Research Info

The Altmetrics Manifesto promised to broaden the notion of impact. However, reliance on citation theory is limiting this promise. It confines altmetrics to bibliometric principles by viewing interactions with scholarly outputs that occur outside the norms and values that rule science through the same lens as citations. The present study argues that this constitutes a form of ontological misalignment (fallacy of reification), whereby altmetrics are assigned entitative properties when in fact they capture processual aspects of engagement and use that may precede or contribute to societal impact. This misalignment manifests as use of counts of social media and online interactions with scholarly outputs as direct indicators of societal impact. Aligning ontology and epistemology requires the redefinition of altmetrics as process-based indicators. We describe recent empirical developments applying interaction and networked approaches to translate this perspective into practice. We argue also that calls for the production of socially relevant knowledge and increased interest in science communication represent a timely opportunity to use altmetrics as process-oriented monitoring tools. To study societal impact, we suggest their use in a mixed-methods research design to identify engagement patterns that can be explored further using qualitative methods.