Blog Citations as Indicators of the Societal Impact of Research: Content Analysis of Social Sciences Blogs

H. Jamali, Dariush Alimohammadi
{"title":"Blog Citations as Indicators of the Societal Impact of Research: Content Analysis of Social Sciences Blogs","authors":"H. Jamali, Dariush Alimohammadi","doi":"10.5865/IJKCT.2015.5.1.015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article analyzes motivations behind social sciences blog posts citing journal articles in order to find out whether blog citations are good indicators for the societal impact or benefits of research. A random sample of 300 social sciences blog posts (out of 1,233 blog posts) from ResearchBlogging.org published between 01/01/2012 to 18/06/2014 were subjected to content analysis. The 300 blog posts had 472 references including 424 journal articles from 269 different journals. Sixty?one (22.68%) of all cited journals were from the social sciences and most of the journals with high frequency were highly cited general science journals such as PNAS and Science. Seventy?five percent of all journals were referenced only once. The average age of articles cited at the time of citation was 5.8 years. Discussion and criticism were the two main categories of motivations. Overall, the study shows the potential of blog citations as an altmetric measure and as a proxy for assessing the research impact. A considerable number of citation motivations in blogs such as disputing a belief, suggesting policies, providing a solution to a problem, reacting to media, criticism and the like seemed to support gaining societal benefits. Societal benefits are considered as helping stimulate new approaches to social issues, or informing public debate and policymaking. Lower self?citation (compared to some other altmetric measures such as tweets) and the fact that blogging involves generating content (i.e. an intellectual process) give them an advantage for altmetrics. However, limitations and contextual issues such as disciplinary differences and low uptake of altmetrics, in general, in scholarly communication should not be ignored when using blogs as a data source for altmetrics.","PeriodicalId":53292,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Knowledge Content Development and Technology","volume":"5 1","pages":"15-32"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"14","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Knowledge Content Development and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5865/IJKCT.2015.5.1.015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

Abstract

This article analyzes motivations behind social sciences blog posts citing journal articles in order to find out whether blog citations are good indicators for the societal impact or benefits of research. A random sample of 300 social sciences blog posts (out of 1,233 blog posts) from ResearchBlogging.org published between 01/01/2012 to 18/06/2014 were subjected to content analysis. The 300 blog posts had 472 references including 424 journal articles from 269 different journals. Sixty?one (22.68%) of all cited journals were from the social sciences and most of the journals with high frequency were highly cited general science journals such as PNAS and Science. Seventy?five percent of all journals were referenced only once. The average age of articles cited at the time of citation was 5.8 years. Discussion and criticism were the two main categories of motivations. Overall, the study shows the potential of blog citations as an altmetric measure and as a proxy for assessing the research impact. A considerable number of citation motivations in blogs such as disputing a belief, suggesting policies, providing a solution to a problem, reacting to media, criticism and the like seemed to support gaining societal benefits. Societal benefits are considered as helping stimulate new approaches to social issues, or informing public debate and policymaking. Lower self?citation (compared to some other altmetric measures such as tweets) and the fact that blogging involves generating content (i.e. an intellectual process) give them an advantage for altmetrics. However, limitations and contextual issues such as disciplinary differences and low uptake of altmetrics, in general, in scholarly communication should not be ignored when using blogs as a data source for altmetrics.
博客引用作为研究的社会影响指标:社科博客的内容分析
本文分析了社会科学博客文章引用期刊文章背后的动机,以找出博客引用是否是研究的社会影响或利益的良好指标。从2012年1月1日至2014年6月18日期间ResearchBlogging.org上发布的1233篇社科博客文章中随机抽取300篇进行内容分析。这300篇博客文章有472篇参考文献,包括来自269种不同期刊的424篇期刊文章。60吗?1种(22.68%)被引期刊为社会科学类期刊,高频次期刊多为高被引的普通科学类期刊,如PNAS和science。七十年?5%的期刊只被引用一次。被引时被引文章的平均年龄为5.8岁。讨论和批评是两种主要的动机。总体而言,该研究显示了博客引用作为一种替代度量和评估研究影响的代理的潜力。相当多的博客被引用的动机,比如对一种信念提出异议、提出政策建议、提供一个问题的解决方案、回应媒体、批评等等,似乎都支持获得社会效益。社会效益被认为有助于激发解决社会问题的新方法,或为公共辩论和政策制定提供信息。较低的自我?引用(与其他替代度量相比,如tweets)以及博客涉及生成内容(即智力过程)的事实使其具有替代度量的优势。然而,在使用博客作为替代度量的数据源时,一般来说,在学术交流中,诸如学科差异和替代度量的低吸收等限制和上下文问题不应被忽视。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
5 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信