@inproceedings{barilan2012beyond,
  abstract = {Traditionally, scholarly impact and visibility have been measured by counting
publications and citations in the scholarly literature. However, increasingly
scholars are also visible on the Web, establishing presences in a growing
variety of social ecosystems. But how wide and established is this presence,
and how do measures of social Web impact relate to their more traditional
counterparts? To answer this, we sampled 57 presenters from the 2010 Leiden STI
Conference, gathering publication and citations counts as well as data from the
presenters' Web "footprints." We found Web presence widespread and diverse: 84%
of scholars had homepages, 70% were on LinkedIn, 23% had public Google Scholar
profiles, and 16% were on Twitter. For sampled scholars' publications, social
reference manager bookmarks were compared to Scopus and Web of Science
citations; we found that Mendeley covers more than 80% of sampled articles, and
that Mendeley bookmarks are significantly correlated (r=.45) to Scopus citation
counts.},
  author = {Bar-Ilan, Judit and Haustein, Stefanie and Peters, Isabella and Priem, Jason and Shema, Hadas and Terliesner, Jens},
  booktitle = {Proceedings of 17th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators, Montréal: Science-Metrix and OST},
  editor = {Archambault, Éric and Gingras, Yves and Larivière, Vincent},
  interhash = {5c386f2bfcd8d2052d455c75efb1c727},
  intrahash = {42585cbc0a99d9e137f2a3d6cb0239e5},
  pages = {98-109},
  title = {Beyond citations: Scholars' visibility on the social Web},
  url = {http://2012.sticonference.org/Proceedings/vol1/Bar-Ilan_Beyond_98.pdf},
  volume = 1,
  year = 2012
}

@article{haustein2011applying,
  abstract = {Web 2.0 technologies are finding their way into academics: specialized social bookmarking services allow researchers to store and share scientific literature online. By bookmarking and tagging articles, academic prosumers generate new information about resources, i.e. usage statistics and content description of scientific journals. Given the lack of global download statistics, the authors propose the application of social bookmarking data to journal evaluation. For a set of 45 physics journals all 13,608 bookmarks from CiteULike, Connotea and BibSonomy to documents published between 2004 and 2008 were analyzed. This article explores bookmarking data in \{STM\} and examines in how far it can be used to describe the perception of periodicals by the readership. Four basic indicators are defined, which analyze different aspects of usage: Usage Ratio, Usage Diffusion, Article Usage Intensity and Journal Usage Intensity. Tags are analyzed to describe a reader-specific view on journal content. },
  author = {Haustein, Stefanie and Siebenlist, Tobias},
  doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2011.04.002},
  interhash = {13fe59aae3d6ef95b529ffe00ede4126},
  intrahash = {c3e49ee7b0ed81ecd126d3ef76d5f407},
  issn = {1751-1577},
  journal = {Journal of Informetrics },
  number = 3,
  pages = {446 - 457},
  title = {Applying social bookmarking data to evaluate journal usage },
  url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157711000393},
  volume = 5,
  year = 2011
}

@article{barilan2012beyond,
  abstract = {Traditionally, scholarly impact and visibility have been measured by counting
publications and citations in the scholarly literature. However, increasingly
scholars are also visible on the Web, establishing presences in a growing
variety of social ecosystems. But how wide and established is this presence,
and how do measures of social Web impact relate to their more traditional
counterparts? To answer this, we sampled 57 presenters from the 2010 Leiden STI
Conference, gathering publication and citations counts as well as data from the
presenters' Web "footprints." We found Web presence widespread and diverse: 84%
of scholars had homepages, 70% were on LinkedIn, 23% had public Google Scholar
profiles, and 16% were on Twitter. For sampled scholars' publications, social
reference manager bookmarks were compared to Scopus and Web of Science
citations; we found that Mendeley covers more than 80% of sampled articles, and
that Mendeley bookmarks are significantly correlated (r=.45) to Scopus citation
counts.},
  author = {Bar-Ilan, Judit and Haustein, Stefanie and Peters, Isabella and Priem, Jason and Shema, Hadas and Terliesner, Jens},
  interhash = {5c386f2bfcd8d2052d455c75efb1c727},
  intrahash = {81198ca94374ccd7b0a86b2b53d2ee50},
  title = {Beyond citations: Scholars' visibility on the social Web},
  url = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/db/journals/corr/corr1205.html#abs-1205-5611},
  year = 2012
}