The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists

My Kardashian Index is 1.16. Which I think is respectable. 🧐 https://t.co/fuIIYBYGbp What's yours?

Good to know! First time I hear about the „Kardashian Index“!!! https://t.co/v2SFQi7w4P

@MGerber_Unibas I don't want to mess up my Kardashian Index. https://t.co/oZJL9mkbwK

@baym A suboptimal metric of publishing impact. IMO the Kardashian Index is more accurate. https://t.co/ObbXZkBHQD

@evelynedeleeuw @GuillermElodie Some academics love it https://t.co/jrUokfexWc @KristofDecoste1

@MichaelEMann @GeraldKutney @MatthewWielicki @maxinthevalley @curryja @jordanbpeterson @neilhall_uk Source: https://t.co/4cWHoYUViQ

@aryehazan @davidmanheim Hmm, MEI (Mathematical Ego Index)? 28000 in my case. I think the Kardashian index (where I score dangerously high, 33.7) is more useful. They are no doubt highly correlated. https://t.co/IW5oEVfDOx

Hmm. My K-index is 0.013 https://t.co/TPObtRS446 Maybe I need to try harder😱

@JMill_er https://t.co/Cf5BcDXMYl

@rquiroga777 en 2014 salió https://t.co/I60vHf2HOP creo que en algún momento deberían leerlo quienes toman decisiones en los organismos de ciencia, por lo menos para empezar a discutir el valor de la comunicación científica. Fuerzas

Y que sepáis que esto no es broma y está publicado en un artículo científico ⬇️ https://t.co/luGoICIFI6

Se tenía que hacer... y se hizo 🤭🤭🤭 https://t.co/Je3LgbZOge

@OdedRechavi The Kardashian index is intriguing: https://t.co/ObbXZkBHQD

achei muito engraçado, mas realmente interessante pra pensar as redes sociais como catapulta na divulgação científica. de fato a ideia de que todos falamos no mesmo volume na internet é absurda e é complicada a projeção de certas figuras por aqui + https:

RT @FrankWAuthor: Twitter can never substitute for Peer Reviewed Science. 🦉 Anyone can dabble on Twitter, even without a verifiable identi…

Twitter can never substitute for Peer Reviewed Science. 🦉 Anyone can dabble on Twitter, even without a verifiable identity. Try this index on suspect sources. Note: it cannot be done for those who fail to identify themselves.

@bielleogy Kardashian Index is a classic https://t.co/8haAJr0Xih

Any news about the Kardashian index ? https://t.co/jrUokfexWc

RT @FrankWAuthor: The Kardashian Index (k) A satirical measure of discrepancy between a scientist's Twitter profile and publication record…

@MichaelTHartney @Brian_Riedl I think that comes from Neil Hall. https://t.co/oCw2KCd0IA.

Are you a Kardashian in research? Calculate your Kardashian index as Future Faculty steering committee member @epikrisa did

How's Kardashian index (k-index) for those who share their published research on facebook... https://t.co/0fzyRLB4jG

Mitt Kardashian-index är ca 1,5 (antalet följare dividerat med antalet vetenskapliga citeringar) https://t.co/TEsKFNqESC

The Kardashian Index (k) A satirical measure of discrepancy between a scientist's Twitter profile and publication record. It compares the number of followers to the number of citations they have for their peer-reviewed work. https://t.co/ZMSHSZqEK8

@RhedinSamuel @ActaPaediatrica @surf4children @LagercrantzHugo Twitter likes don’t count unfortunately Although my followers are contributing to my K index https://t.co/aMNtq3uR3W

RT @theobr0min: Just calculated my Kardashian Index and was disappointed to find that it is < 5, which essentially means I'm a nerd and nee…

Just calculated my Kardashian Index and was disappointed to find that it is < 5, which essentially means I'm a nerd and need more clout on twitter. https://t.co/lOs9bCwZD6 https://t.co/XzvCQr0n7J

If You are Concerned...🤠 Authenticity and Veracity As a satirical exercise, ponder the Kardashian Index: Then apply it to the Twitter scientists you follow. Note: you will need their actual name to search their credentials and publications record.🙃 htt

@alexriesart My K-index is 32. Oops. The paper might have a point... https://t.co/sFLSzgRBCS https://t.co/frjjsUqdcr

An article for all scientists who post views on Twitter.🤠 And all science followers for that matter.🤔 Message: Not all opinions are necessarily equal in value.🦉 https://t.co/aUf7UhxJQb

The Kardashian Index https://t.co/aUf7Uhxc0D

RT @limbsalvagedr: @UkVenous @JeanBismuth https://t.co/VkyDIxWRAB a fun article on that very topic 😂

@UkVenous @JeanBismuth https://t.co/VkyDIxWRAB a fun article on that very topic 😂

@LeanLaje @margaletrafel @pacomarhuenda Buena excusa, pero en Scopus no solo se indexan fuentes de ciencia, sino que también de humanidades y tecnología. Laje no es más que un Kardashian. https://t.co/2tuiU0rPa6

@Marco37639007 @EmmaRincon Ya veo, son algo así como unos kardashians tipo Agustín Laje. https://t.co/2tuiU0smZE

RT @dliebesk: Check your self before you tweet yourself...the STROKE literature succumbs to "social media"...https://t.co/lVt30dVCQq #thin…

RT @dliebesk: Check your self before you tweet yourself...the STROKE literature succumbs to "social media"...https://t.co/lVt30dVCQq #thin…

Check your K-index before you tweet. Or just wait for BioGPT: Generative Pre-trained Transformer for Biomedical Text Generation and Mining to suss you out...

Check your self before you tweet yourself...the STROKE literature succumbs to "social media"...https://t.co/lVt30dVCQq #thinkbeforetweet

RT @Tegumento: https://t.co/Yqa5CKIJU0 El índice Kardashian mide la discrepancia entre el éxito de los académicos en Twitter y su relevanc…

Wow, I have a super high Kardashian index (red circle) https://t.co/2b4Z1t03W1 https://t.co/iq8TZbYyCw https://t.co/JYt6gitGMW

Be careful, you don't want to end up on the Kardashian Index do you?🧐 #researchers #Science #Kardashians #GITwitter #MedEd #MedTwitter #SciComm #Academia #AcademicTwitter Source:https://t.co/MdWPrAUmrR https://t.co/t1bMo5Soca

RT @MKIttlesonMD: @AmitGoyalMD @iamritu @gina_lundberg @KTamirisaMD @Drvic_thomas @SharonneHayes @DrLaPrincess @noshreza @RyanTedfordMD @AH…

RT @MKIttlesonMD: @AmitGoyalMD @iamritu @gina_lundberg @KTamirisaMD @Drvic_thomas @SharonneHayes @DrLaPrincess @noshreza @RyanTedfordMD @AH…

@AmitGoyalMD @iamritu @gina_lundberg @KTamirisaMD @Drvic_thomas @SharonneHayes @DrLaPrincess @noshreza @RyanTedfordMD @AHajduczok @ShreyaTrivediMD @JasonKatzMD @AnnGageMD @AndrewJSauer @jelevenson @AkoczoAgnes @Ajar_Kochar @natstokes @JennaSkowronski Great

@SaraTetraDec I found it's slightly disappointed that they didn't really put granny in the main text. And, here is my favorite one from BMC https://t.co/HRPIzpH2Ls

Took nearly 10 years to get to this point but I am very grateful to all of you for helping me reach this nice round number. Thankfully, I am not a Science Kardashian, since that title requires a K-Index > 5, whereas mine is a very modest 0.35.😊😁 https:

In this time and age… this may come in handy 🧐👇 The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists | Genome Biology | Full Text https://t.co/oxvwU13g2Y

Ayñ👀

RT @Tegumento: https://t.co/Yqa5CKIJU0 El índice Kardashian mide la discrepancia entre el éxito de los académicos en Twitter y su relevanc…

RT @Tegumento: https://t.co/Yqa5CKIJU0 El índice Kardashian mide la discrepancia entre el éxito de los académicos en Twitter y su relevanc…

RT @Tegumento: https://t.co/Yqa5CKIJU0 El índice Kardashian mide la discrepancia entre el éxito de los académicos en Twitter y su relevanc…

RT @Tegumento: https://t.co/Yqa5CKIJU0 El índice Kardashian mide la discrepancia entre el éxito de los académicos en Twitter y su relevanc…

RT @Tegumento: https://t.co/Yqa5CKIJU0 El índice Kardashian mide la discrepancia entre el éxito de los académicos en Twitter y su relevanc…

@BorisBarbour @mbeisen https://t.co/cT4yhohXs9 :)

RT @Tegumento: https://t.co/Yqa5CKIJU0 El índice Kardashian mide la discrepancia entre el éxito de los académicos en Twitter y su relevanc…

RT @Tegumento: https://t.co/Yqa5CKIJU0 El índice Kardashian mide la discrepancia entre el éxito de los académicos en Twitter y su relevanc…

RT @Tegumento: https://t.co/Yqa5CKIJU0 El índice Kardashian mide la discrepancia entre el éxito de los académicos en Twitter y su relevanc…

😅

RT @Tegumento: https://t.co/Yqa5CKIJU0 El índice Kardashian mide la discrepancia entre el éxito de los académicos en Twitter y su relevanc…

RT @Tegumento: https://t.co/Yqa5CKIJU0 El índice Kardashian mide la discrepancia entre el éxito de los académicos en Twitter y su relevanc…

RT @aniuxa: Soy una Kardashian... mucho más seguidores que citas

Con excepción del "privileged background", sí me identifico 🥲 Jajajaja

Soy una Kardashian... mucho más seguidores que citas

RT @Tegumento: https://t.co/Yqa5CKIJU0 El índice Kardashian mide la discrepancia entre el éxito de los académicos en Twitter y su relevanc…

RT @Tegumento: https://t.co/Yqa5CKIJU0 El índice Kardashian mide la discrepancia entre el éxito de los académicos en Twitter y su relevanc…

Ya sabemos a quién se lo vamos a aplicar, verdad?

RT @Tegumento: https://t.co/Yqa5CKIJU0 El índice Kardashian mide la discrepancia entre el éxito de los académicos en Twitter y su relevanc…

https://t.co/Yqa5CKIJU0 El índice Kardashian mide la discrepancia entre el éxito de los académicos en Twitter y su relevancia científica. Lo primero se mide en seguidores, lo segundo en citas al propio trabajo.

The Kardashian Index - are renowned scientists the most influential as measured by twitter followers? 🧵 https://t.co/zrD4qwpa4q

@lucas_c_parra From the original paper: https://t.co/ODtikh7pr4. Phew, I can keep tweeting for a little bit more! https://t.co/G210SGYY6K

@kirk_roberts @allisonbmccoy @deansittig @culehmann Maybe it’s time to revisit the Kardashian Index? Back then, mine was where it should be. Have our priorities changed? https://t.co/Wj7S4nXBpQ

@professor_dave https://t.co/F5RDB8qPDT

RT @ChrisRegulus1: En una era dominada por el culto a la celebridad, los científicos no deben elogiar sin sentido la popularidad superficia…

En una era dominada por el culto a la celebridad, los científicos no deben elogiar sin sentido la popularidad superficial de sus pares. Por ello se propone el índice Kardashian; una cuantificación simple del rendimiento de un científico en redes sociales.

RT @rofe6065: I never knew this existed, but it is kind of funny and maybe has some satirical truths https://t.co/1ObNrpKCSS

I never knew this existed, but it is kind of funny and maybe has some satirical truths https://t.co/1ObNrpKCSS

@gerardinho9 Great question. Not easy to answer. Depends what you mean by folx. My Twitter readers find my work on Twitter. A lot of them are academics, it certainly has helped me. But if I had spent all this time writing articles and and getting grants? H

RT @kembellec: L'information indispensable de la semaine : le site pour calculer votre index Kardashian https://t.co/4R29VeWjkc avec les #A…

Ah quand le "thread index", ratio des publications VS threads twitter :))

RT @kembellec: L'information indispensable de la semaine : le site pour calculer votre index Kardashian https://t.co/4R29VeWjkc avec les #A…

L'information indispensable de la semaine : le site pour calculer votre index Kardashian https://t.co/4R29VeWjkc avec les #API de @Twitter (https://t.co/9gPLebf4Hr) et @googlescholar_ Oh la bonne idée de TP pour les @MedasMaster et @MedasNantes ;) https://

Very very true. Reminds me of this under appreciated paper as well. https://t.co/7tiIl53Ni4

@EckerleIsabella @PSHolstein https://t.co/elPebV1sjn

"...there is a danger that this form of communication is gaining too high a value and that we are losing sight of key metrics of scientific value, such as citation indices." https://t.co/gGMySakHId

RT @vaillancourt_dr: This 2014 paper really applies to Twitter. People (men) with big followings and not much (if any) scientific output…

This 2014 paper really applies to Twitter. People (men) with big followings and not much (if any) scientific output are lauded as being experts. It happens all the time. Hint: Look up a person’s H index to see their scientific contributions. https://t

https://t.co/BgRrb0IDjk ha

I did a little of this by brute force.

@AgustinLaje No entiendo porqué eres tendencia ni menos porqué hay gente que te toma en serio siendo que en Scopus no existes, eres peor que un Kardashian. https://t.co/2tuiU0rPa6

@sdeliberato Btw, this is the article: https://t.co/PAGfIi5sDh

RT @LesFaeLeith: @PBSherren This is a well studied phenomenon called The Kardashian Index. https://t.co/OKPbEzXpki

@PBSherren This is a well studied phenomenon called The Kardashian Index. https://t.co/OKPbEzXpki

@FriendsOfSciMed @ScienceBasedMed https://t.co/HJkk2k9t3i

The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists https://t.co/KZ2lGy0Ry8

Kardashian index! An interesting paper by @neilhall_uk: https://t.co/6cOHZEs4Ca

@R_J_Gilmour Whoops looks like I made a PEMDAS error when I first calculated it 😅😅... It's actually only 3.6. I can keep on Twittering https://t.co/a5DksQfBAm https://t.co/352GsUGIzW

This is interesting, and makes me need to re-thinking my existence in social media... 😇 https://t.co/bskSjTQGFA

Source: https://t.co/VhQ8Luy8DQ

The Kardashian index: a measure of discrepant social media profile for scientists https://t.co/FEGINT53k4