Created as a supplement for the Impact Measurement collection of the ScholarlyCommunication Notebook (SCN) to describe some of the core literature in the field as well asresources that cannot be included on the SCN, because they are not openly licensed but arefree to read.This annotated bibliography is separated into three sections: Peer reviewed scholarly articles,Blog posts, initiatives, and guides, and Resources for further education and professionaldevelopment. The first section is intended to help practitioners in the field of researchassessment and bibliometrics to understand high-level core concepts in the field. The secondsection offers resources that are more applicable to practice. The final section includes links toblogs, communities, discussion lists, paid and free educational courses, and archivedconferences, so that practitioners and professionals can stay abreast of emerging trends,improve their skills, and find community. Most of these resources could not be included on theScholarly Communication Notebook, because they are not openly licensed. However, allresources on this bibliography are freely available to access and read.

This guide has been created by bibliometric practitioners to support other users of InCites, a research analytics tool from Clarivate Analytics that uses bibliographic data from Web of Science; the guide promotes a community of informed and responsible use of research impact metrics. The recommendations in this document may be more suited to other academic sector users, but the authors hope that other users may also benefit from the suggestions. The guide aims to provide plain-English definitions, key strengths and weaknesses and some practical application tips for some of the most commonly-used indicators available in InCites. The indicator definitions are followed by explanations of the data that powers InCites, attempting to educate users on where the data comes from and how the choices made in selecting and filtering data will impact on final results. Also in this document are a comparative table to highlight differences between indicators in InCites and SciVal, another commonly used bibliometric analytic programme, and instructions on how to run group reports. All of the advice in this document is underpinned by a belief in the need to use InCites in a way that respects the limitations of indicators as quantitative assessors of research outputs. Both of the authors are members of signatory institutions of DORA, the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment. A summary of advice to using indicators and bibliometric data responsibly is available on pages 4-5 and should be referred to throughout. Readers are also recommended to refer to the official InCites Indicators Handbook produced by Clarivate Analytics. The guide was written with complete editorial independence from Clarivate Analytics, the owners of InCites. Clarivate Analytics supported the authors of this document with checking for factual accuracy only.

This guide is designed to help those who use SciVal, a research analytics tool from Elsevier that sources bibliographic data from Scopus, to source and apply bibliometrics in academic institutions. It was originally devised in February 2018 by Dr. Ian Rowlands of King’s College London as a guide for his university, which makes SciVal widely available to its staff. King’s does this because it believes that bibliometric data are best used in context by specialists in the field. A small group of LIS-Bibliometrics committee members reviewed and revised the King’s guide to make it more applicable to a wider audience. SciVal is a continually updated source and so feedback is always welcome at LISBibliometrics@jiscmail.ac.uk. LIS-Bibliometrics is keen that bibliometric data should be used carefully and responsibly and this requires an understanding of the strengths and limitations of the indicators that SciVal publishes.

The purpose of this Guide is to help researchers and professional services staff to make the most meaningful use of SciVal. It includes some important `inside track’ insights and practical tips that may not be found elsewhere. The scope and coverage limitations of SciVal are fairly widely understood and serve as a reminder that these metrics are not appropriate in fields where scholarly communication takes place mainly outside of the journals and conference literature. This is one of the many judgment calls that need to be made when putting bibliometric data into their proper context. One of the most useful features of SciVal is the ability to drill down in detail using various filters. This allows a user to define a set of publications accurately, but that may mean generating top level measures that are based on small samples with considerable variance. Bibliometrics distributions are often highly skewed, where even apparently simple concepts like the `average’ can be problematic. So one objective of this Guide is to set out some advice on sample sizes and broad confidence intervals, to avoid over-interpreting the headline data. Bibliometric indicators should always be used in combination, not in isolation, because each can only offer partial insights. They should also be used in a 'variable geometry' along with other quantitative and qualitative indicators, including expert judgments and non-publication metrics, such as grants or awards, to flesh out the picture.