450 likes | 575 Views
Here Comes the Sunburst: Measuring and Visualizing Scholarly Impact. John Barnett Scholarly Communications Librarian Jennifer Chan Assistant Scholarly Communications Librarian Office of Scholarly Communication and Publishing University Library System University of Pittsburgh.
E N D
Here Comes the Sunburst:Measuring and Visualizing Scholarly Impact John Barnett Scholarly Communications Librarian Jennifer Chan Assistant Scholarly Communications Librarian Office of Scholarly Communication and Publishing University Library System University of Pittsburgh
Here Comes the Sunburst:Measuring and Visualizing Scholarly Impact
Pittsburgh campus + regional campuses in Bradford, Greensburg, Johnstown, and Titusville • 16 undergraduate, graduate, and professional schools • 456+ degree programs • 2012: conferred 8,949 degrees University of Pittsburgh
Top 10 American higher ed. in federal funding (NSF) • Top 5 in annual research support (NIH) • 5,369 faculty; 4,470 full-time faculty • Research conducted: more than 300 centers, institutes, laboratories, clinics University of Pittsburgh
University Library System • ARL • 22nd largest academic library system in North America • 25 libraries; 6.6 million volumes • 279,000 current serials
Why Pitt? • Strategic goal: Innovation in scholarly communication • Providing services that scholars understand, need, and value • Putting ourselves in faculty “spaces” • Re-envisioning our librarian liaison program • Deepening our understanding of scholarly communications issues
Why PlumX? • Making research “more assessable and accessible” • Gathering information in one place • Making it intelligible and useful • Measuring and visualizing research impact • Correlating metrics from traditional and new forms of scholarly communication • Allowing researchers, labs, departments, institutions to track real-time scholarly impact • Promoting research, comparing with peers, connecting with new research
Pilot project aims • Develop a tool for measuring and visualizing research impact • Gathering information in one place • Intelligible and useful • Impact in social media and other scholarly communication methods • Traditional measures counted as well • See where to disseminate works to increase impact
Traditional vs. new • Traditional measures are also counted • Findings are complementary to conventional methods of measuring research impact (e.g., H-Index) • Not intended to replace them
New measures • More comprehensive: Altmetrics = ALL METRICS • Citations • Usage • Captures • Mentions • Social Media • Covers impact of online behavior • Because scholars increasingly work online • Measures impact immediately • Because citation counts take years to appear in literature
Pilot Project Participants • 32 researchers, various disciplines • 9 schools • 18 departments • 1 complete research group • Others joined as they learned about the project
Technologies • Internal • IR built on Eprints Platform • Sharepoint • Microsoft Office Suite • PMID/DOI data import tool • External • PlumX • DOIs • PMID
Data collection for pilot project • Created records in D-Scholarship@Pitt, our institutional repository • Focused on articles, books, book chapters, proceedings • Scholarly output with standard identifiers • DOI, ISBN, PubMed ID, official URL, etc. • Scholarship produced since 2000
Other Library work • Developed guidelines to standardize record creation • Data entry from faculty CVs into IR (2 to 3 student workers with QA by librarians) • Librarian liaisons and other staff trained in record creation • SharePoint site used to track work completed • Coordination with pilot faculty • Gathered feedback and administered online survey
Sharepoint • Altmetrics Meetings Minutes • Faculty CVs • Excel spreadsheets • Word docs
Metadata sources • Faculty CVs . . . But verify metadata! • Books: PittCat, WorldCat, Books in Print, publisher sites, online retailers • Journals: Serials Solutions list, journal websites, JournalSeek, UlrichsWeb, DOAJ, PubMed • Conference presentations: Websites, PittCat, indexes, WorldCat
PMID Import Tool • Custom build by SysAdmin for Eprints Platform • Utilizing PMIDs from PubMed, able to import records that prepopulate metadata fields • Item Type, Title, Abstract, Creators, Publication Title, ISSN, Volume/Issue, Page ranges, Date and Date type, DOI, MeSH Headings, Grant Information, Keywords, etc.
Full-text sources • DOAJ • ERIC • PLOS • SSRN* • Other repositories* • Federal government websites* • Conference websites* * Use with caution
Key features • Faculty profiles • Online ‘artifacts’ • Article • Book • Book chapter • Video • Etc. • Impact graph • Sunburst
Feedback • Solicited via email and online survey • Generally positive in most cases • Data corrections • Errors in profiles • Links to wrong data • Quickly corrected by Plum staff • Requests for results from additional online sources (Google Scholar, SlideShare, Reddit, etc.) • PlumX collects data from these but did not gather information in advance for profiles
The survey says • Surveyed pilot project faculty in spring 2013 • @ 1/3rd responded to the survey • Meaning 13 out of 32 participants responded
Comments • Affiliations/bio inaccurate or has missing information • “Mentions” by whom & when? • Publications misclassified • Books vs. conference proceedings • Data not collected • Google Scholar • Slideshare
Comments • Filter out unwanted information • Data are wrong—and not useful • Overabundance of information in sunburst • “I only care what a select group of scholars thinks of my work” • “I did not find this useful for my discipline”
Observations • Lacked information about faculty practices • Are the results useful to all faculty, all disciplines? • May appeal more to faculty who are early in their careers or whose work is more contemporary • Will the data be used against faculty or programs? • Labor-intensive strategy • When it comes down to it . . . Does anyone care?
Embeddable widgets(in development) For researchers, to add to: • their own Web pages • department directories • IR researcher profile page For individual artifacts,to build article level metrics for imbedding in: • IR document abstract page • Article abstract page for journals we publish
Roll-out challenges • Who creates profiles? Who edits? • What information should be included in profiles? Who can view them? • Separate data gathering from D-Scholarship deposits? • Who promotes the service? Who trains? • Timing . . .
Future plans • Data checking • Additional data gathering • Record merging/deduping • Ability to edit user profiles and artifact records locally • Open API • To allow integration with other online systems • More exhaustive scholarly practices survey for all faculty • Rollout to all Pitt Researchers • Will use automatic feed from Pitt IR to PlumX
Discussion • How would you “sell” PlumXto additional faculty?