Relationship between altmetric and bibliometric indicators across academic social sites: The case of CSIC's members

Journal of Informetrics

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 39-49

  Ortega, José Luis ^a  

^a INSTITUTO DE HISTORIA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Academic search engines; Academic social network sites; Altmetrics; Bibliometrics; CSIC

Indexed keywords

SEARCH ENGINES; SOCIAL NETWORKING (ONLINE);

ACADEMIC SEARCH; ALTMETRICS; BIBLIOMETRICS; CSIC; SOCIAL NETWORK SITES;

EDUCATION;

EID: 84912018753     PISSN: 17511577     EISSN: 18755879     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2014.11.004     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Almousa O. Users' classification and usage-pattern identification in academic social networks. Proceedings of 2011 IEEE Jordan conference on applied electrical engineering and computing technologies 2011, IEEE, Amman, Jordania.
2. Banbersta M. The success factors of the social network sites "Twitter" 2010, Utrecht University of Applied Sciences, Utrecht. http://crossmedialab.nl/files/SNS_Research.pdf.
3. Bar-Ilan J., Haustein S., Peters I., Priem J., Shema H., Terliesner J. Beyond citations: Scholars' visibility on the social Web. Proceedings of 17th international conference on science and technology indicators 2012, 14. Science-Metrix and OST, Montréal. T. Archambault, Y. Gingras, V. Larivière (Eds.).
4. Bollen J., Van de Sompel H., Hagberg A., Chute R. A principal component analysis of 39 scientific impact measures. PLoS ONE 2009, 4(6):e6022.
5. Brody T., Harnad S., Carr L. Earlier web usage statistics as predictors of later citation impact. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2006, 57(8):1060-1072.
6. Costas R., Zahedi Z., Wouters P. Do altmetrics correlate with citations? Extensive comparison of altmetric indicators with citations from a multidisciplinary perspective 2014, arxiv:1401.4321.
7. Cronin B. Metrics à la mode. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2013, 64(6):1091.
8. CSIC Data 2012: Research centers and institutes 2013, CSIC, Madrid, Spain. http://documenta.wi.csic.es/alfresco/downloadpublic/direct/workspace/SpacesStore/d7069f1e-b26e-46ae-935f-313c44d875d0/CSIC_DATA_2012.pdf.
9. Delgado Lopez-Cozar E., Robinson-García N., Torres-Salinas D. Manipulating Google Scholar citations and Google Scholar metrics: Simple, easy and tempting 2012, arxiv:1212.0638.
10. Elder J. Social media fail to live up to early marketing hype. The Wall Street Journal 2014, http://online.wsj.com/articles/companies-alter-social-media-strategies-1403499658.
11. Eysenbach G. Can tweets predict citations? Metrics of social impact based on Twitter and correlation with traditional metrics of scientific impact. Journal of Medical Internet Research 2011, 13(4):e123.
12. Garcia D., Mavrodiev P., Schweitzer F. Social resilience in online communities: The autopsy of Friendster. Conference on online social networks 2013, 39-50. ACM, Boston, USA. S. Muthu Muthukrishnan, A. El Abbadi, B. Krishnamurthy (Eds.).
13. Haley M.R. Ranking top economics and finance journals using Microsoft Academic Search versus Google scholar: How does the new publish or perish option compare?. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 2014, 65(5):1079-1084.
14. Haustein S., Peters I., Bar-Ilan J., Priem J., Shema H., Terliesner J. Coverage and adoption of altmetrics sources in the bibliometric community. Scientometrics 2014, 1-19. 10.1007/s11192-013-1221-3.
15. Jacsó P. The pros and cons of Microsoft Academic Search from a bibliometric perspective. Online Information Review 2011, 35(6):983-997.
16. Jacsó P. Google Scholar author citation tracker: Is it too little, too late?. Online Information Review 2012, 36(1):126-141.
17. Jeng W., He D., Jiang J. User participation in an academic social networking service: A survey of open group users on Mendeley 2014, arxiv:1401.6495.
18. Jeng W., He D., Jiang J., Zhang Y. Groups in Mendeley: Owners' descriptions and group outcomes. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2012, 49(1):1-4.
19. Jiang J., Ni C., He D., Jeng W. Mendeley group as a new source of interdisciplinarity study: How do disciplines interact on Mendeley?. Proceedings of the 13th ACM/IEEE-CS joint conference on digital libraries 2013, 135-138. ACM, Indianapolis, USA. J.S. Downie, R.H. McDonald, T.W. Cole, R. Sanderson, F. Shipman (Eds.).
20. Khabsa M., Giles C.L. The number of scholarly documents on the public web. PLOS ONE 2014, 9(5):e93949.
21. Kelly B., Delasalle J. Can LinkedIn and Academia.edu enhance access to open repositories?. OR2012: The 7th international conference on open repositories 2012.
22. Kordestani A.A., Limayem M., Salehi-Sangari E., Blomgren H., Afsharipour A. Why a few social networking sites succeed while many fail. Proceedings of the annual conference of the academy of marketing science, Coral Gables, USA 2011, M. Conway (Ed.).
23. Li X., Thelwall M. F1000, Mendeley and traditional bibliometric indicators. Proceedings of 17th international conference on science and technology indicators 2012, 451-551. Science-Metrix and OST, Montréal. T. Archambault, Y. Gingras, V. Larivière (Eds.).
24. Li X., Thelwall M., Giustini D. Validating online reference managers for scholarly impact measurement. Scientometrics 2012, 91(2):461-471.
25. Mas-Bleda A., Thelwall M., Kousha K., Aguillo I.F. Do highly cited researchers successfully use the social web?. Scientometrics 2014, 10.1007/s11192-014-1345-0.
26. Menendez M., de Angeli A., Menestrina Z. Exploring the virtual space of academia. From research to practice in the design of cooperative systems: Results and open challenges 2012, Springer-Verlag, London. J. Dugdale (Ed.).
27. Mohammadi E., Thelwall M. Mendeley readership altmetrics for the social sciences and humanities: Research evaluation and knowledge flows. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 2014, 10.1002/asi.23071.
28. Nentwich M., König R. Academia goes Facebook? The potential of social network sites in the scholarly realm. Opening Science 2014, 107-124. Springer International Publishing, London. S. Bartling, S. Friesike (Eds.).
29. Ortega J.L. Academic search engines: A quantitative outlook 2014, 200. Chandos Publishing, Cambridge, UK, ISBN: 1843347911.
30. Ortega J.L., Aguillo I.F. Science is all in the eye of the beholder: Keyword maps in Google Scholar Citations;. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2012, 63(12):2370-2377.
31. Ortega J.L., Aguillo I.F. Microsoft Academic Search and Google Scholar Citations: A comparative analysis of author profiles. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2014, 65(6):1149-1156.
32. Perneger T.V. Relation between online 'hit counts' and subsequent citations: Prospective study of research papers in the BMJ. British Medical Journal 2004, 329(7465):546-547.
33. Pitts M., Savvana S., Basu Roy S., Mandava V. ALIAS: Author disambiguation in Microsoft academic search engine dataset. Proceedings of the 17th international conference on extending database technology 2014, 648-651. OpenProceedings, Athens, Greece. S. Amer-Yahia (Ed.).
34. Ponte D., Simon J. Scholarly communication 2.0: Exploring researchers' opinions on Web 2.0 for scientific knowledge creation, evaluation and dissemination. Serials Review 2011, 37(3):149-156.
35. Priem J., Hemminger B.H. Scientometrics 2.0: New metrics of scholarly impact on the social Web. First Monday 2010, 15(7.). 10.5210/fm.v15i7.2874.
36. Priem J., Piwowar H.A., Hemminger B.M. Altmetrics in the wild: Using social media to explore scholarly impact 2012, arxiv:1203.4745.
37. ResearchGate RG score FAQ - ResearchGate 2014, https://www.researchgate.net/publicprofile.RGScoreFAQ.html.
38. Rowlands I., Nicholas D., Russell B., Canty N., Watkinson A. Social media use in the research workflow. Learned Publishing 2011, 24(3):183-195.
39. Thelwall M., Haustein S., Larivière V., Sugimoto C.R. Do altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other social web services. PLOS ONE 2013, 8(5):e64841.
40. Thelwall M., Kousha K. Academia.edu: Social network or academic network?. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 2014, 65(4):721-731.
41. Thelwall M., Kousha K. ResearchGate: Disseminating, communicating, and measuring scholarship?. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 2014, 10.1002/asi.23236.
42. Thelwall M., Maflahi N. Are scholarly articles disproportionately read in their own country? An analysis of Mendeley readers. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 2014, 10.1002/asi.23252.
43. Wallace D. R.I.P. - Top 10 failed social media sites. Search Engine Journal 2013, http://www.searchenginejournal.com/r-i-p-top-10-failed-social-media-sites/57554/.
44. Watson A.B. Comparing citations and downloads for individual articles. Journal of Vision 2009, 9(4). http://www.journalofvision.org/content/9/4/i.
45. Zahedi Z., Costas R., Wouters P.F. What is the impact of the publications read by the different Mendeley users? Could they help to identify alternative types of impact?. PLoS ALM Workshop 2013.