{"title":"是另类指标跟随大众还是大众跟随另类指标?","authors":"Hamed Alhoori, R. Furuta","doi":"10.1109/JCDL.2014.6970193","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Changes are occurring in scholarly communication as scientific discourse and research activities spread across various social media platforms. In this paper, we study altmetrics on the article and journal levels, investigating whether the online attention received by research articles is related to scholarly impact or may be due to other factors. We define a new metric, Journal Social Impact (JSI), based on eleven data sources: CiteULike, Mendeley, F1000, blogs, Twitter, Facebook, mainstream news outlets, Google Plus, Pinterest, Reddit, and sites running Stack Exchange (Q&A). We compare JSI against diverse citation-based metrics, and find that JSI significantly correlates with a number of them. These findings indicate that online attention of scholarly articles is related to traditional journal rankings and favors journals with a longer history of scholarly impact. We also find that journal-level altmetrics have strong significant correlations among themselves, compared with the weak correlations among article-level altmetrics. Another finding is that Mendeley and Twitter have the highest usage and coverage of scholarly activities. Among individual altmetrics, we find that the readership of academic social networks have the highest correlations with citation-based metrics. Our findings deepen the overall understanding of altmetrics and can assist in validating them.","PeriodicalId":92278,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the ... ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries. ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries","volume":"307 1","pages":"375-378"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"29","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do altmetrics follow the crowd or does the crowd follow altmetrics?\",\"authors\":\"Hamed Alhoori, R. Furuta\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/JCDL.2014.6970193\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Changes are occurring in scholarly communication as scientific discourse and research activities spread across various social media platforms. In this paper, we study altmetrics on the article and journal levels, investigating whether the online attention received by research articles is related to scholarly impact or may be due to other factors. We define a new metric, Journal Social Impact (JSI), based on eleven data sources: CiteULike, Mendeley, F1000, blogs, Twitter, Facebook, mainstream news outlets, Google Plus, Pinterest, Reddit, and sites running Stack Exchange (Q&A). We compare JSI against diverse citation-based metrics, and find that JSI significantly correlates with a number of them. These findings indicate that online attention of scholarly articles is related to traditional journal rankings and favors journals with a longer history of scholarly impact. We also find that journal-level altmetrics have strong significant correlations among themselves, compared with the weak correlations among article-level altmetrics. Another finding is that Mendeley and Twitter have the highest usage and coverage of scholarly activities. Among individual altmetrics, we find that the readership of academic social networks have the highest correlations with citation-based metrics. Our findings deepen the overall understanding of altmetrics and can assist in validating them.\",\"PeriodicalId\":92278,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the ... ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries. ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries\",\"volume\":\"307 1\",\"pages\":\"375-378\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"29\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the ... ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries. ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/JCDL.2014.6970193\",\"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 ... ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries. ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/JCDL.2014.6970193","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 29
摘要
随着科学话语和研究活动在各种社交媒体平台上的传播,学术交流正在发生变化。在本文中,我们研究了文章和期刊层面的替代指标,调查研究论文的在线关注是否与学术影响有关,或者可能是由于其他因素。我们根据11个数据来源定义了一个新的指标——Journal Social Impact (JSI),这些数据来源包括:CiteULike、Mendeley、F1000、博客、Twitter、Facebook、主流新闻媒体、Google Plus、Pinterest、Reddit和运行Stack Exchange (Q&A)的网站。我们将JSI与各种基于引用的指标进行比较,发现JSI与其中许多指标显著相关。这些发现表明,学术文章的在线关注与传统期刊排名有关,并且更倾向于具有较长学术影响历史的期刊。我们还发现,期刊级别的替代指标之间具有很强的显著相关性,而文章级别的替代指标之间的相关性较弱。另一个发现是,Mendeley和Twitter的学术活动使用率和覆盖率最高。在各个替代指标中,我们发现学术社交网络的读者群与基于引用的指标相关性最高。我们的发现加深了对替代度量的整体理解,并有助于验证它们。
Do altmetrics follow the crowd or does the crowd follow altmetrics?
Changes are occurring in scholarly communication as scientific discourse and research activities spread across various social media platforms. In this paper, we study altmetrics on the article and journal levels, investigating whether the online attention received by research articles is related to scholarly impact or may be due to other factors. We define a new metric, Journal Social Impact (JSI), based on eleven data sources: CiteULike, Mendeley, F1000, blogs, Twitter, Facebook, mainstream news outlets, Google Plus, Pinterest, Reddit, and sites running Stack Exchange (Q&A). We compare JSI against diverse citation-based metrics, and find that JSI significantly correlates with a number of them. These findings indicate that online attention of scholarly articles is related to traditional journal rankings and favors journals with a longer history of scholarly impact. We also find that journal-level altmetrics have strong significant correlations among themselves, compared with the weak correlations among article-level altmetrics. Another finding is that Mendeley and Twitter have the highest usage and coverage of scholarly activities. Among individual altmetrics, we find that the readership of academic social networks have the highest correlations with citation-based metrics. Our findings deepen the overall understanding of altmetrics and can assist in validating them.