Researchers are always looking for ways to increase the reading and citing of their publications. Kudos is a web-based service that aims at helping them do just that.
On Kudos, researchers may do the following: (1) post links to their publications, (2) attach simplified descriptions and explanations to broaden their readership among non-specialists, (3) add links to related works and resources concerning the article.
Kudos also gives feedback on how well the researcher is exploiting the service, for example, it provides the number of downloads and citations for the posted publications.
Let’s find out what our experts think about Kudos.
Our Experts’ Opinions on Kudos
The author of a study is the best person to explain his/her work, and Kudos provides a platform to do so.
MA, Interdisciplinary Studies (11+ years of Research and Academic Editing experience, US)
As the number of articles being published continues to increase, it becomes imperative for authors to measure the impact of their articles and take an active role in raising the visibility of their work. Kudos provides a new way for authors to do just that.Some of the tools provided by Kudos help authors to explain their work directly to audiences with short titles and summaries, to link to other material that facilitates understanding of the work, and to share their work though social media. The author of a study is the best person to explain his/her work, and Kudos provides a platform to do so. Authors can feel more empowered in maximizing the impact of their research by keeping themselves engaged with their articles after publication.Most authors feel responsible for increasing the impact of their work, but aren’t sure where to start. Kudos provides a straightforward and multifaceted tool kit that is of benefit to authors, researchers, publishers and institutions.
In an age of self-promotion, Kudos may offer an obvious, but likely needed, marketing tool…
PhD, Cancer (12+ years of Scientific and Medical Writing experience, AU)
As its name suggests, “Kudos” is designed to enhance the impact and visibility of academic journal articles, presumably using lay descriptions and marketing strategies across multiple academic and social media. In an age of self-promotion, Kudos may offer an obvious, but likely needed, marketing tool for socially demure academics to ensure that their work receives the much sought after limelight. However, proficienados of self-promotion may rapidly incorporate this tool into their already bulging social media portfolios as a matter of routine, and the efforts of those with their heads in the proverbial sand will remain obscure. Nonetheless, with the communications and marketing skills of the Kudos team, this platform may offer an unprecedented opportunity for academic products to enter mainstream media, though this is not made explicit on the website.
…you get back from Kudos what you put into it
PhD, Organic Chemistry (10+ years of Scientific and Medical Writing experience, US)
To see how Kudos works in practice, I logged onto their website and randomly clicked on various authors. An author was presented with an optional head shot photo and bulletized summary of interests. A list of publications was present which could be downloaded if the computer system being used subscribes to a publishers service which allows this (my home computer doesn’t, my work computer does). I didn’t see any simplified descriptions of any articles, perhaps because the researchers think this is a waste of time, since only specialists will want to read them. On the other hand, when book titles were posted, there were often capsule summaries under the heading What’s it about followed by a promotion paragraph on Why is it important and links to related works under What else might be of interest?
Kudos claims that researchers using their service get 19% higher exposure for their posted work. I expect there is a large variation in this number from person to person since the postings vary markedly in quality. Some postings are the barest of bones, with no photo, no author description, no nothing really except an author’s name with a publication link. These authors probably don’t get much benefit from Kudos. On the other hand, there are authors who have obviously spent time on their entries, inserting descriptions, promotions, and links to related work; these authors may well get a real benefit from the service. Kudos is so recently launched that is impossible to predict how effective it will prove to be. But most likely you get back from Kudos what you put into it.
The obvious positive aspect is visibility…
PhD, Molecular and Cellular Biology (10+ years of Scientific and Editing Experience, US)
The idea behind kudos, whereby researchers could explain the impact of their published studies and its wider impact, is an interesting one, and I can see both pros and cons with the concept. The obvious positive aspect is visibility, whereby information is likely to get disseminated to a wider audience, which could lead to an increased number of studies being performed. However, it might also lead to an “over-selling” of the data and perhaps unintended misrepresentation of the results. For example, in the discussion of a manuscript, peer-reviewers will ensure that claims that cannot be substantiated based on the presented information are removed from the publication. It is my concern that kudos could become a platform for claims that cannot be supported fully.
Kudos has created a special database where researchers can readily share their work
MS, Information Technology (11+ years of English–Japanese Translation experience, Japan)
Search engines have become useful tools that many people use in daily life. We live in an age where a world of knowledge can be summoned with just a few keystrokes. However, when it comes to research publication, it’s easy for your paper to become lost in the shuffle. With so much information, and misinformation, readily available to the public, it can be difficult to be noticed let alone taken seriously. A standard search engine is suitable for general information, but Kudos has created a special database where researchers can readily share their work.
Kudos makes it easier for your work to be searchable, verifiable, and cited by other researchers. This is especially important for initial studies where a lot of time and funding has been invested. By registering on the free database with Kudos, publishers only need to follow a few easy steps to make their research conveniently accessible to peers, educators, students, institutions, and anyone else within their community. Once submitted, authors can also track activities such as downloads, citations, and more in order to measure the impact of each publication uploaded.
New discoveries and breakthroughs need to be properly acknowledged and circulated in order for science to continue progressing. The Kudos data-sharing network cuts through all the clutter of standard search engines and brings the research community together. Their streamlined library of information takes the guesswork out of sharing important findings and keeps the scientific field in touch with up to date publications.
Kudos represents a unique and useful tool for researchers worldwide…
PhD, Biology (12+ years of Scientific and Editing Experience, UK)
My first impression of Kudos referred to the similitude with other tools such as Researchgate, and the fact that all sharing tools are already readily available from most publishers. Kudos provides overview on the impact of each published paper on academic circles and in social media and a mean to improve such impact. What certainly makes kudos stand up from similar previous attempts to unify publications lists is the access to direct Altmetric data, which provides detail number of tweets, Facebook posts, number of times it has been blogged, or mentioned in Google posts. Many academic institutions are increasingly encouraging their staff to provide a range of evidence on the impact of their research, including impact on social media, and Kudos represents a unique tool to extract this type of data.
My only criticism (albeit perhaps unfair) is that this tool still has plenty of room for improvement. Google Scholar seems to be a commonly used search tool, yet “Number of times the article appears in a Google Scholar search” does not seem to be available for any tools, not even for Kudos, despite it would probably provide the best indicator to date in how relevant the information is for the wider world.
Comments are closed for this post.