreuses revues fournissent également les «altmetrics» associées à chacun de leurs articles, certains chercheurs les présentent sur leurs CVs, et certains organismes subventionnaires commencent à envisager leur utilisation. Même s’il est devenu évident que ces nouvelles mesures sont très hétérogènes et ne peuvent remplacer les citations, on sait encore peu de choses sur leur signification et le type d’impact qu’ils reflètent. Cette communication fera un tour d’horizon des opportunités et des défis associés à l’utilisation de médias sociaux dans la communication savante.
from Stefanie Haustein
]]> 2724 3 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteinacfas-f-150526005148-lva1-app6892-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 Scientific Interactions and Research Evaluation: From Bibliometrics to Altmetrics - Keynote ISI2015 /slideshow/haustein-isi2015-keynotereducedsize/48432902 hausteinisi2015-keynote-reducedsize-150521123537-lva1-app6892
Haustein, S. (2015). Scientific Interactions and Research Evaluation: From Bibliometrics to Altmetrics Keynote at ISI2015 in Zadar, Croatia http://isi2015.de/?session=keynote-c-i Abstract. Since its creation 350 years ago, the scientific peer-reviewed journal has become the central and most important form of scholarly communication in the natural sciences and medicine. Although the digital revolution has facilitated and accelerated the publishing process by moving from print to online, it has not changed the scientific journal and scholarly communication as such. Today publications and citations in peer-reviewed journals are considered as indicators of scientific productivity and impact and used and misused in research evaluation. As scholarly communication is becoming more open and diverse and manuscripts, data, presentations and code are shared online, the altmetrics and open science movement demand the adaption of evaluation practices. Parallels are drawn between the early days of bibliometrics and current altmetrics research highlighting possibilities and limitations of various metrics and warning against adverse effects.]]>
Haustein, S. (2015). Scientific Interactions and Research Evaluation: From Bibliometrics to Altmetrics Keynote at ISI2015 in Zadar, Croatia http://isi2015.de/?session=keynote-c-i Abstract. Since its creation 350 years ago, the scientific peer-reviewed journal has become the central and most important form of scholarly communication in the natural sciences and medicine. Although the digital revolution has facilitated and accelerated the publishing process by moving from print to online, it has not changed the scientific journal and scholarly communication as such. Today publications and citations in peer-reviewed journals are considered as indicators of scientific productivity and impact and used and misused in research evaluation. As scholarly communication is becoming more open and diverse and manuscripts, data, presentations and code are shared online, the altmetrics and open science movement demand the adaption of evaluation practices. Parallels are drawn between the early days of bibliometrics and current altmetrics research highlighting possibilities and limitations of various metrics and warning against adverse effects.]]> Thu, 21 May 2015 12:35:37 GMT /slideshow/haustein-isi2015-keynotereducedsize/48432902 StefanieHaustein@slideshare.net(StefanieHaustein) Scientific Interactions and Research Evaluation: From Bibliometrics to Altmetrics - Keynote ISI2015 StefanieHaustein Haustein, S. (2015). Scientific Interactions and Research Evaluation: From Bibliometrics to Altmetrics Keynote at ISI2015 in Zadar, Croatia http://isi2015.de/?session=keynote-c-i Abstract. Since its creation 350 years ago, the scientific peer-reviewed journal has become the central and most important form of scholarly communication in the natural sciences and medicine. Although the digital revolution has facilitated and accelerated the publishing process by moving from print to online, it has not changed the scientific journal and scholarly communication as such. Today publications and citations in peer-reviewed journals are considered as indicators of scientific productivity and impact and used and misused in research evaluation. As scholarly communication is becoming more open and diverse and manuscripts, data, presentations and code are shared online, the altmetrics and open science movement demand the adaption of evaluation practices. Parallels are drawn between the early days of bibliometrics and current altmetrics research highlighting possibilities and limitations of various metrics and warning against adverse effects. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteinisi2015-keynote-reducedsize-150521123537-lva1-app6892-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> Haustein, S. (2015). Scientific Interactions and Research Evaluation: From Bibliometrics to Altmetrics Keynote at ISI2015 in Zadar, Croatia http://isi2015.de/?session=keynote-c-i Abstract. Since its creation 350 years ago, the scientific peer-reviewed journal has become the central and most important form of scholarly communication in the natural sciences and medicine. Although the digital revolution has facilitated and accelerated the publishing process by moving from print to online, it has not changed the scientific journal and scholarly communication as such. Today publications and citations in peer-reviewed journals are considered as indicators of scientific productivity and impact and used and misused in research evaluation. As scholarly communication is becoming more open and diverse and manuscripts, data, presentations and code are shared online, the altmetrics and open science movement demand the adaption of evaluation practices. Parallels are drawn between the early days of bibliometrics and current altmetrics research highlighting possibilities and limitations of various metrics and warning against adverse effects.
Scientific Interactions and Research Evaluation: From Bibliometrics to Altmetrics - Keynote ISI2015 from Stefanie Haustein
]]> 3699 6 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteinisi2015-keynote-reducedsize-150521123537-lva1-app6892-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 Scholarly communication�and evaluation:� from bibliometrics to altmetrics /slideshow/haustein-coar-sparcapril2015/47025926 hausteincoar-sparc-april2015-150415082126-conversion-gate01
presentation at COAR-SPARC Conference 2015, Porto, Portugal, 16 April 2015 Session 4: Assessing Value Chair: Lars Björnshauge https://www.coar-repositories.org/community/events/annual-meeting-2015/programme/]]>
presentation at COAR-SPARC Conference 2015, Porto, Portugal, 16 April 2015 Session 4: Assessing Value Chair: Lars Björnshauge https://www.coar-repositories.org/community/events/annual-meeting-2015/programme/]]> Wed, 15 Apr 2015 08:21:26 GMT /slideshow/haustein-coar-sparcapril2015/47025926 StefanieHaustein@slideshare.net(StefanieHaustein) Scholarly communication�and evaluation:� from bibliometrics to altmetrics StefanieHaustein presentation at COAR-SPARC Conference 2015, Porto, Portugal, 16 April 2015 Session 4: Assessing Value Chair: Lars Björnshauge https://www.coar-repositories.org/community/events/annual-meeting-2015/programme/ <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteincoar-sparc-april2015-150415082126-conversion-gate01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> presentation at COAR-SPARC Conference 2015, Porto, Portugal, 16 April 2015 Session 4: Assessing Value Chair: Lars Björnshauge https://www.coar-repositories.org/community/events/annual-meeting-2015/programme/
Scholarly communication and evaluation: from bibliometrics to altmetrics from Stefanie Haustein
]]> 4920 8 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteincoar-sparc-april2015-150415082126-conversion-gate01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 Mendeley as a Source of �Readership by Students and Postdocs?�� Evaluating Article Usage by Academic Status /slideshow/haustein-iatul/40775848 hausteiniatul-141027111549-conversion-gate02
Stefanie Haustein & Vincent Larivière (2014). Mendeley as a Source of Readership by Students and Postdocs? Evaluating Article Usage by Academic Status. Presentation at IATUL 2014. http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2033&context=iatul]]>
Stefanie Haustein & Vincent Larivière (2014). Mendeley as a Source of Readership by Students and Postdocs? Evaluating Article Usage by Academic Status. Presentation at IATUL 2014. http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2033&context=iatul]]> Mon, 27 Oct 2014 11:15:49 GMT /slideshow/haustein-iatul/40775848 StefanieHaustein@slideshare.net(StefanieHaustein) Mendeley as a Source of �Readership by Students and Postdocs?�� Evaluating Article Usage by Academic Status StefanieHaustein Stefanie Haustein & Vincent Larivière (2014). Mendeley as a Source of �Readership by Students and Postdocs?�� Evaluating Article Usage by Academic Status. Presentation at IATUL 2014. http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2033&context=iatul <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteiniatul-141027111549-conversion-gate02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> Stefanie Haustein &amp; Vincent Larivière (2014). Mendeley as a Source of �Readership by Students and Postdocs?�� Evaluating Article Usage by Academic Status. Presentation at IATUL 2014. http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2033&amp;context=iatul
Mendeley as a Source of Readership by Students and Postdocs? Evaluating Article Usage by Academic Status from Stefanie Haustein
]]> 841 5 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteiniatul-141027111549-conversion-gate02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 Automated arXiv feeds on Twitter:�On the role of bots in scholarly communication /slideshow/haustein-etal-nordicworkshopbots/39521505 hausteinetal-nordicworkshop-bots-140925084953-phpapp01
Stefanie Haustein, Kim Holmberg, Timothy D. Bowman, Andrew Tsou, Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Vincent Larivière (2014). Automated arXiv feeds on Twitter: On the role of bots in scholarly communication Presentation at 19th Nordic Workshop on Bibliometrics and Research Policy, Reykjavik, 25. September 2014 http://www.rannis.is/bibliometrics/workshop-programme/]]>
Stefanie Haustein, Kim Holmberg, Timothy D. Bowman, Andrew Tsou, Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Vincent Larivière (2014). Automated arXiv feeds on Twitter: On the role of bots in scholarly communication Presentation at 19th Nordic Workshop on Bibliometrics and Research Policy, Reykjavik, 25. September 2014 http://www.rannis.is/bibliometrics/workshop-programme/]]> Thu, 25 Sep 2014 08:49:53 GMT /slideshow/haustein-etal-nordicworkshopbots/39521505 StefanieHaustein@slideshare.net(StefanieHaustein) Automated arXiv feeds on Twitter:�On the role of bots in scholarly communication StefanieHaustein Stefanie Haustein, Kim Holmberg, Timothy D. Bowman, Andrew Tsou, Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Vincent Larivière (2014). Automated arXiv feeds on Twitter: On the role of bots in scholarly communication Presentation at 19th Nordic Workshop on Bibliometrics and Research Policy, Reykjavik, 25. September 2014 http://www.rannis.is/bibliometrics/workshop-programme/ <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteinetal-nordicworkshop-bots-140925084953-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> Stefanie Haustein, Kim Holmberg, Timothy D. Bowman, Andrew Tsou, Cassidy R. Sugimoto &amp; Vincent Larivière (2014). Automated arXiv feeds on Twitter: On the role of bots in scholarly communication Presentation at 19th Nordic Workshop on Bibliometrics and Research Policy, Reykjavik, 25. September 2014 http://www.rannis.is/bibliometrics/workshop-programme/
Automated arXiv feeds on Twitter: On the role of bots in scholarly communication from Stefanie Haustein
]]> 1717 4 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteinetal-nordicworkshop-bots-140925084953-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 The heterogeneity of social media metrics and its effects on statistics /StefanieHaustein/costas-hausteinlariviere-nordicworkshop costashausteinlarivierenordicworkshop-140925071805-phpapp02
Rodrigo Costas, Stefanie Haustein & Vincent Larivière (2014). The heterogeneity of social media metrics and its effects on statistics. Presentation at 19th Nordic Workshop on Bibliometrics and Research Policy, Reykjavik, 25. September 2014 http://www.rannis.is/bibliometrics/workshop-programme/]]>
Rodrigo Costas, Stefanie Haustein & Vincent Larivière (2014). The heterogeneity of social media metrics and its effects on statistics. Presentation at 19th Nordic Workshop on Bibliometrics and Research Policy, Reykjavik, 25. September 2014 http://www.rannis.is/bibliometrics/workshop-programme/]]> Thu, 25 Sep 2014 07:18:05 GMT /StefanieHaustein/costas-hausteinlariviere-nordicworkshop StefanieHaustein@slideshare.net(StefanieHaustein) The heterogeneity of social media metrics and its effects on statistics StefanieHaustein Rodrigo Costas, Stefanie Haustein & Vincent Larivière (2014). The heterogeneity of social media metrics and its effects on statistics. Presentation at 19th Nordic Workshop on Bibliometrics and Research Policy, Reykjavik, 25. September 2014 http://www.rannis.is/bibliometrics/workshop-programme/ <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/costashausteinlarivierenordicworkshop-140925071805-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> Rodrigo Costas, Stefanie Haustein &amp; Vincent Larivière (2014). The heterogeneity of social media metrics and its effects on statistics. Presentation at 19th Nordic Workshop on Bibliometrics and Research Policy, Reykjavik, 25. September 2014 http://www.rannis.is/bibliometrics/workshop-programme/
The heterogeneity of social media metrics and its effects on statistics from Stefanie Haustein
]]> 1349 3 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/costashausteinlarivierenordicworkshop-140925071805-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 Stefanie Haustein, Timothy D. Bowman, Benoît Macaluso, �Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Vincent Larivière: Measuring Twitter activity of �arXiv e-prints and published papers /slideshow/haustein-etal-altmetrics14pptx/36192526 hausteinetal-altmetrics14-140623070300-phpapp01
Presentation at #altmetrics14, #WebSci14, Bloomington, IN altmetrics.org/altmetrics14/]]>
Presentation at #altmetrics14, #WebSci14, Bloomington, IN altmetrics.org/altmetrics14/]]> Mon, 23 Jun 2014 07:03:00 GMT /slideshow/haustein-etal-altmetrics14pptx/36192526 StefanieHaustein@slideshare.net(StefanieHaustein) Stefanie Haustein, Timothy D. Bowman, Benoît Macaluso, �Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Vincent Larivière: Measuring Twitter activity of �arXiv e-prints and published papers StefanieHaustein Presentation at #altmetrics14, #WebSci14, Bloomington, IN altmetrics.org/altmetrics14/ <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteinetal-altmetrics14-140623070300-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&amp;height=120&amp;fit=bounds" /><br> Presentation at #altmetrics14, #WebSci14, Bloomington, IN altmetrics.org/altmetrics14/
Stefanie Haustein, Timothy D. Bowman, Beno樽t Macaluso, Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Vincent Larivi竪re: Measuring Twitter activity of arXiv e-prints and published papers from Stefanie Haustein
]]> 2208 5 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteinetal-altmetrics14-140623070300-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation White http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted 0 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/profile-photo-StefanieHaustein-48x48.jpg?cb=1568127002 Prof at uOttawa School of Information Studies (ÉSIS) teaching research methods and evaluation, social network analysis and knowledge organization, working on altmetrics, bibliometrics and metrics literacy stefaniehaustein.com https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/ebbt2018-180724205610-thumbnail.jpg?width=320&height=320&fit=bounds slideshow/scholarly-twitter-metrics-how-when-and-what-does-the-twittersphere-tweet-about-science-107355811/107355811 Scholarly Twitter metr... https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteinacfas2017-170509161036-thumbnail.jpg?width=320&height=320&fit=bounds slideshow/haustein-s-2017-temporalit-et-publication-savante-le-cycle-de-vie-des-articles-en-ligne-et-sur-les-mdias-sociaux/75821410 Haustein, S. (2017). T... https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hausteinknowescape2017-170222091216-thumbnail.jpg?width=320&height=320&fit=bounds slideshow/haustein-s-2017-the-evolution-of-scholarly-communication-and-the-reward-system-of-science/72450290 Haustein, S. (2017). T...