Abstract
This paper investigates whether CiteULike and Mendeley are useful for measuring scholarly influence, using a sample of 1,613 papers published in Nature and Science in 2007. Traditional citation counts from the Web of Science (WoS) were used as benchmarks to compare with the number of users who bookmarked the articles in one of the two free online reference manager sites. Statistically significant correlations were found between the user counts and the corresponding WoS citation counts, suggesting that this type of influence is related in some way to traditional citation-based scholarly impact but the number of users of these systems seems to be still too small for them to challenge traditional citation indexes.
ProCite
RefWorks
Reference Manager
BibTeX
Zotero
EndNote
-
Aguillo, I. (2011). Is Google Scholar useful for bibliometrics? A webometrics analysis. Proceedings of the ISSI 2011 Conference. Presented at the 13th International Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics & Informetrics (pp. 13–18), Durban, 4-7 July 2011.
-
Belew, R. K. (2005). Scientific impact quantity and quality: Analysis of two sources of bibliographic data. Arxiv preprint cs/0504036.
-
Brody, T, Harnad, S, Carr, L 2006 Earlier web usage statistics as predictors of later citation impact. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 57 8 1060–1072 .
-
Burgelman, J., Osimo, D., & Bogdanowicz, M. (2010). Science 2.0 (change will happen…). First Monday, 15 (7). Retrieved from http://www.uic.edu/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2961/2573.
-
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
-
Cronin, B 2001 Bibliometrics and beyond: Some thoughts on web-based citation analysis. Journal of Information Science 27 1 1–7 .
-
Cronin, B, Snyder, HW, Rosenbaum, H, Martinson, A, Callahan, E 1998 Invoked on the web. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 49 14 1319–1328 .
-
Ginsparg, P. (2007). Next-generation implications of Open Access. CTWatch Quarterly, 2 (3). Retrieved from http://www.ctwatch.org/quarterly/print.php?p=80.
-
Groth, P., & Gurney, T. (2010). Studying scientific discourse on the Web using bibliometrics: A chemistry blogging case study—web science repository. Proceedings of the WebSci’10. Raleigh, NC. Retrieved April 26-27, 2010, from http://journal.webscience.org/308/.
-
Henning, V. (2010). The top 10 journal articles published in 2009 by readership on Mendeley | Mendeley Blog. Retrieved August 8, 2010, from http://www.mendeley.com/blog/academic-features/the-top-10-journal-articles-published-in-2009-by-readership-on-mendeley/.
-
Henning, V., & Reichelt, J. (2008). Mendeley—A Last.fm for research? In IEEE Fourth International Conference on eScience, 2008 (pp. 327–328).
-
Jiang, J., He, D., & Ni, C. (2011). Social reference: Aggregating online usage of scientific literature in CiteULike for clustering academic resources. Proceeding of the 11th annual international ACM/IEEE joint conference on Digital libraries (pp. 401–402), Ottawa, Ontario, 13-17 June 2011.
-
Kousha, K, Thelwall, M 2007 Google Scholar citations and Google Web/URL citations: A multi-discipline exploratory analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 58 7 1055–1065 .
-
Kousha, K, Thelwall, M 2008 Assessing the impact of disciplinary research on teaching: An automatic analysis of online syllabuses. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 59 13 2060–2069 .
-
Kousha, K, Thelwall, M 2009 Google book search: Citation analysis for social science and the humanities. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 60 8 1537–1549 .
-
Kousha, K, Thelwall, M, Rezaie, S 2010 Using the Web for research evaluation: The Integrated Online Impact indicator. Journal of Informetrics 4 1 124–135 .
-
Li, X., Thelwall, M., & Giustini, D. (2011). Validating online reference managers for scholarly impact measurement. In E. Noyons, P. Ngulube & J. Leta (eds.), Proceedings of ISSI 2011—The 13th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics (pp. 454–462), Durban, 4-7 July 2011.
-
Meho, LI, Yang, K 2007 Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of Science versus Scopus and Google Scholar. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 58 13 2105–2125 .
-
Mendeley . (2010). Academic reference management software for researchers | Mendeley. Retrieved August 8, 2010, from http://www.mendeley.com/.
-
Moed, HF 2005 Citation analysis in research evaluation Springer New York.
-
Neylon, C, Wu, S 2009 Article-level metrics and the evolution of scientific impact. PLoS Biol 7 11 e1000242 .
-
Norris, M, Oppenheim, C 2010 Peer review and the h-index: Two studies. Journal of Informetrics 4 3 221–232 .
-
PLoS ONE . (2009a). Article-level metrics. Retrieved July 20, 2010, from http://article-level-metrics.plos.org/.
-
PLoS ONE . (2009b). New addition to article-level metrics—blog posts from ResearchBlogging.org | Public Library of Science. Retrieved July 20, 2010, from http://www.plos.org/cms/node/500.
-
Priem, J., & Costello, K. L. (2010). How and why scholars cite on Twitter. Presented at the American Society for Information Science & Technology Annual Meeting, Pittsburgh, PA, 22-27 October 2010.
-
Priem, J., & Hemminger, B. M. (2010). Scientometrics 2.0: Toward new metrics of scholarly impact on the social Web. First Monday, 15 (7). Retrieved from http://www.uic.edu/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2874/2570.
-
Priem, J., Taraborelli, D., Groth, P. & Neylon, C. (2010). Alt-metrics: A manifesto. Retrieved July 25, 2011, from http://altmetrics.org/manifesto/.
-
Research Information Network. (2010). If you build it, will they come? How researchers perceive and use web 2.0 | Research Information Network. Retrieved August 6, 2010, from http://www.rin.ac.uk/our-work/communicating-and-disseminating-research/use-and-relevance-web-20-researchers.
-
Shepherd, P. T. (2007). Final report on the investigation into the feasibility of developing and implementing journal usage factors. Retrieved January 2, 2011, from http://www.uksg.org/sites/uksg.org/files/FinalReportUsageFactorProject.pdf.
-
Smith, A. G. (2011). Wikipedia and institutional repositories: An academic symbiosis? Proceedings of the ISSI 2011 Conference. Presented at the 13th International Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics & Informetrics (pp. 794–800), Durban, 4-7 July 2011.
-
Taraborelli, D. (2008). Soft peer review: Social software and distributed scientific evaluation. In 8th International Conference on the Design of Cooperative Systems. Carry-le-Rouet: Institut d’Etudes Politiques d’Aix-en-Provence, Aix-en-Provence (pp. 99–110), France.
-
Taraborelli, D. (2010). ReaderMeter: Research impact, crowdsourced. Retrieved July 28, 2011, from http://readermeter.org/.
-
Thelwall, M 2008 Bibliometrics to webometrics. Journal of information science 34 4 605–621 .
-
Thelwall, M, Kousha, K 2008 Online presentations as a source of scientific impact? An analysis of PowerPoint files citing academic journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 59 5 805–815 .
-
Vaughan, L, Shaw, D 2003 Bibliographic and web citations: What is the difference?. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 54 14 1313–1322 .
-
Vaughan, L, Shaw, D 2005 Web citation data for impact assessment: a comparison of four science disciplines. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 56 10 1075–1087 .
-
Vaughan, L, Shaw, D 2008 A new look at evidence of scholarly citation in citation indexes and from web sources. Scientometrics 74 2 317–330 .
-
Ware, M., & Monkman, M. (2008). Peer review in scholarly journals: Perspective of the scholarly community-an international study. Publishing Research Consortium. Retrieved from .
-
Weller, K., & Puschmann, C. (2011). Twitter for scientific communication: How can citations/references be identified and measured? Proceedings of the ACM WebSci’11 (pp. 1–4). Koblenz, Germany, 14-17 June 2011.
-
Zaugg, H, West, RE, Tateishi, I, Randall, DL 2011 Mendeley: Creating communities of scholarly inquiry through research collaboration. TechTrends 55 1 32–36 .
To see the editorial board, please visit the website of Springer Nature.
Manuscript submission: http://www.editorialmanager.com/scim/
For subscription options, please visit the website of Springer Nature.
| Scientometrics | |
|---|---|
| Language | English |
| Size | B5 |
| Year of Foundation |
1978 |
| Volumes per Year |
1 |
| Issues per Year |
12 |
| Founder | Akadémiai Kiadó |
| Founder's Address |
H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 1516 Budapest, PO Box 245. |
| Publisher | Akadémiai Kiadó Springer Nature Switzerland AG |
| Publisher's Address |
H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 1516 Budapest, PO Box 245. CH-6330 Cham, Switzerland Gewerbestrasse 11. |
| Responsible Publisher |
Chief Executive Officer, Akadémiai Kiadó |
| ISSN | 0138-9130 (Print) |
| ISSN | 1588-2861 (Online) |
Monthly Content Usage
| Abstract Views | Full Text Views | PDF Downloads | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 2022 | 129 | 3 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 144 | 5 | 2 |
| Oct 2022 | 150 | 6 | 0 |
| Nov 2022 | 143 | 0 | 0 |
| Dec 2022 | 112 | 0 | 0 |
| Jan 2023 | 112 | 4 | 3 |
| Feb 2023 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Copyright Akadémiai Kiadó
AKJournals is the trademark of Akadémiai Kiadó's journal publishing business branch.
Copyright Akadémiai Kiadó AKJournals is the trademark of Akadémiai Kiadó's journal publishing business branch.
Powered by PubFactory