↓ Skip to main content

Perspectives on social media in and as research: A synthetic review

Overview of attention for article published in International Review of Psychiatry, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#15 of 497)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
62 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Perspectives on social media in and as research: A synthetic review
Published in
International Review of Psychiatry, March 2015
DOI 10.3109/09540261.2015.1009419
Pubmed ID
Authors

Natalie T. Lafferty, Annalisa Manca

Abstract

With the growth of social media use in both the private and public spheres, researchers are currently exploring the new opportunities and practices offered by these tools in the research lifecycle. This area is still in its infancy: As methodological approaches and methods are being tested - mainly through pragmatic and exploratory approaches - practices are being shaped and negotiated by the actors involved in research. A further element of complexity is added by the ambivalent status of social media within research activities. They can be both a tool - for recruitment, data collection, analysis - and data - as what constitutes the corpus to be analysed - both in an observational and interactive domain. This synthetic analysis of the literature is aimed at identifying how social media are currently being used in research and how they fit into the research lifecycle. We identify and discuss emerging evidence and trends in the adoption of social media in research, which can be used and applied by psychiatry research practitioners as a framework to inform the development of a personalized research network and social media strategy in research.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 62 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 5 5%
United States 4 4%
Canada 2 2%
Poland 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Unknown 76 84%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 21%
Student > Master 13 14%
Other 13 14%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Researcher 8 9%
Other 29 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 25 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 22 24%
Unspecified 8 9%
Computer Science 7 8%
Psychology 7 8%
Other 22 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 47. 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 27 August 2017.
All research outputs
#309,452
of 12,371,657 outputs
Outputs from International Review of Psychiatry
#15
of 497 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,394
of 224,433 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Review of Psychiatry
#2
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,371,657 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 497 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 224,433 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.