-
The insoluble problems of books: What does Altmetric.com have to offer?
Authors:
Daniel Torres-Salinas,
Juan Gorraiz,
Nicolas Robinson-Garcia
Abstract:
The purpose of this paper is to analyze the capabilities, functionalities and appropriateness of Altmetric.com as a data source for the bibliometric analysis of books in comparison to PlumX. We perform an exploratory analysis on the metrics the Altmetric Explorer for Institutions platform offers for books. We use two distinct datasets of books: the Book Collection included in Altmetric.com and the…
▽ More
The purpose of this paper is to analyze the capabilities, functionalities and appropriateness of Altmetric.com as a data source for the bibliometric analysis of books in comparison to PlumX. We perform an exploratory analysis on the metrics the Altmetric Explorer for Institutions platform offers for books. We use two distinct datasets of books: the Book Collection included in Altmetric.com and the Clarivate's Master Book List, to analyze Altmetric.com's capabilities to download and merge data with external databases. Finally, we compare our findings with those obtained in a previous study performed in PlumX. Altmetric.com combines and orderly tracks a set of data sources combined by DOI identifiers to retrieve metadata from books, being Google Books its main provider. It also retrieves information from commercial publishers and from some Open Access initiatives, including those led by university libraries such as Harvard Library. We find issues with linkages between records and mentions or ISBN discrepancies. Furthermore, we find that automatic bots affect greatly Wikipedia mentions to books. Our comparison with PlumX suggests that none of these tools provide a complete picture of the social attention generated by books and are rather complementary than comparable tools.
△ Less
Submitted 26 September, 2018;
originally announced September 2018.
-
Filling the citation gap: Measuring the multidimensional impact of the academic book at institutional level with PlumX
Authors:
Daniel Torres-Salinas,
Nicolas Robinson-Garcia,
Juan Gorraiz
Abstract:
More than five years after their emergence, altmetrics are still seen as a promise to complement traditional citation-based indicators. However, no study has focused on their potential usefulness to capture the impact of scholarly books. While recent literature shows that citation indicators cannot fully capture the impact of books, other studies have suggested alternative indicators such as usage…
▽ More
More than five years after their emergence, altmetrics are still seen as a promise to complement traditional citation-based indicators. However, no study has focused on their potential usefulness to capture the impact of scholarly books. While recent literature shows that citation indicators cannot fully capture the impact of books, other studies have suggested alternative indicators such as usage, publishers' prestige or library holdings. In this paper, we calculate 18 indicators which range from altmetrics to library holdings, views, downloads or citations to the production of monographs of a Spanish university using the bibliometric suite PlumX from EBSCO. The objective of the study is to adopt a multidimensional perspective on the analysis of books and understand the level of complementarity between these different indicators. Also, we compare the overview offered by this range of indicators when applied to monographs with the traditional bibliometric perspective focused on journal articles and citation impact. We observe a low presence of altmetric indicators for monographs, even lower than for journal articles and a predominance of library holdings, confirming this indicator as the most promising one towards the analysis of the impact of books.
△ Less
Submitted 1 October, 2017;
originally announced October 2017.
-
PlumX As a Potential Tool to Assess the Macroscopic Multidimensional Impact of Books
Authors:
Daniel Torres-Salinas,
Christian Gumpenberger,
Juan Gorraiz
Abstract:
The main purpose of this macro-study is to shed light on the broad impact of books. For this purpose, the impact of a very large collection of books has been analyzed by using PlumX, an analytical tool providing a great number of different metrics provided by various tools.
The main purpose of this macro-study is to shed light on the broad impact of books. For this purpose, the impact of a very large collection of books has been analyzed by using PlumX, an analytical tool providing a great number of different metrics provided by various tools.
△ Less
Submitted 5 July, 2017;
originally announced July 2017.
-
Individual Bibliometric Assessment @ University of Vienna: From Numbers to Multidimensional Profiles
Authors:
Juan Gorraiz,
Martin Wieland,
Christian Gumpenberger
Abstract:
This paper shows how bibliometric assessment can be implemented at individual level. This has been successfully done at the University of Vienna carried out by the Bibliometrics and Publication Strategies Department of the Vienna University Library. According to the department's philosophy, bibliometrics is not only a helpful evaluation instrument in order to complement the peer review system. It…
▽ More
This paper shows how bibliometric assessment can be implemented at individual level. This has been successfully done at the University of Vienna carried out by the Bibliometrics and Publication Strategies Department of the Vienna University Library. According to the department's philosophy, bibliometrics is not only a helpful evaluation instrument in order to complement the peer review system. It is also meant as a compass for researchers in the "publish or perish" dilemma in order to increase general visibility and to optimize publication strategies. The individual assessment comprises of an interview with the researcher under evaluation, the elaboration of a bibliometric report of the researcher's publication output, the discussion and validation of the obtained results with the researcher under evaluation as well as further optional analyses. The produced bibliometric reports are provided to the researchers themselves and inform them about the quantitative aspects of their research output. They also serve as a basis for further discussion concerning their publication strategies. These reports are eventually intended for informed peer review practices, and are therefore forwarded to the quality assurance and the rector's office and finally sent to the peers. The most important feature of the generated bibliometric report is its multidimensional and individual character. It relies on a variety of basic indicators and further control parameters in order to foster comprehensibility. Researchers, administrative staff and peers alike have confirmed the usefulness of this bibliometric approach. An increasing demand is noticeable. In total, 33 bibliometric reports have been delivered so far. Moreover, similar reports have also been produced for the bibliometric assessment of two faculties with great success.
△ Less
Submitted 23 February, 2016; v1 submitted 29 January, 2016;
originally announced January 2016.
-
Research Data Explored II: the Anatomy and Reception of figshare
Authors:
Peter Kraker,
Elisabeth Lex,
Juan Gorraiz,
Christian Gumpenberger,
Isabella Peters
Abstract:
This is the second paper in a series of bibliometric studies of research data. In this paper, we present an analysis of figshare, one of the largest multidisciplinary repositories for research materials to date. We analysed the structure of items archived in figshare, their usage, and their reception in two altmetrics sources (PlumX and ImpactStory). We found that figshare acts (1) as a personal r…
▽ More
This is the second paper in a series of bibliometric studies of research data. In this paper, we present an analysis of figshare, one of the largest multidisciplinary repositories for research materials to date. We analysed the structure of items archived in figshare, their usage, and their reception in two altmetrics sources (PlumX and ImpactStory). We found that figshare acts (1) as a personal repository for yet unpublished materials, (2) as a platform for newly published research materials, and (3) as an archive for PLOS. Depending on the function, we found different bibliometric characteristics. Items archived from PLOS tend to be coming from the natural sciences and are often unviewed and non-downloaded. Self-archived items, however, come from a variety of disciplines and exhibit some patterns of higher usage. In the altmetrics analysis, we found that Twitter was the social media service where research data gained most attention; generally, research data published in 2014 were most popular across social media services. PlumX detects considerably more items in social media and also finds higher altmetric scores than ImpactStory.
△ Less
Submitted 26 June, 2015; v1 submitted 4 March, 2015;
originally announced March 2015.
-
Research Data Explored: Citations versus Altmetrics
Authors:
Isabella Peters,
Peter Kraker,
Elisabeth Lex,
Christian Gumpenberger,
Juan Gorraiz
Abstract:
The study explores the citedness of research data, its distribution over time and how it is related to the availability of a DOI (Digital Object Identifier) in Thomson Reuters' DCI (Data Citation Index). We investigate if cited research data "impact" the (social) web, reflected by altmetrics scores, and if there is any relationship between the number of citations and the sum of altmetrics scores f…
▽ More
The study explores the citedness of research data, its distribution over time and how it is related to the availability of a DOI (Digital Object Identifier) in Thomson Reuters' DCI (Data Citation Index). We investigate if cited research data "impact" the (social) web, reflected by altmetrics scores, and if there is any relationship between the number of citations and the sum of altmetrics scores from various social media-platforms. Three tools are used to collect and compare altmetrics scores, i.e. PlumX, ImpactStory, and Altmetric.com. In terms of coverage, PlumX is the most helpful altmetrics tool. While research data remain mostly uncited (about 85%), there has been a growing trend in citing data sets published since 2007. Surprisingly, the percentage of the number of cited research data with a DOI in DCI has decreased in the last years. Only nine repositories account for research data with DOIs and two or more citations. The number of cited research data with altmetrics scores is even lower (4 to 9%) but shows a higher coverage of research data from the last decade. However, no correlation between the number of citations and the total number of altmetrics scores is observable. Certain data types (i.e. survey, aggregate data, and sequence data) are more often cited and receive higher altmetrics scores.
△ Less
Submitted 21 April, 2015; v1 submitted 14 January, 2015;
originally announced January 2015.
-
Most borrowed is most cited? Library loan statistics as a proxy for monograph selection in citation indexes
Authors:
Álvaro Cabezas-Clavijo,
Nicolás Robinson-García,
Daniel Torres-Salinas,
Evaristo Jiménez-Contreras,
Thomas Mikulka,
Christian Gumpenberger,
Ambros Wemisch,
Juan Gorraiz
Abstract:
This study aims to analyse whether library loans statistics can be used as a measure of monograph use and as a selection criteria for inclusion in citation indexes. For this, we conducted an exploratory study based on loan data (1000 most borrowed monographs) from two non-Anglo-Saxon European university libraries (Granada and Vienna) with strong social sciences and humanities components. Loans to…
▽ More
This study aims to analyse whether library loans statistics can be used as a measure of monograph use and as a selection criteria for inclusion in citation indexes. For this, we conducted an exploratory study based on loan data (1000 most borrowed monographs) from two non-Anglo-Saxon European university libraries (Granada and Vienna) with strong social sciences and humanities components. Loans to scientists only were also analysed at the University of Vienna. Furthermore, citation counts for the 100 most borrowed scientific monographs (SM) and textbooks or manuals (MTB) were retrieved from Web of Science and Google Scholar. The results show considerable similarities in both libraries: the percentage of loans for books in national languages represents almost 96 per cent of the total share and SM accounts only for 10 to 13 per cent. When considering loans to scientists only, the percentage of English books increases to 30 per cent, the percentage of SM loans also increases (approx 80 per cent). Furthermore, we found no significant correlations between loans and citations. Since loan statistics are currently insufficient for measuring the use of monographs, their suggested use as an applicable selection criterion for book citation indexes is not yet feasible. Data improvement and aggregation at different levels is a challenge for modern libraries in order to enable the exploitation of this invaluable information source for scientometric purposes.
△ Less
Submitted 7 May, 2013;
originally announced May 2013.
