Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Using altmetrics for assessing research impact in the humanities

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The prospects of altmetrics are especially encouraging for research fields in the humanities that currently are difficult to study using established bibliometric methods. Yet, little is known about the altmetric impact of research fields in the humanities. Consequently, this paper analyses the altmetric coverage and impact of humanities-oriented articles and books published by Swedish universities during 2012. Some of the most common altmetric sources are examined using a sample of 310 journal articles and 54 books. Mendeley has the highest coverage of journal articles (61 %) followed by Twitter (21 %) while very few of the publications are mentioned in blogs or on Facebook. Books, on the other hand, are quite often tweeted while both Mendeley’s and the novel data source Library Thing’s coverage is low. Many of the problems of applying bibliometrics to the humanities are also relevant for altmetric approaches; the importance of non-journal publications, the reliance on print as well the limited coverage of non-English language publications. However, the continuing development and diversification of methods suggests that altmetrics could evolve into a valuable tool for assessing research in the humanities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Altmetric data on journal articles was gathered from 2014-01-21 to 2013-01-23.

  2. http://scholar.google.com/, http://www.librarything.com/search.php, https://twitter.com/search-home, http://www.mendeley.com/research-papers/search/ (Searches conducted 30-31 January 2014).

References

  • Archambault, É., Vignola-Gagne, É., Côté, G., Larivière, V., & Gingras, Y. (2006). Benchmarking scientific output in the social sciences and humanities: The limits of existing databases. Scientometrics, 68(3), 329–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bar-Ilan, J., Haustein, S., Peters, I., Priem, J., Shema, H., & Tersliesner, J. (2012). Beyond citations: Scholars’ visibility on the social Web. In E. Archambault., Y. Gingras & V. Larivière (Eds.), Proceedings of 17th International conference on science and technology indicators, (pp. 98–109). Montréal: Science-Metrix and OST.

  • Chamberlain, S. (2013). Consuming article-level metrics: Observations and lessons. Information Standards Quarterly, Summer, 25(2), 4–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, E., Bulger, M. E., & Meyer, E. T. (2012). Discipline matters: Technology use in the humanities. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 11(1–2), 76–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammarfelt, B. (2012). Following the footnotes: A bibliometric analysis of citation patterns in literary studies. (Diss.). Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.

  • Hammarfelt, B. (2013). An examination of the possibilities that altmetrics offer in the case of the humanities. In J. Gorraiz, E. Schiebel, C. Gumpenberger, M. Hörlesberger & H. Moed (Eds.), Proceedings of ISSI 2013 Vienna: 14th international society of scientometrics and informetrics conference (pp. 721–727). Vienna: Austrian Institute of Technology GmbH.

  • Hellqvist, B. (2010). Referencing in the humanities and its implications for citation analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(2), 310–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmberg, K., & Thelwall, M. (2013). Disciplinary differences in Twitter scholarly communication. In J. Gorraiz, E. Schiebel, C. Gumpenberger, M. Hörlesberger & H. Moed (Eds.) Proceedings of ISSI 2013 Vienna: 14th International society of scientometrics and informetrics conference (pp. 567–582). Vienna: Austrian Institute of Technology GmbH.

  • Kousha, K., & Thelwall, M. (2009). Google book search: Citation analysis for social science and the humanities. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(8), 1537–1549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurtz, M. J., & Bollen, J. (2010). Usage bibliometrics. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 44(1), 1–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L., Hammarfelt, B., & Salah, A. (2011). The structure of the Arts & Humanities Citation Index: A mapping on the basis of aggregated citations among 1,157 journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(12), 2414–2426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, X., Thellwall, M., & Guistini, D. (2012). Validating online reference managers for scholarly impact measurement. Scientometrics, 91(2), 461–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linmans, J. A. M. (2010). Why with bibliometrics the humanities does not need to be the weakest link. Indicators for research evaluation based on citations, library holdings and productivity measures. Scientometrics, 83(2), 337–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohammadi, E., & Thelwall, M. (2013). Assessing the Mendeley readership of social science and humanities research. In J. Gorraiz, E. Schiebel, C. Gumpenberger, M. Hörlesberger & H. Moed (Eds.), Proceedings of ISSI 2013 Vienna: 14th International society of scientometrics and informetrics conference (pp. 200–214). Vienna: Austrian Institute of Technology GmbH.

  • Nederhof, A. J. (2006). Bibliometric monitoring of research performance in the social sciences and the humanities: A review. Scientometrics, 66(1), 81–100.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Priem, J., Piwowar, H. A., & Hemminger, B. M. (2012). Altmetrics in the wild: Using social media to explore scholarly impact. arXiv preprint:1203.4745.

  • Priem, J., Taraborelli, D., Groth, P., & Neylon, C. (2010). Altmetrics: A Manifesto. http://altmetrics.org/manifesto/. Accessed 10 Jan 2013.

  • Rasmussen, P. G., & Andersen, J.P. (2013). Altmetrics: An alternate perspective on research evaluation. Sciecom Info, 9(2).

  • Rowlands, I., Nicholas, D., Russell, B., Canty, N., & Watkinson, A. (2011). Social media use in the research workflow. Learned Publishing, 24(3), 183–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sud, P., & Thelwall, M. (2014). Evaluating altmetrics. Scientometrics, 98(2), 1131–1143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tang, M., Wang, C., Chen, K., & Hsiang, J. (2012). Exploring alternative cyber bibliometrics for evaluation of scholarly performance in the social sciences and humanities in Taiwan. Proceedings of the ASIS&T Annual Meeting, Vol. 49. www.asis.org/asist2012/proceedings/openpage.html. Accessed 12 Dec 2013.

  • Voorbij, H. (2012). The value of library thing tags for academic libraries. Online Information Review, 36(2), 196–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wouters, P., & Costas, R. (2012). Users, narcissism and control—Tracking the impact of scholarly publications in the 21st century. Utrecht: SURF-foundation.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Parts of this paper build on a presentation at the 14th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, Vienna, 15–19 July 2013. The author would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for insightful comments that greatly improved the article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of ALM, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden

    Björn Hammarfelt

  2. Swedish School of Library and Information Science (SSLIS), University of Borås, Borås, Sweden

    Björn Hammarfelt

Authors
  1. Björn Hammarfelt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Björn Hammarfelt.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hammarfelt, B. Using altmetrics for assessing research impact in the humanities. Scientometrics 101, 1419–1430 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1261-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1261-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation