| Title |
If I tweet will you cite? The effect of social media exposure of articles on downloads and citations
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Public Health, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00038-016-0831-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Thomy Tonia, Herman Van Oyen, Anke Berger, Christian Schindler, Nino Künzli |
| Abstract |
We sought to investigate whether exposing scientific papers to social media (SM) has an effect on article downloads and citations. We randomized all International Journal of Public Health (IJPH) original articles published between December 2012 and December 2014 to SM exposure (blog post, Twitter and Facebook) or no exposure at three different time points after first online publication. 130 papers (SM exposure = 65, control = 65) were randomized. The number of downloads did not differ significantly between groups (p = 0.60) nor did the number of citations (p = 0.88). Adjusting for length of observation and paper's geographical origin did not change these results. There was no difference in the number of downloads and citations between the SM exposure and control group when we stratified for open access status. The number of downloads and number of citations were significantly correlated in both groups. SM exposure did not have a significant effect on traditional impact metrics, such as downloads and citations. However, other metrics may measure the added value that social media might offer to a scientific journal, such as wider dissemination. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 289 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 61 | 21% |
| United States | 45 | 16% |
| Spain | 10 | 3% |
| Switzerland | 10 | 3% |
| Australia | 8 | 3% |
| Canada | 6 | 2% |
| France | 6 | 2% |
| Denmark | 6 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 45 | 16% |
| Unknown | 87 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 153 | 53% |
| Scientists | 88 | 30% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 29 | 10% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 19 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 2 | 3% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 72 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 12 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 10% |
| Other | 7 | 9% |
| Other | 15 | 19% |
| Unknown | 14 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 13 | 17% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 16% |
| Computer Science | 9 | 12% |
| Psychology | 5 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 15 | 19% |
| Unknown | 19 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 204. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 November 2023.
All research outputs
#196,090
of 25,766,791 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Public Health
#13
of 1,938 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,726
of 350,920 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Public Health
#1
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,766,791 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,938 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 350,920 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.