S
Gave a short online lecture on altmetrics today. Main point: altmetrics measure attention, not quality. Sometimes they capture real interest - sometimes just noise. Attention ≠ impact.
https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.30154.12488
#Altmetrics #ResearchImpact #OpenScience #ScholarlyCommunication #Scientometrics
In our new short letter, we explored where real discussion on complex scientific issues actually happens. Instead of articles or reports, we analysed letters to the editor in journals – using #geoengineering as a case.
https://doi.org/10.1515/reveh-2025-0161
These short texts turn out to be one of the few spaces where science becomes a dialogue: not only experts, but also broader publics engage, and discussions move beyond technical details to #ethics risks, and governance.
A recent Journal of Informetrics study shows – There is no universal number of “too many authors.”
In some fields, 3–6 may already be unusual.
In medicine – dozens are common.
In physics – large teams are often the norm.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2026.101803
Yes, #hyperauthorship can signal problems (e.g., honorary authorship, metric inflation). But the key question is not “how many authors?” it is: Is this abnormal for this field and time?
