announcing ImpactStory: An awesome new way to get altmetrics

72 views
Skip to first unread message

Jason Priem

unread,
Sep 24, 2012, 11:55:11 PM9/24/12
to altme...@googlegroups.com
Great news, fellow altmetrics folks: today we're relaunching total-impact as ImpactStory, a great new way to gather and understand altmetrics. Check out the features:
  • Reporting that puts metrics in context based on type of use? Yup
  • Normalization against Web of Science-indexed articles? Check.
  • Reporting percentile scores (with confidence intervals!) instead of just raw numbers? Oh yes indeed.
  • Dozens of bugfixes and huge performance improvements? You better believe it.
I could go on, but you know what's better? Visit http://impactstory.it and check out all the awesome new changes for yourself! We'd love feedback.

It's still very much beta software, but it's also a quantum leap up from the old total-impact in capability, focus, and robustness. We think this is a big step forward for our users and for altmetrics in general, and we're really, really excited about it (if you hadn't guessed). Looking forward to pushing more new features in the coming weeks!


--
Jason Priem
UNC Royster Scholar
School of Information and Library Science
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Mike Taylor

unread,
Sep 25, 2012, 4:11:55 AM9/25/12
to altme...@googlegroups.com
Very cool. Have you updated the api to be able to show the funky new aggregations?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "altmetrics" group.
To post to this group, send email to altme...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to altmetrics+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

Jason Priem

unread,
Sep 25, 2012, 4:43:42 AM9/25/12
to altme...@googlegroups.com
Glad you're liking it!

Not yet on the API. But the aggregations just come from a simple lookup table, so anyone who wants to duplicate 'em can use that table (it's here) and get our same groupings. 

The table could also use some better documentation in the UI, perhaps in item-level help or tooltips, and/or maybe in the FAQ; it's on the near-term roadmap.
j
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages