Library and Information Service >
Analysis of Altmetrics Indicators in the Field of Library and Information Science
Received date: 2015-08-19
Revised date: 2015-09-05
Online published: 2015-09-20
[Purpose/significance] By analyzing the feature of Altmetrics indicators, this paper builds a scientific evaluation system to judge the impact of papers in a certain field.[Method/process] Taking the field of library and information science for example, it gathers citations and Altmetrics from Scopus and Altmetric.com, and makes a statistical analysis, cluster analysis and content analysis.[Result/conclusion] The findings show that: Mendeley and Twitter are more suitable to evaluate the impact of literatures in the field of library and information science; there are significant differences between Mendeley and Twitter in the point of user demographic, paper topic, paper content and journal distribution; Twitter is suitable to measure societal impact and Mendeley is suitable for the scholarly impact; there are regional differences in the popularity of different tools, when using an Altmetrics indicator it is necessary to consider if it could reveal the paper impact comprehensively.
Key words： Altmetrics; Mendeley; Twitter; bibliometrics
Liu Xiaojuan , Zai Bingxin . Analysis of Altmetrics Indicators in the Field of Library and Information Science[J]. Library and Information Service, 2015 , 59(18) : 108 -116 . DOI: 10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2015.18.017
[1] Neylon C,Wu S.Article-level metrics and the evolution of scientific impact[J].PLoS Biology,2009,7(11): e1000242.
[2] Priem J,Taraborelli D,Groth P,et al.Altmetrics:A manifesto[EB/OL].[2015-04-15].http://altmetrics.org/manifesto/.
[3] Bornmann L.Do altmetrics point to the broader impact of research？An overview of benefits and disadvantages of altmetrics[J].Journal of Informetrics,2014,8(4):895-903.
[4] Adie E,Roe W.Altmetric:Enriching scholarly content with article level discussion and metrics[J].Learned Publishing,2013,26(1):11-17.
[5] Roemer R C,Borchardt R.From bibliometrics to altmetrics: A changing scholarly landscape[J].College & Research Libraries News,2012,73(10):596-600.
[6] Galligan F,Dyas-Correia S.Altmetrics: Rethinking the way we measure[J].Serials Review,2013,39(1):56-61.
[7] Priem J,Piwowar H A,Hemminger B M.Altmetrics in the wild:Using social media to explore scholarly impact [EB/OL].[2015-05-21].http://altmetrics.org/altmetrics12/priem/.
[8] Bornmann L.Validity of altmetrics data for measuring societal impact: A study using data from altmetric and F1000Prime[J].Journal of Informetrics,2014,8(4):935-950.
[9] Torres-Salinas D,Cabezas-Clavijo A,Jimenez-Contreras E.Altmetrics:New indicators for scientific communication in Web 2.0[J].Comunicar,2013,21(41):53-60.
[10] Costas R,Zahedi Z,Wouters P.The thematic orientation of publications mentioned on social media:Large-scale disciplinary comparison of social media metrics with citations[J].Aslib Journal of Information Management,2015,67(3):260-288.
[11] Costas R,Zahedi Z,Wouters P.Do altmetrics correlate with citations? Extensive comparison of altmetric indicators with citations from a multidisciplinary perspective[EB/OL].[2015-05-28].http://arxiv.org/abs/1401.4321.
[12] Mohammadi E,Thelwall M.Mendeley readership altmetrics for the social sciences and humanities: Research evaluation and knowledge flows[J].Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology,2014,65(8):1627-1638.
[13] Haunschild R,Bornmann L.F1000 prime:An analysis of discipline-specific reader data from Mendeley[EB/OL].[2015-07-05].http://f1000research.com/articles/4-41/v2.
[14] Mohammadi E,Thelwall M,Haustein S,et al.Who reads research articles? An altmetrics analysis of mendeley user categories[EB/OL].[2015-06-28].http://www.academia.edu/6298635/Who_Reads_Research_Articles_An_Altmetrics_Analysis_of_Mendeley_User_Categories.
[15] Holmberg K,Thelwall M.Disciplinary differences in twitter scholarly communication[J].Scientometrics,2014,101(2):1027-1042.
[16] Mohammadi E, Thelwall M. Assessing the Mendeley readership of social sciences and humanities research[C]//Proceedings of ISSI: 14th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics . Vienna: University of Vienna and the AIT Austrian Institute of Technology,2013: 200-214.
[17] Li Xuemei, Thelwall M. F1000, Mendeley and traditional bibliometric indicators[C]//Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators. Montréal: Université du Québec à Montréal,2012, 2: 451-551.
[18] 宋丽萍,王建芳,孙斌.相关性视角下的WoS与Scopus之比较[J].图书情报工作,2012,56(4): 22-26.
[19] 宋丽萍,王建芳,王树义.科学评价视角下F1000、Mendeley与传统文献计量指标的比较[J].中国图书馆学报,2014,40(4):48-54.
[20] 宋丽萍,陈巍,贺颖.论文层面科学评价实证研究——以PLoS ONE为例[J].图书馆工作与研究,2015 (7): 85-88.
[21] The Altmetric Explorer[EB/OL].[2015-03-06].http://www.altmetric.com/aboutexplorer.php.
[22] What does altmetric Do?[EB/OL].[2015-03-06].http://www.altmetric.com/aboutexplorer.php.
[23] Webometric analyst[EB/OL].[2015-03-07].http://lexiurl.wlv.ac.uk/.
[24] Liu Jean.New perspectives on article-level metrics:Developing ways to assess research uptake and impact online[J].UKSG Insights,2013,6(2):153-158.
[25] Torres-Salinas D,Cabezas-Clavijo A,Jiménez-Contreras E.Altmetrics:New indicators for scientific communication in Web 2.0[J].Comunicar,2013,21(41):53-60.
[26] Thelwall M,Haustein S,Larivière V,et al.Do altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other social Web services[J].PLoS ONE,2013,8(5):e64841.
[27] Mendeley[EB/OL].[2015-04-02].https://www.Mendeley.com/.
[28] Gephi[EB/OL].[2015-04-28].https://gephi.github.io/.
[29] De Winter J C F.The relationship between Tweets,citations,and articleviews for PLoS ONE articles[J].Scientometrics,2015,102(2):1773-1779.
[30] JAMIA[EB/OL].[2015-05-24].http://jamia.oxfordjournals.org/about.
[31] JASIST[EB/OL].[2015-05-24].http://www.asis.org/jasist.html.
[32] Wang Xianwen, Liu Chen, Mao Wenli,et al.The open access advantage considering citation,article usage and social media attention[J].Scientometrics,2015,103(2):555-564.
[33] Alperín J P.Geographic variation in social media metrics:An analysis of Latin American journal articles[J].Aslib Journal of Information Management,2015,67(3): 289-304.
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
