Search results

1 – 10 of 353
Article
Publication date: 29 December 2022

Xu Wang and Xin Feng

This paper aims to analyze the relationships between discourse leading indicators and citations from perspectives of integrating altmetrics indicators and tries to provide…

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to analyze the relationships between discourse leading indicators and citations from perspectives of integrating altmetrics indicators and tries to provide references for comprehending the quantitative indicators of scientific communication in the era of open science, constructing the evaluation indicator system of the discourse leading for academic journals and then improving the discourse leading of academic journals.

Design/methodology/approach

Based on the theory of communication and the new pattern of scientific communication, this paper explores the formation process of academic journals' discourse leading. This paper obtains 874,119 citations and 6,378,843 altmetrics indicators data from 65 international multidisciplinary academic journals. The relationships between indicators of discourse leading (altmetrics) and citations are studied by using descriptive statistical analysis, correlation analysis, principal component analysis, negative binomial regression analysis and marginal effects analysis. Meanwhile, the connotation and essential characteristics of the indicators, the strength and influence of the relationships are further analyzed and explored. It is proposed that academic journals' discourse leading is composed of news discourse leading, social media discourse leading, peer review discourse leading, encyclopedic discourse leading, video discourse leading and policy discourse leading.

Findings

It is discovered that the 15 altmetrics indicators data have a low degree of centralization to the center and a high degree of polarization dispersion overall; their distribution patterns do not follow the normal distributions, and their distributions have the characteristics of long-tailed right-peaked curves. Overall, 15 indicators show positive correlations and wide gaps exist in the number of mentions and coverage. The academic journals' discourse leading significantly affects total cites. When altmetrics indicators of international mainstream academic and social media platforms are used to explore the connotation and characteristics of academic journals' discourse leading, the influence or contribution of social media discourse, news discourse, video discourse, policy discourse, peer review discourse and encyclopedia discourse on the citations decreases in turn.

Originality/value

This study is innovative from the academic journal level to analyze the deep relationships between altmetrics indicators and citations from the perspective of correlation. First, this paper explores the formation process of academic journals' discourse leading. Second, this paper integrates altmetrics indicators to study the correlation between discourse leading indicators and citations. This study will help to enrich and improve basic theoretical issues and indicators’ composition, provide theoretical support for the construction of the discourse leading evaluation system for academic journals and provide ideas for the evaluation practice activities.

Details

Library Hi Tech, vol. ahead-of-print no. ahead-of-print
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0737-8831

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 25 October 2022

Xu Wang

Under the background of open science, this paper integrates altmetrics data and combines multiple evaluation methods to analyze and evaluate the indicators' characteristics of…

258

Abstract

Purpose

Under the background of open science, this paper integrates altmetrics data and combines multiple evaluation methods to analyze and evaluate the indicators' characteristics of discourse leading for academic journals, which is of great significance to enrich and improve the evaluation theory and indicator system of academic journals.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper obtained 795,631 citations and 10.3 million altmetrics indicators data for 126,424 published papers from 151 medicine, general and internal academic journals. In this paper, descriptive statistical analysis and distribution rules of evaluation indicators are first carried out at the macro level. The distribution characteristics of evaluation indicators under different international collaboration conditions are analyzed at the micro level. Second, according to the characteristics and connotation of the evaluation indicators, the evaluation indicator system is constructed. Third, correlation analysis, factor analysis, entropy weight method and TOPSIS method are adopted to evaluate and analyze the discourse leading in medicine, general and internal academic journals by integrating altmetrics. At the same time, this paper verifies the reliability of the evaluation results.

Findings

Six features of discourse leading integrated with altmetrics indicators are obtained. In the era of open science, online academic exchanges are becoming more and more popular. The evaluation activities based on altmetrics have fine-grained and procedural advantages. It is feasible and necessary to integrate altmetrics indicators and combine the advantages of multiple methods to evaluate the academic journals' discourse leading of which are in a diversified academic ecosystem.

Originality/value

This paper uses descriptive statistical analysis to analyze the distribution characteristics and distribution rules of discourse leading indicators of academic journals and to explore the availability of altmetrics indicators and the effectiveness of constructing an evaluation system. Then, combining the advantages of multiple evaluation methods, The author integrates altmetrics indicators to comprehensively evaluate the discourse leading of academic journals and verify the reliability of the evaluation results. This paper aims to provide references for enriching and improving the evaluation theory and indicator system of academic journals.

Details

Library Hi Tech, vol. ahead-of-print no. ahead-of-print
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0737-8831

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 30 December 2019

Xiaoguang Wang, Tao Lv and Donald Hamerly

The purpose of this paper is to provide insights on the improvement of academic impact and social attention of Chinese collaboration articles from the perspective of altmetrics.

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to provide insights on the improvement of academic impact and social attention of Chinese collaboration articles from the perspective of altmetrics.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors retrieved articles which are from the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) and indexed by Nature Index as sampled articles. With the methods of distribution analysis, comparative analysis and correlation analysis, authors compare the coverage differences of altmetric sources for CAS Chinese articles and CAS international articles, and analyze the correlation between the collaborative information and the altmetric indicators.

Findings

Results show that the coverage of altmetric sources for CAS international articles is greater than that for CAS Chinese articles. Mendeley and Twitter cover a higher percentage of collaborative articles than other sources studied. Collaborative information, such as number of collaborating countries, number of collaborating institutions, and number of collaborating authors, show moderate or low correlation with altmetric indicator counts. Mendeley readership has a moderate correlation with altmetric indicators like tweets, news outlets and blog posts.

Practical implications

International scientific collaboration at different levels improves attention, academic impact and social impact of articles. International collaboration and altmetrics indicators supplement each other. The results of this study can help us better understand the relationship between altmetrics indicators of articles and collaborative information of articles. It is of great significance to evaluate the influence of Chinese articles, as well as help to improve the academic impact and social attention of Chinese collaboration articles.

Originality/value

To the best of authors’ knowledge, few studies focus on the use of altmetrics to assess publications produced through Chinese academic collaboration. This study is one of a few attempts that include the number of collaborating countries, number of collaborating institutions, and number of collaborating authors of scientific collaboration into the discussion of altmetric indicators and figured out the relationship among them.

Details

Library Hi Tech, vol. 38 no. 3
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0737-8831

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 17 October 2019

Ali Ouchi, Mohammad Karim Saberi, Nasim Ansari, Leila Hashempour and Alireza Isfandyari-Moghaddam

The purpose of this paper is to study the presence of highly cited papers of Nature in social media websites and tools. It also tries to examine the correlation between altmetric

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to study the presence of highly cited papers of Nature in social media websites and tools. It also tries to examine the correlation between altmetric and bibliometric indicators.

Design/methodology/approach

This descriptive study was carried out using altmetric indicators. The research sample consisted of 1,000 most-cited articles in Nature. In February 2019, the bibliographic information of these articles was extracted from the Scopus database. Then, the titles of all articles were manually searched on Google, and by referring to the article in the journal website and altmetric institution, the data related to social media presence and altmetric score of articles were collected. The data were analyzed using Microsoft Excel and SPSS.

Findings

According to the results of the study, from 1,000 articles, 989 of them (98.9 per cent) were mentioned at least once in different social media websites and tools. The most used altmetric source in highly cited articles was Mendeley (98.9 per cent), followed by Citeulike (79.8 per cent) and Wikipedia (69.4 per cent). Most Tweets, blog posts, Facebook posts, news stories, readers in Mendeley, Citeulike and Connotea and Wikipedia citations belonged to the article titled “Mastering the game of Go with deep neural networks and tree search”. The highest altmetric score was 3,135 which belonged to this paper. Most tweeters and articles’ readers were from the USA. The membership type of the tweeters was public membership. In terms of fields of study, most readers were PhD students in Agricultural and Biological Sciences. Finally, the results of Spearman’s Correlation revealed positive significant statistical correlation between all altmetric indicators and received citations of highly cited articles (p-value = 0.0001).

Practical implications

The results of this study can help researchers, editors and editorial boards of journals better understand the importance and benefits of using social media and tools to publish articles.

Originality/value

Altmetrics is a relatively new field, and in particular, there are not many studies related to the presence of articles in various social media until now. Accordingly, in this study, a comprehensive altmetric analysis was carried out on 1000 most-cited articles of one of the world's most reliable journals.

Details

Information Discovery and Delivery, vol. 47 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 2398-6247

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 24 May 2021

Zahra Batooli, Azam Mohamadloo and Somayyeh Nadi-Ravandi

The study aimed to measure scientific and social impacts of Iranian researchers' “Top Papers” in clinical medicine using citation and altmetric indicators.

Abstract

Purpose

The study aimed to measure scientific and social impacts of Iranian researchers' “Top Papers” in clinical medicine using citation and altmetric indicators.

Design/methodology/approach

In this applied descriptive-analytical study, it used scientometric analysis. A total of 166 “Top Papers” of Iranian researchers in clinical medicine category of Web of Science (WoS) database including “Highly Cited Papers” and “Hot Papers” published between 2009 and 2019 were used. Overall, 29 indicators and their data were extracted from WoS, Scopus, ResearchGate (RG) and PlumX in March 2020.

Findings

The results showed that there exists a positive correlation between the number of citations in WoS, Scopus, RG, PubMed and Crossref. In addition, it was found that there existed a positive correlation between the received citations by articles and altmetric indicators. According to the results, there is a strong correlation between RG Research Interest and citation impact. The correlation analysis on the Plum Analytics categories including “Usage”, “Capture”, “Mention”, “Social Media” and “Citation” showed the correlations between five dimensions of impact were positive and significant. The results have led the authors to think more about new metrics that can response to new developments in the new information areas.

Research limitations/implications

There are limitations to access altmetric.com in Iran and cannot be used easily. On the other hand, because of considering 24 indicators, authors had to investigate only a sample of 166 top papers from Iranian researchers to present the detailed results. About nature of altmetric indicators, although they reflect the nonacademic impact of articles alongside bibliographic indicators, they still cannot be a complete representative of the influence of their owners.

Practical implications

This study can indicate a practical application appropriate for the future study. It would be valuable to further examine how social academic platforms construct images of impact of research and how this impacts the social impact of the university as a mission. This study suggests that social media attention to academic research can be much greater than what is shown in traditional indicators such as citation.

Originality/value

This study examines 29 indicators from four platforms including RG, WoS, Scopus and PlumX, simultaneously and measures the relationship among them.

Details

Library Hi Tech, vol. 39 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0737-8831

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 26 January 2022

Mehri Sedighi

This study aims to measure the impact of the selected papers in the field of social sciences indexed in Scopus using altmetrics tools.

Abstract

Purpose

This study aims to measure the impact of the selected papers in the field of social sciences indexed in Scopus using altmetrics tools.

Design/methodology/approach

The research community consists of the articles of the Iranian researchers in the field of social sciences indexed in the Scopus database in 2014–2018. Some of the most important altmetric service providers have been used to assess the presence of the research outputs in the social media and their impact assessment. Also, the relationship between variables such as scientific collaboration of researchers, open access journals and the quality of research journals with altmetric activity have been investigated through appropriate correlation tests.

Findings

The findings indicated that the most important social media publishing Iranian articles are Mendeley, Twitter and Facebook. The results of the correlation test showed a statistically significant positive and weak relationship between the scientific collaboration of researchers and their altmetric activity. Also, there is a significant and weak statistical relation between journal openness and the altmetric scores. In this study, the findings suggest that the published articles in the journals with higher quality indicators have higher altmetric scores and are more likely to be present in social media.

Research implications

In this study, the social network indicators have been introduced as a solution to examine the effectiveness of research activities on social media. These indicators can be used to evaluate the impact and usefulness of the articles and other scientific outputs with the aim of completing and eliminating the shortcomings of traditional scientometrics indicators. What distinguishes altmetric criteria from other criteria related to the scientometric studies is the speed, ease and transparency of these scales. This allows the publications to be evaluated regardless of their formal form and in the shortest possible time, and in addition to the scientific impact, the social impact of the works is also measured.

Originality/value

The results of these studies show that using altmetric service providers not only reflects the social impact of publications on authors in different subject areas but also helps libraries, universities, research organizations and politicians in planning, budgeting and allocating resources.

Details

Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication, vol. 72 no. 4/5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 2514-9342

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 31 January 2020

Mehri Sedighi

This paper aims to assess the impact of research in the field of scientometrics by using the altmetrics (social media metrics) approach.

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to assess the impact of research in the field of scientometrics by using the altmetrics (social media metrics) approach.

Design/methodology/approach

This is an applied study which uses scientometric and altmetrics methods. The research population consists of the studies and their citations published in the two core journals (Scientometrics and Journal of Informetrics) in a period of five years (included 1,738 papers and 11,504 citations). Collecting and extracting the studies directly was carried from Springer and ScienceDirect databases. The Altmetric Explorer, a service provided by Altmetric.com, was used to collect data on studies from various sources (www.altmetric.com/). The research studies with the altmetric scores were identified (included 830 papers). The altmetric scores represent the quantity and quality of attention that the study has received on social media. The association between altmetric scores and citation indicators was investigated by using correlation tests.

Findings

The findings indicated a significant, positive and weak statistical relationship between the number of citations of the studies published in the field of scientometrics and the altmetric scores of these studies, as well as the number of readers of these studies in the two social networks (Mendeley and Citeulike) with the number of their citations. In this study, there was no statistically significant relationship between the number of citations of the studies and the number of readers on Twitter. In sum, the above findings suggest that some social networks and their indices can be representations of the impact of scientific papers, similar citations. However, owing to the weakness of the correlation coefficients, the replacement of these two categories of indicators is not recommended, but it is possible to use the altmetrics indicators as complementary scientometrics indicators in evaluating the impact of research.

Originality/value

Investigating the impact of research on social media can reflect the social impact of research and can also be useful for libraries, universities, and research organizations in planning, budgeting, and resource allocation processes.

Details

Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication, vol. 69 no. 4/5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 2514-9342

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 27 April 2020

Xiaojuan Liu, Yu Wei and Zhuojing Zhao

The purpose of this study is to explore informetrics researchers' use of social media for academic activities, their attitudes to the applicability of altmetrics in research…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to explore informetrics researchers' use of social media for academic activities, their attitudes to the applicability of altmetrics in research evaluation, the factors influencing their attitudes, and the main opportunities and weaknesses of using altmetrics.

Design/methodology/approach

A survey using a questionnaire was conducted with researchers who participated in the 16th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics ISSI 2017 and a sample of 125 respondents was obtained.

Findings

Progressively more researchers are using social media for different types of academic activities. The study found that many factors affect informetrics researchers' attitudes in different application scenarios with respect to research evaluation. Researchers who have studied altmetrics and who began using social media platforms recently or frequently have more positive attitudes. Academic users and social users have statistically significantly disparate attitudes toward altmetrics in different disciplines and different application scenarios.

Research limitations/implications

Our study only focused on 125 informetrics researchers, who participated in ISSI 2017. We mainly used the questionnaire method, but did not conduct in-depth interviews with the researcher's views.

Originality/value

Informetrics researchers are participants in social media and major researchers of altmetrics. Previous research has examined their use of social media, and this study combines this use of social media with their attitudes to altmetrics to explore the value of altmetrics from a particular perspective. The paper also provides suggestions for the application of altmetrics in research evaluation.

Details

Aslib Journal of Information Management, vol. 72 no. 3
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 2050-3806

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 28 February 2019

Mohammad Karim Saberi and Faezeh Ekhtiyari

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the usage, captures, mentions, social media and citations of highly cited papers of Library and information science (LIS).

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the usage, captures, mentions, social media and citations of highly cited papers of Library and information science (LIS).

Design/methodology/approach

This study is quantitative research that was conducted using scientometrics and altmetrics indicators. The research sample consists of LIS classic papers. The papers contain highly cited papers of LIS that are introduced by Google Scholar. The research data have been gathered from Google Scholar, Scopus and Plum Analytics Categories. The data analysis has been done by Excel and SPSS applications.

Findings

The data indicate that among the highly cited articles of LIS, the highest score regarding the usage, captures, mentions and social media and the most abundance of citations belong to “Citation advantage of open access articles” and “Usage patterns of collaborative tagging systems.” Based on the results of Spearman statistical tests, there is a positive significant correlation between Google Scholar Citations and all studied indicators. However, only the correlation between Google Scholar Citations with capture metrics (p-value = 0.047) and citation metrics (p-value = 0.0001) was statistically significant.

Originality/value

Altmetrics indicators can be used as complement traditional indicators of Scientometrics to study the impact of papers. Therefore, the Altmetrics knowledge of LIS researchers and experts and practicing new studies in this field will be very important.

Details

Performance Measurement and Metrics, vol. 20 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1467-8047

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 29 November 2018

Jose Luis Ortega

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the metrics provided by Publons about the scoring of publications and their relationship with impact measurements (bibliometric and…

2503

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the metrics provided by Publons about the scoring of publications and their relationship with impact measurements (bibliometric and altmetric indicators).

Design/methodology/approach

In January 2018, 45,819 research articles were extracted from Publons, including all their metrics (scores, number of pre and post reviews, reviewers, etc.). Using the DOI identifier, other metrics from altmetric providers were gathered to compare the scores of those publications in Publons with their bibliometric and altmetric impact in PlumX, Altmetric.com and Crossref Event Data.

Findings

The results show that: there are important biases in the coverage of Publons according to disciplines and publishers; metrics from Publons present several problems as research evaluation indicators; and correlations between bibliometric and altmetric counts and the Publons metrics are very weak (r<0.2) and not significant.

Originality/value

This is the first study about the Publons metrics at article level and their relationship with other quantitative measures such as bibliometric and altmetric indicators.

Details

Aslib Journal of Information Management, vol. 71 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 2050-3806

Keywords

1 – 10 of 353