title: How to normalize Twitter counts? A first attempt based on journals in the Twitter Index.
abstract: One possible way of measuring the broad impact of research (societal impact) quantitatively is the use of alternative metrics (altmetrics). An important source of altmetrics is Twitter, which is a popular microblogging service. In bibliometrics, it is standard to normalize citations for cross-field comparisons. This study deals with the normalization of Twitter counts (TC). The problem with Twitter data is that many papers receive zero tweets or only one tweet. In order to restrict the impact analysis on only those journals producing a considerable Twitter impact, we defined the Twitter Index (TI) containing journals with at least 80 % of the papers with at least 1 tweet each. For all papers in each TI journal, we calculated normalized Twitter percentiles (TP) which range from 0 (no impact) to 100 (highest impact). Thus, the highest impact accounts for the paper with the most tweets compared to the other papers in the journal. TP are proposed to be used for cross-field comparisons. We studied the field-independency of TP in comparison with TC. The results point out that the TP can validly be used particularly in biomedical and health sciences, life and earth sciences, mathematics and computer science, as well as physical sciences and engineering. In a first application of TP, we calculated percentiles for countries. The results show that Denmark, Finland, and Norway are the countries with the most tweeted papers (measured by TP).
authors.affiliation: Division for Science and Innovation Studies, Administrative Headquarters of the Max Planck Society, Hofgartenstr. 8, 80539 Munich, Germany.
authors.forename: Lutz
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Bornmann
authors.affiliation: Max Planck Institute for Solid State Research, Heisenbergstr. 1, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany.
authors.forename: Robin
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Haunschild
keywords: Altmetrics; Twitter Index; Twitter counts; Twitter percentiles