Search results

The purpose of this study is to assess the value of altmetrics or other indicators, showcasing the impact of academic output, which is seen too often correlated with the citation count.

This study considered three reputed journals of Library and Information Science (LIS) published by Elsevier. A total of 1,164 articles were found in these journals from 2016 to 2020 and the relationships between altmetric attention scores (AAS) and citations were examined. The analysis was extended to compare the grouped data set based on percentile ranks of AAS like top 50%, top 25%, top 10% and top 1%.

Using Spearman correlation analysis, the findings reveal a positive correlation between AAS and citations with different significant levels for all articles, and articles with AAS, as well as for normalized AAS in the top 50%, top 25%, top 10% and top 1% data set. For the three journals International Journal of Information Management (IJIM), Journal of Informetrics (JIF) and Library and Information Science Research (LISR), a significant positive correlation is observed across all data sets. But an unexpected result was observed: in the case of the top 50% of articles for the IJIM and JIF showed no significant correlation but the LISR journal showed a positive correlation for the whole data set. This journal though has fewer articles in comparison to the other two.

A source item that is highly cited may not be having high social media attention as reflected in the findings. This demarcates AAS with citations implying various factors on which these measurements are dependent. The study distinguishes these metrics lucidly. There is not a single guideline or uniformity in assessing the correlation found. But the problem is that the interpretation of the correlation strength affects the conclusion of the study. Moreover, this study will be a role model as a draft for librarians to select relevant journals for their libraries and will facilitate authors in the choice of the publication outlets for their papers, particularly concerning the journals that have both visibility and research impact.

The study reported devising a comprehensive tool to validate AAS as a measure of scholarly impact to include appropriate social media sources and verify its relationship with other metrics. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is the first attempt to discover the correlation between AAS and citations for the highly impactful LIS journal published by Elsevier. The empirical evidence lies in the citation and altmetric data extracted from the dimension database.

The study showcases the social impact (online attention) of funded research compared to nonfunded for the BRICS nations. The key themes achieving online attention across the funded and nonfunded publications have also been identified.

A total of 1,507,931 articles published across the BRICS nations for a period of three (03) years were downloaded from the Clarivate Analytics' InCites database of Web of Science (WoS). “Funding Acknowledgement Analysis (FAA)” was used to identify the funded and nonfunded publications. The altmetric score of the top highly cited (1%) publications was gauged from the largest altmetric data provider, “Altmetric.com”, using the DOI of each publication. One-way ANOVA test was used to know the impact of funding on the mentions (altmetrics) across different data sources covered by Altmetric.com. The highly predominant keywords (hotspots) have been mapped using bibliometric software, “VOSviewer”.

The mentions across all the altmetric sources for funded research are higher compared to nonfunded research for all nations. It indicates the altmetric advantage for funded research, as funded publications are more discussed, tweeted, shared and have more readers and citations; thus, acquiring more social impact/online attention compared to nonfunded publications. The difference in means for funded and nonfunded publications varies across various altmetric sources and nations. Further, the authors’ keyword analysis reveals the prominence of the respective nation names in publications of the BRICS.

The study showcases the utility of indexing the funding information and whether research funding increases social impact return (online attention). It presents altmetrics as an important impact assessment and evaluation framework indicator, adding one more dimension to the research performance. The linking of funding information with the altmetric score can be used to assess the online attention and multi-flavoured impact of a particular funding programme and source/agency of a nation so that necessary strategies would be framed to improve the reach and impact of funded research. It identifies countries that achieve significant online attention for their funded publications compared to nonfunded ones, along with the key themes that can be utilised to frame research and investment plans.

The study represents the social impact of funded research compared to nonfunded across the BRICS nations.

The purpose of this study is to apply altmetrics and bibliometric indicators on the top 100 most mentioned articles published related to the sustainable development goal (SDG)-13, Climate Action.

The authors used the Altmetric Explorer’s SDGs filter to extract the most mentioned articles belonging to Climate Action and their other characteristics, such as DOI, titles, tools mentioning them and their demographic descriptions. The same set of papers was searched in the Dimensions database to extract them in the format importable in R-studio to check the distribution of papers across various journals and identify their subject category, countries and institutions publishing these papers. Further, SPSS was used to check the correlation between altmetric attention score (AAS) and citations.

The results of the paper showed the mean of AAS and the citations received by the articles was 3,556.35 and 304.04, respectively. Twitter has been the most used social media platform for mentioning the research related to climate action, covering 88.1% of the total mentions. The Twitter and the News mention demographics show the USA contributing the most tweet mentions (15.2%) as well as news mentions (57.65%) to the papers. Also, the USA has solely published 49 papers from the total papers selected for the study. The papers were published in 31 journals most of them belonging to the quartile first (Q1) category and primarily belonged to the subject category “Earth Sciences.” Pearson’s correlational method showed a significant but low positive correlation between AAS and citation counts (r = 0.365, p = <0.001) and a strong positive correlation between the citations and Mendeley readership counts (r = 0.907).

The research is original in nature and discovered very interesting results about climate action using altmetric and bibliometric techniques.

This paper aimed to explore the presence of altmetric data across the sub-categories of the medical science discipline and also explore whether the openness of articles results in (dis)advantage for altmetrics mentions.

The research implies data carpentry methods for gathering bibliographic data related to narrow fields of medical science discipline from the Scopus database with at least one Indian author affiliation during 2012–2021. The corresponding data were also collected from three different sources: Altmetric.com, Mendeley.com and Unpaywall.org, using OpenRefine and REST/API calls. Further, the authors observed open access altmetric advantages (OAAA) and categorical OAAA (COAAA) across seven altmetric platforms for all articles as well as discipline-wise.

The result shows that the overall coverage of altmetric events is still low, but it shows an increasing trend from the past. Mendeley has the largest coverage; almost 97.12% of publications are covered. The health policy discipline has extensive coverage across altmetric platforms (nearly 57.40% of publications in altmetrics and 99.23% in Mendeley), whereas the drug guides has the lowest (almost 0.92% in Altmetrics and 77.05% in Mendeley). Moreover, the OA articles have been highly covered in altmetrics than those of non-OA articles, and bronze OA articles covered mostly compared to others. News registered with the significant OA altmetric advantages across disciplines. Categorically, bronze and hybrid OA have the largest altmetric advantages.

This research is a unique attempt to apply OAAA and COAAA to explore OA altmetric advantages of narrow subject categories of medical science disciplines.

Academic citation and social attention measure different dimensions in the impact of research results. The authors quantify the contribution of funding to both indicators considering the differences attributable to the research field and access type.

Citation and social attention accumulated until the year 2021 of more than 367 thousand research articles published in the year 2018 are studied. The authors consider funding acknowledgments (FAs) in the research articles. The data source is Dimensions, and the units of study are research articles in the United Nation (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Most cited goals by researchers do not coincide with those that arouse greater social attention. A small proportion of articles accumulates a large part of the citations and most of the social attention. Both citation and social attention grow with funding. Thus, funded research has a greater probability of being cited in academic articles and mentioned in social media. Funded research receives on average two to three times more citations and 2.5 to 4.5 times more social attention than unfunded research. Moreover, the open access (OA) modalities gold and hybrid have the greatest advantages in citation and social attention due to funding.

Specific topics were studied in a specific period. Studying other topics and/or different time periods might result in different findings.

When funding to publish in open or hybrid access journals is not available, it is advisable to self-archiving the pre-print or post-print version in a freely accessible repository.

Although cautiously, it is also advisable to consider the social impact of the research to complement the scientific impact in the evaluation of the research.

The joint evaluation of the effect of both funding and OA on social attention.

The emergence of cryptocurrencies has tremendously changed the way of financial transactions around the world which has led to form distinct discussions in the field regarding its reliability. This paper aims to evaluate the published literatures on cryptocurrency identifying its growth, citation, prolific authors, journals, countries, active funding agencies, collaboration pattern and emerging research hotspots in the area.

Scientometrics and Altmetrics parameters have been incorporated in the study. Literatures covered from the Scopus database searching within “Article Title, Abstract, Keywords” with keywords “cryptocurrency” OR “digital currency” OR “bitcoin” OR “Ethereum” by limiting the time range of 2013–2022, English language and journal articles only. Total 6,107 documents have been identified. The further analysis and visualisation is performed using MSExcel, VOSviewer, Biblioshiny and Tableau. Another tool, Dimension.ai is used to identify the Altmetric Attention Score.

The findings reveal that the growth of research and citation rate hiked from the year 2017 till now. Elie Bouri is the top contributor, IEEE Access is the most prolific journal, China being the prolific country. Topics like Blockchain, Bitcoin, Ethereum, smart contracts, financial markets are emerging researched hotspots. The reliability of crypto market is still not clear because of its high volatility. The findings of the study will be more useful in the academia, subject specialists, research institutions, funding agencies, publishing agencies in decision-making.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, there is no such study found considering both Scientometrics and Altmetrics approaches on cryptocurrency research with the selected time bound.

In recent years, instant messaging platforms like WhatsApp have gained substantial popularity in both academic and practical domains. However, despite this growth, there is a lack of a comprehensive overview of the literature in this field. The primary purpose of this study is to bridge this gap by analyzing a substantial dataset of 12,947 articles retrieved from the Dimensions.ai, database spanning from 2011 to March 2023.

To achieve the authors' objective, the authors employ bibliometric analysis techniques. The authors delve into various bibliometric networks, including citation networks, co-citation networks, collaboration networks, keywords and bibliographic couplings. These methods allow for the uncovering of the social and conceptual structures within the academic discourse surrounding WhatsApp.

The authors' analysis reveals several significant findings. Firstly, the authors observe a remarkable and continuous growth in the number of academic studies dedicated to WhatsApp over time. Notably, two prevalent themes emerge: the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and the role of WhatsApp in the realm of social media. Furthermore, the authors' study highlights diverse applications of WhatsApp, including its utilization in education and learning, as a communication tool, in medical education, cyberpsychology, security, psychology and behavioral learning.

This paper contributes to the field by offering a comprehensive overview of the scholarly research landscape related to WhatsApp. The findings not only illuminate the burgeoning interest in WhatsApp among researchers but also provide insights into the diverse domains where WhatsApp is making an impact. The analysis of bibliometric networks offers a unique perspective on the social and conceptual structures within this field, shedding light on emerging trends and influential research. This study thus serves as a valuable resource for scholars, practitioners and policymakers seeking to navigate the evolving landscape of WhatsApp research. The study will also be useful for researchers interested in conducting bibliometric analysis using Dimensions.ai, a free database.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a significant game changer in human resource development (HRD). The launch of ChatGPT has accelerated its progress and amplified its impact on organizations and employees. This study aims to review and examine literature on AI in HRD, using a bibliometric approach.

This study is a bibliometric review. Scopus was used to identify studies in the field. In total, 236 papers published in the past 10 years were examined using the VOSviewer program.

The obtained results showed that most cited documents and authors are mainly from computer sciences, emphasizing machine learning over human learning. While it was expected that HRD authors and studies would have a more substantial presence, the lesser prominence suggests several interesting avenues for explorations.

This study provides insights and recommendations for researchers, managers, HRD practitioners and policymakers. Prioritizing the development of both humans and machines becomes crucial, as an exclusive focus on machines may pose a risk to the sustainability of employees' skills and long-term career prospects.

There is a dearth of bibliometric studies examining AI in HRD. Hence, this study proposes a relatively unexplored approach to examine this topic. It provides a visual and structured overview of this topic. Also, it highlights areas of research concentration and areas that are overlooked. Shedding light on the presence of more research originating from computer sciences and focusing on machine learning over human learning represent an important contribution of this study, which may foster interdisciplinary collaboration with experts from diverse fields, broadening the scope of research on technologies and learning in workplaces.

This study aims to investigate the impact of ResearchGate (RG) scores on the scientific indicators of Qur’anic productions in Scopus.

This research is fundamental in method, created in a descriptive method and a scientometric approach. The statistical society includes 4,105 records produced by writers in the field of Qur’an during the time period of 2011–2020 indexed in the Scopus database. In this study, Pearson correlation coefficient test is used with aid of Excel and SPSS software.

Countries such as Malaysia, the USA and Indonesia, respectively, hold the highest number of scientific productions in the field of Qur’an. Iran holds the fourth place with a 544 record difference in comparison to Malaysia (866 documents). There is a positive and meaningful relation between measures of RG, readers, followers, citations and the H-index score regarding writers with received citations and the H-index score of scientific productions in the field of Qur’an in Scopus. However, no relation can be observed between the mentioned measures and indicators of the number of documents with cowriting.

Because of some authors not using the same name in their articles, it was not possible to access their profile in RG. For this reason, the information of these authors was not accessible in RG.

The activity of researchers in social networks will receive feedback from readers. This will result in more citations. Contrary to expectations, the research results showed that Iran does not have a good position in publishing Qur’anic works. Therefore, researchers should publish their findings in international journals.

Iranian writers should try to publish their scientific productions in international publications and also widely spread their content and research results across social networks to increase feedback and gain the attention of readers. This process leads to receiving reader feedback and publication of the Islamic teachings.

The relationship between the number of citations of Qur’anic works in Scopus and altmetric indicators in RG has not been investigated in previous researches. Therefore, this research is innovative in this field.

This study aims to develop a framework for applying performance management principles to implementing a pluralistic model of scholarly impact in business schools to increase the value and relevance scholarly research to multiple stakeholder groups.

Performance management principles were studied with case study data of scholarly impact that included bibliographic measures and altmetrics. An analytical model was built for a focal business school that provided benchmarks for managing scholarly impact by using data from three peer schools.

Bibliographic, scholarly output measures and altmetrics were consistent across the focal school and peer schools, thereby providing a solid foundation for establishing performance benchmarks for annual performance reviews, promotion and tenure decisions and organizational impact goals.

This paper provides guidance for designing, building and implementing performance management systems to foster scholarly impact.

This paper integrates pluralistic impact models and performance management systems to build faculty expertise and align it with multiple impact domains.