Table 1. Comparison of Facebook likes of a manuscript, journal article citations, and the Impact Factor/Immediacy Index as potential impact indicators of scientific work.
| Facebook likes | Citations | Impact Factor/Immediacy Index | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Advantage | • Possibly alternative, more modern and faster index of the influence of an unpublished manuscript | • Citations are carefully selected posts after information of an article has been used | • Indicates the popularity of a journal in the scientific community in an easy to understand fashion |
| • Possibly more direct feedback for authors (the rate and magnitude of the manuscript impact) | • Citations are strongly accepted and heavily consulted as an indicator of the impact of the quality and relevance of a journal article | • Impact Factor is a worldwide accepted standard indicator, e.g., for the comparison of journals and hiring decisions | |
| • May facilitate the search for red-hot manuscripts within the drastically increasing amount of scientific work | |||
| • Clearly renders a positive opinion of a manuscript in an open review form | |||
| • May include recommendations from stakeholders in science who read but may not cite the manuscript | |||
| • Manuscripts that might not be published in journals are also considered | |||
| • May reduce self-interested referencing habits (cannot be determined who liked a manuscript) | |||
| • Are independent from limited databases | |||
| Disadvantage | • Unclear informative value (e.g., large number of likes may reflect social influence, catchy title) | • Unclear informative value (i.e., negative and positive citations cannot be distinguished) | • Invalid statements about single articles based on the skewed distribution of citations (and the number of published articles) in a journal in a given timespan |
| • Can be manipulated (inflated) | • May be given for reasons other than appropriateness, e.g., to elevate citations of own articles | • Retrospective measure that is annually updated and does not necessarily reflect current publications | |
| • Might be given in a more spontaneous and less thoughtful way | • Are distorted: Limited databases that cover selected journals/timeframes/mostly work in English | ||
| • Is not an established indicator in science | • Long time lags until the influence of an article becomes apparent: publication delay, citation gap | ||
| • Likes are not centrally available and traceable for all manuscripts | • Display formal recognition of scholarly impact and do not necessarily depict to what extent the article was read or is use to non-scientists |
The Impact Factor and the Immediacy Index are discussed together in one column in this table because both rely on similar calculations and thus are associated with similar advantages and disadvantages.