Title |
Tweet success? Scientific communication correlates with increased citations in Ecology and Conservation
|
---|---|
Published in |
PeerJ, April 2018
|
DOI | 10.7717/peerj.4564 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Clayton T. Lamb, Sophie L. Gilbert, Adam T. Ford |
Abstract |
Science communication is seen as critical for the disciplines of ecology and conservation, where research products are often used to shape policy and decision making. Scientists are increasing their online media communication, via social media and news. Such media engagement has been thought to influence or predict traditional metrics of scholarship, such as citation rates. Here, we measure the association between citation rates and the Altmetric Attention Score-an indicator of the amount and reach of the attention an article has received-along with other forms of bibliometric performance (year published, journal impact factor, and article type). We found that Attention Score was positively correlated with citation rates. However, in recent years, we detected increasing media exposure did not relate to the equivalent citations as in earlier years; signalling a diminishing return on investment. Citations correlated with journal impact factors up to ∼13, but then plateaued, demonstrating that maximizing citations does not require publishing in the highest-impact journals. We conclude that ecology and conservation researchers can increase exposure of their research through social media engagement and, simultaneously, enhance their performance under traditional measures of scholarly activity. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 123 | 16% |
Canada | 102 | 13% |
United Kingdom | 67 | 9% |
Australia | 35 | 5% |
Spain | 33 | 4% |
Germany | 26 | 3% |
Brazil | 9 | 1% |
Switzerland | 9 | 1% |
France | 8 | 1% |
Other | 99 | 13% |
Unknown | 250 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 429 | 56% |
Scientists | 262 | 34% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 52 | 7% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 16 | 2% |
Unknown | 2 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 256 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 46 | 18% |
Researcher | 40 | 16% |
Student > Master | 33 | 13% |
Student > Bachelor | 22 | 9% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 19 | 7% |
Other | 39 | 15% |
Unknown | 57 | 22% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 55 | 21% |
Environmental Science | 40 | 16% |
Social Sciences | 31 | 12% |
Computer Science | 11 | 4% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 10 | 4% |
Other | 45 | 18% |
Unknown | 64 | 25% |