推特衡量的是什么?Altmetrics中不同用户群体的影响

Simon Barthel, S. Tönnies, B. Köhncke, Patrick Siehndel, Wolf-Tilo Balke
{"title":"推特衡量的是什么?Altmetrics中不同用户群体的影响","authors":"Simon Barthel, S. Tönnies, B. Köhncke, Patrick Siehndel, Wolf-Tilo Balke","doi":"10.1145/2756406.2756913","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The most important goal for digital libraries is to ensure high quality search experience for all kinds of users. To attain this goal, it is necessary to have as much relevant metadata as possible at hand to assess the quality of publications. Recently, a new group of metrics appeared, that has the potential to raise the quality of publication metadata to the next level -- the altmetrics. These metrics try to reflect the impact of publications within the social web. However, currently it is still unclear if and how altmetrics should be used to assess the quality of a publication and how altmetrics are related to classical bibliographical metrics (like e.g. citations). To gain more insights about what kind of concepts are reflected by altmetrics, we conducted an in-depth analysis on a real world dataset crawled from the Public Library of Science (PLOS). Especially, we analyzed if the common approach to regard the users in the social web as one homogeneous group is sensible or if users need to be divided into diverse groups in order to receive meaningful results.","PeriodicalId":256118,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 15th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries","volume":"149 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"21","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What does Twitter Measure?: Influence of Diverse User Groups in Altmetrics\",\"authors\":\"Simon Barthel, S. Tönnies, B. Köhncke, Patrick Siehndel, Wolf-Tilo Balke\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/2756406.2756913\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The most important goal for digital libraries is to ensure high quality search experience for all kinds of users. To attain this goal, it is necessary to have as much relevant metadata as possible at hand to assess the quality of publications. Recently, a new group of metrics appeared, that has the potential to raise the quality of publication metadata to the next level -- the altmetrics. These metrics try to reflect the impact of publications within the social web. However, currently it is still unclear if and how altmetrics should be used to assess the quality of a publication and how altmetrics are related to classical bibliographical metrics (like e.g. citations). To gain more insights about what kind of concepts are reflected by altmetrics, we conducted an in-depth analysis on a real world dataset crawled from the Public Library of Science (PLOS). Especially, we analyzed if the common approach to regard the users in the social web as one homogeneous group is sensible or if users need to be divided into diverse groups in order to receive meaningful results.\",\"PeriodicalId\":256118,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 15th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries\",\"volume\":\"149 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-06-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"21\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 15th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/2756406.2756913\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 15th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2756406.2756913","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 21

摘要

数字图书馆最重要的目标是为各类用户提供高质量的搜索体验。为了实现这一目标,有必要掌握尽可能多的相关元数据,以评估出版物的质量。最近,出现了一组新的指标,它有可能将出版物元数据的质量提升到一个新的水平——替代指标。这些指标试图反映出版物在社交网络中的影响。然而,目前尚不清楚是否以及如何使用替代指标来评估出版物的质量,以及替代指标如何与经典书目指标(如引文)相关联。为了更深入地了解altmetrics反映了什么样的概念,我们对从公共科学图书馆(PLOS)抓取的真实数据集进行了深入分析。特别是,我们分析了将社交网络中的用户视为一个同质群体的常见方法是否合理,或者是否需要将用户划分为不同的群体才能获得有意义的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
What does Twitter Measure?: Influence of Diverse User Groups in Altmetrics
The most important goal for digital libraries is to ensure high quality search experience for all kinds of users. To attain this goal, it is necessary to have as much relevant metadata as possible at hand to assess the quality of publications. Recently, a new group of metrics appeared, that has the potential to raise the quality of publication metadata to the next level -- the altmetrics. These metrics try to reflect the impact of publications within the social web. However, currently it is still unclear if and how altmetrics should be used to assess the quality of a publication and how altmetrics are related to classical bibliographical metrics (like e.g. citations). To gain more insights about what kind of concepts are reflected by altmetrics, we conducted an in-depth analysis on a real world dataset crawled from the Public Library of Science (PLOS). Especially, we analyzed if the common approach to regard the users in the social web as one homogeneous group is sensible or if users need to be divided into diverse groups in order to receive meaningful results.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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