Altmetrics and Article-Level Metrics
Alternative Metrics for Assessing Research Impact Beyond Citations · Also known as: altmetrics, article-level metrics, alternative impact metrics
Altmetrics (alternative metrics) measure the online attention and societal impact of research by tracking mentions in social media (Twitter), news outlets, policy documents, blogs, videos, and other online sources. Introduced formally in 2010 by Jason Priem and colleagues, altmetrics address limitations of citation-based assessment: citation counts accumulate slowly (taking years for impact to register), do not capture policy influence, and are biased toward certain fields (biomedicine receives more citations than social sciences). Altmetric.com, PlumX, and other platforms now provide real-time data on research reach, complementing traditional journal impact factors and H-indices. While altmetrics should not replace peer-reviewed citations for tenure and promotion, they offer valuable insight into public engagement with research.
Read the full method
Sign in with a free account to read this section.
Method map
The neighbourhood of related methods — select a node to explore.
When to use it
Monitor altmetrics for research that is policy-relevant, interdisciplinary, or aimed at non-specialist audiences. Altmetrics are particularly useful for: (1) public health, policy, and environmental research (where government agencies, NGOs, and media engage with findings), (2) clinical or applied research (where practitioners, patients, and journalists follow developments), (3) social science and humanities research (where academic citations may be low but policy influence is high), (4) research you wish to communicate to funders or the public. Less useful for: (1) highly specialized academic fields (e.g., theoretical mathematics, where discussion occurs in peer-reviewed journals only), (2) assessment of scientific rigor (use peer review and citations for that). Include altmetrics in your research evaluation alongside traditional metrics, but do not allow altmetric scores alone to guide publication or funding decisions.
Strengths & limitations
- Captures real-time impact: altmetric attention appears within days or weeks of publication, whereas citations accumulate over years.
- Reflects societal impact: policy influence, media coverage, and public engagement are important outcomes often invisible to citation metrics.
- Identifies public interest: high altmetric scores indicate that the public or policymakers find your research relevant or newsworthy.
- Useful for funding justification: funders increasingly cite altmetrics as evidence of research value and public engagement.
- Multi-dimensional: altmetrics encompass many types of engagement (media, social media, policy, blogs, videos), providing a richer picture of impact than citations alone.
- Easily manipulated: social media mentions can be artificially inflated by coordinated campaigns or bots, making altmetrics susceptible to gaming.
- Biased toward certain research types: clinical, public health, and policy research receive more media attention than basic science, skewing altmetric distributions.
- Does not reflect research quality: a poorly designed study can receive high altmetric scores if it is sensational or newsworthy. High altmetrics ≠ good science.
- Geographic and linguistic bias: English-language research and research from wealthy countries receive more online attention, disadvantaging international researchers.
- Transient and volatile: social media mentions spike quickly after publication and may decline rapidly; altmetric scores can fluctuate unpredictably.
- Data availability issues: not all online sources are captured by altmetric platforms; some media outlets, policy documents, and regional publications are missed.
Frequently asked
Is a high Altmetric score better than a high citation count?
They measure different things, so neither is 'better.' A high citation count (academic impact) reflects influence among peers and accumulates slowly. A high Altmetric score (public/policy engagement) reflects media interest and accumulates quickly. Ideally, your important research will have both. For career advancement in academia, citations still matter more, but altmetrics are increasingly valued, especially if your work influences policy or public health.
Why does my article have a high Altmetric score but few citations?
Altmetrics measure public and media attention, not academic influence. Your article may be newsworthy (e.g., 'New study challenges conventional wisdom') even if it has not yet been cited by many other researchers. This is normal. Continue monitoring citations; academic citations typically accumulate 1–3 years after publication. If after 5 years your article still has few academic citations but high altmetrics, it may be influential in practice or policy but not in academic discourse.
Can I increase my altmetric score by promoting my article on social media?
Yes, legitimately. Sharing your article on Twitter, blogging about it, and engaging with journalists increases your Altmetric score. However, buying fake engagement or orchestrating artificial amplification is unethical and undermines the metric. Focus on authentic promotion: write a clear summary of your findings, engage with questions, and reach out to relevant journalists or policy organizations. Organic amplification is more valuable and sustainable than artificial inflation.
Do universities consider altmetrics in tenure and promotion decisions?
Increasingly, yes, especially for applied, policy-relevant, or interdisciplinary research. However, peer-reviewed citations and expert evaluation still take precedence. Include altmetrics in your tenure case as supplementary evidence of impact, particularly if your work influences policy or practice. For non-academic careers (policy, journalism, public health) or for research explicitly aimed at public communication, altmetrics may be valued more highly.
Sources
- Priem, J., Taraborelli, D., Groth, P., & Neylon, C. (2010). Altmetrics: A manifesto. http://altmetrics.org/manifesto/ link ↗
- Piwowar, H., Priem, J., & Larivière, V. (2018). The state of OA: a large-scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of open access articles. PeerJ, 6, e4375. DOI: 10.7717/peerj.4375 ↗
- Larivière, V., Gingras, Y., & Archambault, E. (2009). The decline in the concentration of citations, 1900–2007. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(4), 858–862. DOI: 10.1002/asi.21011 ↗
How to cite this page
ScholarGate. (2026, June 3). Alternative Metrics for Assessing Research Impact Beyond Citations. ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/research-skills/altmetrics
Which method?
Set this method beside its closest kin and read them side by side — the library lays the books on the table; the choice is yours.
- Citation AnalysisResearch Skills↔ compare
- Citation Management ToolsResearch Skills↔ compare
- Digital Object Identifier SystemResearch Skills↔ compare
- ORCID Researcher IdentifierResearch Skills↔ compare