Role of citation and non-citation metrics in predicting the educational impact of textbooks

IF 3.4 3区管理学 0 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE

Library Hi Tech Pub Date : 2023-03-20 DOI:10.1108/lht-06-2022-0297

Ashraf Maleki, Javad Abbaspour, Abdolrasoul Jowkar, H. Sotudeh

{"title":"Role of citation and non-citation metrics in predicting the educational impact of textbooks","authors":"Ashraf Maleki, Javad Abbaspour, Abdolrasoul Jowkar, H. Sotudeh","doi":"10.1108/lht-06-2022-0297","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe main objective of the present study is to determine the role of citation-based metrics (PageRank and HITS’ authority and hub scores) and non-citation metrics (Goodreads readers, reviews and ratings, textbook edition counts) in predicting educational ranks of textbooks.Design/methodology/approachThe rankings of 1869 academic textbooks of various disciplines indexed in Scopus were extracted from the Open Syllabus Project (OSP) and compared with normalized counts of Scopus citations, scores of PageRank, authority and hub (HITS) in Scopus book-to-book citation network, Goodreads ratings and reviews, review sentiment scores and WorldCat book editions.FindingsPrediction of the educational rank of scholarly syllabus books ranged from 32% in technology to 68% in philosophy, psychology and religion. WorldCat editions in social sciences, medicine and technology, Goodreads ratings in humanities, and book-citation-network authority scores in law and political science accounted for the strongest predictions of the educational score. Thus, each indicator of editions, Goodreads ratings, and book citation authority score alone can be used to show the rank of the academic textbooks, and if used in combination, they will help explain the educational uptake of books even better.Originality/valueThis is the first study examining the role of citation indicators, Goodreads readers, reviews and ratings in predicting the OSP rank of academic books.","PeriodicalId":47196,"journal":{"name":"Library Hi Tech","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Library Hi Tech","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/lht-06-2022-0297","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Abstract

PurposeThe main objective of the present study is to determine the role of citation-based metrics (PageRank and HITS’ authority and hub scores) and non-citation metrics (Goodreads readers, reviews and ratings, textbook edition counts) in predicting educational ranks of textbooks.Design/methodology/approachThe rankings of 1869 academic textbooks of various disciplines indexed in Scopus were extracted from the Open Syllabus Project (OSP) and compared with normalized counts of Scopus citations, scores of PageRank, authority and hub (HITS) in Scopus book-to-book citation network, Goodreads ratings and reviews, review sentiment scores and WorldCat book editions.FindingsPrediction of the educational rank of scholarly syllabus books ranged from 32% in technology to 68% in philosophy, psychology and religion. WorldCat editions in social sciences, medicine and technology, Goodreads ratings in humanities, and book-citation-network authority scores in law and political science accounted for the strongest predictions of the educational score. Thus, each indicator of editions, Goodreads ratings, and book citation authority score alone can be used to show the rank of the academic textbooks, and if used in combination, they will help explain the educational uptake of books even better.Originality/valueThis is the first study examining the role of citation indicators, Goodreads readers, reviews and ratings in predicting the OSP rank of academic books.

查看原文本刊更多论文

引用和非引用指标在预测教科书教育影响中的作用

目的本研究的主要目的是确定基于引文的指标（PageRank和HITS的权威和中心分数）和非引文指标（Goodreads读者、评论和评级、教科书版本计数）在预测教科书教育排名中的作用。设计/方法/方法从开放教学大纲项目（OSP）中提取Scopus中索引的1869本不同学科的学术教科书的排名，并与Scopus引文的归一化计数、PageRank得分、Scopus图书引文网络中的权威和枢纽（HITS）、Goodreads评级和评论、评论情绪得分和WorldCat图书版本进行比较。学术教学大纲书籍的教育排名预测范围从技术的32%到哲学、心理学和宗教的68%。社会科学、医学和技术领域的WorldCat版本、人文学科的Goodreads评级以及法律和政治科学领域的图书引用网络权威分数对教育分数的预测最为强烈。因此，每一个版本指标、Goodreads评分和书籍引用权威评分都可以单独用于显示学术教科书的排名，如果结合使用，它们将有助于更好地解释书籍的教育接受程度。原创性/价值这是第一项研究引用指标、Goodreads读者、评论和评级在预测学术书籍OSP排名中的作用。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Library Hi Tech INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-

CiteScore

8.30

自引率

44.10%

发文量

期刊介绍： ■Integrated library systems ■Networking ■Strategic planning ■Policy implementation across entire institutions ■Security ■Automation systems ■The role of consortia ■Resource access initiatives ■Architecture and technology ■Electronic publishing ■Library technology in specific countries ■User perspectives on technology ■How technology can help disabled library users ■Library-related web sites