Does presence of social media plugins in a journal website result in higher social media attention of its research publications?

Abstract

Social media platforms have now emerged as an important medium for wider dissemination of research articles; with authors, readers and publishers creating different kinds of social media activity about the article. Some research studies have even shown that articles that get more social media attention may get higher visibility and citations. These factors are now persuading journal publishers to integrate social media plugins in their webpages to facilitate sharing and dissemination of articles in social media platforms. Many past studies have analyzed several factors (like journal impact factor, open access, collaboration etc.) that may impact social media attention of scholarly articles. However, there are no studies to analyze whether the presence of social media plugin in a journal could result in higher social media attention of articles published in the journal. This paper aims to bridge this gap in knowledge by analyzing a sufficiently large-sized sample of 99,749 articles from 100 different journals. Results obtained show that journals that have social media plugins integrated in their webpages get significantly higher social media mentions and shares for their articles as compared to journals that do not provide such plugins. Authors and readers visiting journal webpages appear to be a major contributor to social media activity around articles published in such journals. The results suggest that publishing houses should actively provide social media plugin integration in their journal webpages to increase social media visibility (altmetric impact) of their articles.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Notes

  1. 1.

    https://towardsdatascience.com/understanding-auc-roc-curve-68b2303cc9c5. Accessed (10/01/2020).

References

  1. Banshal, S. K., Singh, V. K., Kaderye, G., Muhuri, P. K., & Sánchez, B. P. (2018). An altmetric analysis of scholarly articles from India. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems,34(5), 3111–3118. https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-169495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Banshal, S. K., Singh, V. K., Muhuri, P. K., & Mayr, P. (2019a). How much research output from India gets social media attention? Current Science,117(5), 753–760.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Banshal, S. K., Singh, V. K., Muhuri, P. K., & Mayr, P. (2019b). Disciplinary variations in altmetric coverage of scholarly articles. In 17th international conference on scientometrics & informetrics (ISSI) (pp. 1870–1881).

  4. Bar-ilan, J. (2014). Astrophysics publications on arXiv, Scopus and Mendeley: a case study. Scientometrics,100(1), 217–225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1215-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Chen, K., Tang, M., Wang, C., & Hsiang, J. (2015). Exploring alternative metrics of scholarly performance in the social sciences and humanities in Taiwan. Scientometrics,102(1), 97–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1420-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Costas, R., Zahedi, Z., & Wouters, P. (2015a). Do “altmetrics” correlate with citations? Extensive comparison of altmetric indicators with citations from a multidisciplinary perspective. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,66(10), 2003–2019. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Costas, R., Zahedi, Z., & Wouters, P. (2015b). The thematic orientation of publications mentioned on social media: Large-scale disciplinary comparison of social media metrics with citations. Aslib Journal of Information Management,67(3), 260–288. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-12-2014-0173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Davis, P. M., Lewenstein, B. V., Simon, D. H., Booth, J. G., & Connolly, M. J. L. (2008). Open access publishing, article downloads, and citations: randomised controlled trial. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.),337, a568. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.a568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Didegah, F., Bowman, T. D., & Holmberg, K. (2018). On the Differences Between Citations and Altmetrics: An Investigation of Factors Driving Altmetrics Versus Citations for Finnish Articles. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,69(6), 832–843. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23934.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Eysenbach, G. (2011). Can tweets predict citations? Metrics of social impact based on Twitter and correlation with traditional metrics of scientific impact. Journal of Medical Internet Research. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.2012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Gargouri, Y., Hajjem, C., Larivière, V., Gingras, Y., Carr, L., Brody, T., et al. (2010). Self-selected or mandated, open access increases citation impact for higher quality research. PLoS ONE,5(10), e13636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Gruzd, A., & Goertzen, M. (2013). Wired academia: Why social science scholars are using social media. Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2013.614.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Hammarfelt, B. (2014). Using altmetrics for assessing research impact in the humanities. Scientometrics,101(2), 1419–1430. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1261-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Hank, C., Sugimoto, C. R., Tsou, A., & Pomerantz, J. (2014). Faculty and student interactions via Facebook: Policies, preferences, and practices. It-Information Technology,56(5), 216–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hassan, S., Mubashir, I., Gillani, U., Aljohani, N. R., Bowman, T. D., & Didegah, F. (2017). Measuring social media activity of scientific literature: An exhaustive comparison of scopus and novel altmetrics big data. Scientometrics,113(2), 1037–1057. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2512-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Haustein, S., Costas, R., & Larivière, V. (2015). Characterizing social media metrics of scholarly papers: The effect of document properties and collaboration patterns. PLoS ONE,10(3), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0120495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Haustein, S., Peters, I., Sugimoto, C. R., Thelwall, M., & Larivière, V. (2014). Tweeting biomedicine: An analysis of tweets and citations in the biomedical literature. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,65(4), 656–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Holmberg, K., Hedman, J., Bowman, T. D., Didegah, F., & Laakso, M. (2020). Do articles in open access journals have more frequent altmetric activity than articles in subscription-based journals? An investigation of the research output of Finnish universities. Scientometrics,122(1), 645–659. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03301-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Htoo, T. H. H., & Na, J.-C. (2017). Disciplinary differences in altmetrics for social sciences. Online Information Review,41(2), 235–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Maggio, L. A., Leroux, T. C., Meyer, H. S., & Artino, A. R. (2018). #MedEd: exploring the relationship between altmetrics and traditional measures of dissemination in health professions education. Perspectives on Medical Education,7(4), 239–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-018-0438-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Norris, M., Oppenheim, C., & Rowland, F. (2008). The citation advantage of open-access articles. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,59, 1963–1972. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20898.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Ortega, J. L. (2015). Disciplinary differences in the use of academic social networking sites. Online Information Review,39(4), 520–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Poplašen, L. M., & Grgić, I. H. (2017). Altmetric and bibliometric scores: Does open access matter? QQML Journal,5(2), 451–460.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Priem, J. (2014). Altmetrics (chapter from beyond bibliometrics: Harnessing multidimensional indicators of scholarly impact). In Beyond bibliometrics: Harnessing multidimensional indicators of scholarly impact.

  25. Priem, J., & Hemminger, B. H. (2010). Scientometrics 2.0: New metrics of scholarly impact on the social Web. First Monday,15(7), 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Priem, J., Taraborelli, D., Groth, P., & Neylon, C. (2010). altmetrics: A manifesto. 1–77.

  27. Shema, H., Bar-IIan, J., & Thelwall, M. (2014). Do Blog Citations Correlate With a Higher Number of Future Citations? Research Blogs as a Potential Source for Alternative Metrics. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,65(5), 1018–1027. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Sotudeh, H., Mazarei, Z., & Mirzabeigi, M. (2015). CiteULike bookmarks are correlated to citations at journal and author levels in library and information science. Scientometrics,105(3), 2237–2248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1745-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Thelwall, M. (2018). Early Mendeley readers correlate with later citation counts. Scientometrics,115(3), 1231–1240. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2715-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Thelwall, M., & Kousha, K. (2017). ResearchGate articles: Age, discipline, audience size, and impact. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,68(2), 468–479. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Thelwall, M., & Nevill, T. (2018). Could scientists use Altmetric. com scores to predict longer term citation counts ? Journal of Informetrics,12(1), 237–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Vogl, S., Scherndl, T., & Ku, A. (2018). # Psychology: A bibliometric analysis of psychological literature in the online media. Scientometrics,115(3), 1253–1269. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2727-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Wang, X., Liu, C., Mao, W., & Fang, Z. (2015). The open access advantage considering citation, article usage and social media attention. Scientometrics,103(2), 555–564. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1547-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Williams, A. E., & Woodacre, M. A. (2016). The possibilities and perils of academic social networking sites. Online Information Review,40(2), 282–294. https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-10-2015-0327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Zhang, L., & Wang, J. (2018). Why highly cited articles are not highly tweeted? A biology case. Scientometrics,117(1), 495–509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2876-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the support of Stacy Konkiel, Director of Research Relations at Digital Science, for providing access to Altmetric.com data.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vivek Kumar Singh.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Karmakar, M., Banshal, S.K. & Singh, V.K. Does presence of social media plugins in a journal website result in higher social media attention of its research publications?. Scientometrics (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03574-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • Altmetrics
  • Science communication
  • Social media attention
  • Social media plugin