4 ms·

The metrics are just for papers uploaded to Academia.edu (as stated in my previous commment). I think real time metrics will come to other research sharing plat

The metrics are just for papers uploaded to Academia.edu (as stated in my previous commment). I think real time metrics will come to other research sharing platforms. Academia.edu is leading the way here. I would question your assumption that academics have not heard of Academia.edu. 1.7 million academics have signed up, and around 3,500 join each day. It's one of the largest research sharing platforms on the web, with more than ten times the traffic of, say, ArXiv.

MrGunn 14y ago
I think what you're doing to spread the concept of new ways of measuring academic impact beyond citations is great, but to say you're leading the way is a bit misleading. Mendeley has been around for years and has been collecting information on what papers academics are actually reading, regardless of source, not just pageviews or downloads at your site. In fact, your site didn't start talking much about their profile pageviews until after Mendeley launched the Institutional Edition, at which point stats had been accumulating for years. So again, I think it's great what you're doing, but to cast yourself as the leader of this movement is kinda like publishing a paper and not citing any prior work. If people are really interested in this kind of thing, I recommend altmetrics.org and #altmetrics (I work for Mendeley)
- RichardPrice 14y ago
  There are a number of sites that have historically shown simple counters for downloads etc, and Mendeley is one of them, but Academia.edu has led the way in terms of building a powerful analytics product that shows analytics for a scientist's research at a relatively deep level - traffic by country, search engine, and a variety of other dimensions. Mendeley's Institutional Edition is completely different. It's an analytics tool for libraries, not for individual scientists.

MrGunn 14y ago

I think what you're doing to spread the concept of new ways of measuring academic impact beyond citations is great, but to say you're leading the way is a bit misleading. Mendeley has been around for years and has been collecting information on what papers academics are actually reading, regardless of source, not just pageviews or downloads at your site. In fact, your site didn't start talking much about their profile pageviews until after Mendeley launched the Institutional Edition, at which point stats had been accumulating for years. So again, I think it's great what you're doing, but to cast yourself as the leader of this movement is kinda like publishing a paper and not citing any prior work. If people are really interested in this kind of thing, I recommend altmetrics.org and #altmetrics (I work for Mendeley)

RichardPrice 14y ago
There are a number of sites that have historically shown simple counters for downloads etc, and Mendeley is one of them, but Academia.edu has led the way in terms of building a powerful analytics product that shows analytics for a scientist's research at a relatively deep level - traffic by country, search engine, and a variety of other dimensions. Mendeley's Institutional Edition is completely different. It's an analytics tool for libraries, not for individual scientists.