Skip to Main Content

Scholarly Identity

Measure Your Impact

Traditional research metrics are largely citation-based. They can evaluate an individual researcher's impact, or the impact of an entire department, university or discipline. These metrics include"

  • H-Index: An author-level metric that calculates the number of an author's articles that have been cited by at least that same number (h) of times. This metric can be found in Google Scholar. The H-index can include metrics:
    • H-core: the most cited h articles from a particular journal
    • H-median: the median number of citations in that journal's h-core
    • H5-index, h5-core, h5-median: the above-mentioned metrics limited to the most recent five years
  • Impact Factor: A journal-level metric that measure's the number of times the average article recently published in a journal is cited in that particular year. It is used to demonstrate the importance or rank of a journal and can be an important metric in promotion and tenure. The impact factor can be found in InCites Journal Citation Reports.
  • SCImago Journal Rank (SJR Impact Factor): A journal-level metric from Scopus that shows the influence of journals by measuring the number of citations received by a journal and the prestige of the source of the citation.

Altmetrics

Altmetrics are “alternative metrics” that compliment traditional citations. They are becoming increasingly important because they measure the reach of research and publication through online interactions, giving authors to get a better picture of the broad and true impact of their scholarship than traditional measurements alone and helping scholars to be recognized for contributions that go beyond traditional publishing, which can be crucial for promotion and tenure. Altmetrics record activity such as:

  • Views, downloads, shares, GitHub forks and adaptation, and bookmarks of the work
  • Number of comments on the work and who is commenting
  • Who is reading the work and where
  • Whether the author work has been covered in credible websites or news agencies
  • Social media mentions and “likes” of the author or work
  • Reviews and ratings of the author or work

Altmetrics are meant to work with traditional metrics, and the growing place of data and digital publication in scholarship requires altmetrics to accommodate the breadth and diversity of research output.

Considerations:

  • Emphasis on quantity. Like citations, altmetrics often measure quantity, not quality, and can be interpreted as metrics of popularity instead of scholarly impact. Include meaningful context and qualitative data when citing altmetrics to avoid this misinterpretation.
  • Lack of a standard definition. Without a current “official” definition of what altmetrics truly measure, altmetrics reports will vary on which data is represented.
  • Data is not normalized. Different providers collect different kinds of data, which makes it difficult to compare data sets and measurements of altmetrics from different sources.
  • Sometimes difficult to track. Although there are few issues in tracking works with a DOI (Digital Object Identifier), not all providers of altmetrics are capable of tracking usage of works with only a URL.
  • Importance of time. Altmetrics can produce measurements quicker, as data is gathered when the activity happens. However, this data often has a lifespan that isn’t always documented. In order to gather complete usage information of a work, altmetrics should be collected and documented regularly.

Scholars can make the most of altmetrics by learning how to use and cite them correctly.