Validity of altmetrics data for measuring societal impact: A study using data from Altmetric and F1000Prime

Can altmetric data be validly used for the measurement of societal impact? The current study seeks to answer this question with a comprehensive dataset (about 100,000 records) from very disparate sources (F1000, Altmetric, and an in-house database based on Web of Science). In the F1000 peer review system, experts attach particular tags to scientific papers which indicate whether a paper could be of interest for science or rather for other segments of society. The results show that papers with the tag “good for teaching” do achieve higher altmetric counts than papers without this tag – if the quality of the papers is controlled. At the same time, a higher citation count is shown especially by papers with a tag that is specifically scientifically oriented (“new finding”). The findings indicate that papers tailored for a readership outside the area of research should lead to societal impact.If altmetric data is to be used for the measurement of societal impact, the question arises of its normalization. In bibliometrics, citations are normalized for the papers’ subject area and publication year. This study has taken a second analytic step involving a possible normalization of altmetric data. As the results show there are particular scientific topics which are of especial interest for a wide audience. Since these more or less interesting topics are not completely reflected in Thomson Reuters’ journal sets, a normalization of altmetric data should not be based on the level of subject categories, but on the level of topics.     

期刊影响力指数与影响因子评价国际期刊的比较研究

为了验证《中国学术期刊(光盘版)》电子杂志社提出的新型期刊评价指标——期刊影响力指数(Journal Clout Index,CI)的科学性,首先采用JCR数据分析影响因子(IF)与5年影响因子(IF5)、IF与即年指标(IM)、IF与总被引频次(TC)之间的相关性,得出结论:IF、IF5、IM是相关性显著的同类指标,IF与TC的相关性较弱;因而认为,TC和IF是可用来评价期刊影响力的主要指标,基于这2个指标的综合评价指标——期刊影响力指数(CI)具有合理性.进一步实证分析了CI这一综合指标对国际期刊的排序结果比采用单一指标——影响因子(IF)排序更符合实际经验认识.     

Bionanotechnology: A bibliometric analysis using science citation index database (1995–2006)

The development of nanotechnology and the growth of investment in this field are briefly surveyed based on a bibliometric analysis using Science Citation Index (SCI) database entering into the Web of Science (WOS) online academic database, with special emphasis on the positions of Russian researchers in modern nano-and bionanotechnology (BNT). The flow of domestic BNT publications over a period from 1995 to 2006 has been analyzed at three-year intervals. The search in SCI over this period of time yielded more than 19.2 thousand articles pertaining to the field under consideration. Russia is still among 50 leading countries with respect to a broad spectrum of research in nanoscience and nanotechnology. However, the growth rate of domestic publications among those covered by the WOS database lags significantly behind that of the publications from United States and China. The Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS) is a leader among the domestic institutions engaged in nanoscience and BNT, despite some decrease in the proportion of RAS publications in the total world flow. The results of domestic investigations in BNT are primarily published in the world leading journals on the chemistry and materials science.     

Data sharing by biologists: A comparative study of genome sequence data and lab experiment data

Whether biologists share data depends on data type. This study employed an integrated theoretical framework combining theory of planned behavior and institutional theory to investigate individual motivations, technological resources, and institutional pressures affecting data sharing intentions between biologists depending on whether they were sharing genome sequence data or regular lab experiment data. A series of statistical analyses including principal component factor analysis, hierarchical regression, and independent sample t-test were conducted on a total of 342 survey responses from biologists. The results suggest that biologists' data sharing intentions are influenced by individual motivations, technological resources, and institutional pressures, and that the intensities of those factors are considerably different for genome sequence data and lab experiment data. This study suggests that data sharing by biologists varies depending on the type of data they produce, and that different policies and technological supports should be applied to facilitate the sharing of diverse biological data types.     

Examining the usage,citation, and diffusion patterns of bibliometric mapping software: A comparative study of three tools

This study investigates the use, citation and diffusion of three bibliometric mapping software tools (CiteSpace, HistCite and VOSviewer) in scientific papers. We first conduct a content analysis of a sample of 481 English core journal papers—i.e., papers from journals deemed central to their respective disciplines—in which at least one of these tools is mentioned. This allows us to understand the predominant mention and citation practices surrounding these tools. We then employ several diffusion indicators to gain insight into the diffusion patterns of the three software tools. Overall, we find that researchers mention and cite the tools in diverse ways, many of which fall short of a traditional formal citation. Our results further indicate a clear upward trend in the use of all three tools, though VOSviewer is more frequently used than CiteSpace or HistCite. We also find that these three software tools have seen the fastest and most widespread adoption in library and information science research, where the tools originated. They have since been gradually adopted in other areas of study, initially at a lower diffusion speed but afterward at a rapidly growing rate.     

Publication point indicators: A comparative case study of two publication point systems and citation impact in an interdisciplinary context

The paper presents comparative analyses of two publication point systems, The Norwegian and the in-house system from the interdisciplinary Danish Institute of International Studies (DIIS), used as case in the study for publications published 2006, and compares central citation-based indicators with novel publication point indicators (PPIs) that are formalized and exemplified. Two diachronic citation windows are applied: 2006-07 and 2006-08. Web of Science (WoS) as well as Google Scholar (GS) are applied to observe the cite delay and citedness for the different document types published by DIIS, journal articles, book chapters/conference papers and monographs. Journal Crown Indicator (JCI) calculations was based on WoS. Three PPIs are proposed: the Publication Point Ratio (PPR), which measures the sum of obtained publication points over the sum of the ideal points for the same set of documents; the Cumulated Publication Point Indicator (CPPI), which graphically illustrates the cumulated gain of obtained vs. ideal points, both seen as vectors; and the normalized Cumulated Publication Point Index (nCPPI) that represents the cumulated gain of publication success as index values, either graphically or as one overall score for the institution under evaluation.The case study indicates that for smaller interdisciplinary research institutions the cite delay is substantial (2–3 years to obtain a citedness of 50%) when applying WoS for articles. Applying GS implies a shorter delay and much higher citedness for all document types. Statistical significant correlations were only found between WoS and GS and the two publication point systems in between, respectively. The study demonstrates how the nCPPI can be applied to institutions as evaluation tools supplementary to JCI in various combinations, in particular when institutions include humanistic and social science disciplines.     

Convergent validation of peer review decisions using the h index: Extent of and reasons for type I and type II errors

Hirsch [Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(46), 16569–16572] has proposed the h index as a single-number criterion to evaluate the scientific output of a researcher. We investigated the convergent validity of decisions for awarding long-term fellowships to post-doctoral researchers as practiced by the Boehringer Ingelheim Fonds (B.I.F.) by using the h index. Our study examined 414 B.I.F. applicants (64 approved and 350 rejected) with a total of 1586 papers. The results of our study show that the applicants’ h indices correlate substantially with standard bibliometric indicators. Even though the h indices of approved B.I.F. applicants on average (arithmetic mean and median) are higher than those of rejected applicants (and with this, fundamentally confirm the validity of the funding decisions), the distributions of the h indices show in part overlaps that we categorized as type I error (falsely drawn approval) or type II error (falsely drawn rejection). Approximately, one-third of the decisions to award a fellowship to an applicant show a type I error, and about one-third of the decisions not to award a fellowship to an applicant show a type II error. Our analyses of possible reasons for these errors show that the applicant's field of study but not personal ties between the B.I.F. applicant and the B.I.F. can increase or decrease the risks for type I and type II errors.     

The use of percentiles and percentile rank classes in the analysis of bibliometric data: Opportunities and limits

Percentiles have been established in bibliometrics as an important alternative to mean-based indicators for obtaining a normalized citation impact of publications. Percentiles have a number of advantages over standard bibliometric indicators used frequently: for example, their calculation is not based on the arithmetic mean which should not be used for skewed bibliometric data. This study describes the opportunities and limits and the advantages and disadvantages of using percentiles in bibliometrics. We also address problems in the calculation of percentiles and percentile rank classes for which there is not (yet) a satisfactory solution. It will be hard to compare the results of different percentile-based studies with each other unless it is clear that the studies were done with the same choices for percentile calculation and rank assignment.     

图书馆学五定律与《图书馆服务宣言》内涵比较研究

通过对阮冈纳赞图书馆学五定律和《图书馆服务宣言》的解读,以及二者的对比研究,揭示图书馆学五定律对图书馆学理论创立的贡献以及对后来研究者的指导意义;同时就《图书馆服务宣言》的特点进行了简要的分析与探讨。参考文献14。     

基于F1000与WoS的同行评议与文献计量相关性研究

为比较同行评议与文献计量方法在科学评价中的有效性及相关性,选取F1000以及Web of Science数据库,采用SPSS16.0软件,将近2000篇论文的F1000因子与Web of Science数据库中指标进行相关性比较。结果显示,F1000因子与统计区间内的被引频次呈显著正相关,同时一些F1000因子很高的论文并没有高频被引,反之亦然。结论指出:从统计学的视角,文献计量指标与同行评议结果具有正向相关性,但是无论是同行评议还是文献计量,单独作为科学评价标准都会有失偏颇,以引文分析为代表的定量指标与同行评议方法的结合将是未来科学评价的主流。     

Green and gold open access citation and interdisciplinary advantage: A bibliometric study of two science journals

This bibliometric study quantified the impact of different open access (OA) implementations on the number and subject diversity of citations to articles. The study compared two partial OA journals and found that green (institutional repository) OA articles received up to 106% more citations on average than gold (publisher provided) OA or non-OA articles. OA articles received up to 36% more diverse (interdisciplinary) citations than non-OA articles. This result could inform libraries in their decisions regarding OA, specifically the continued importance of institutional repositories. The results will also assist librarians in educating faculty on the benefits of OA.     

SooPAT搜索引擎与中国知识产权网专利检索比较研究

文章从国内外专利检索角度出发,对SooPAT搜索引擎和中国知识产权网的数据覆盖范围、检索界面、检索分析功能以及检索结果等方面进行了详细地对比分析,为图书馆员和读者获取专利信息提供指导和帮助.     

A comparative study of e-government XBRL implementations: The potential of improving information transparency and efficiency

This study examines the e-government implementation of eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL) to increase accountability and transparency in business and financial information. The business and financial information gathered in XBRL format is machine-readable and interoperable, thereby improving the ease of public dissemination and analysis. This study focuses on identifying and examining the determinants of successful XBRL implementation and draws from several bodies of literature: e-government, institutionalism, collaborative public management, regulatory compliance, and management information systems to identify determinants of successful implementation. This study selects four diverse implementations: the Netherlands, Australia, the United States, and Singapore. Empirical analysis follows a comparative case study method. The findings of this exploratory study underscore the importance of program goals and strategic alignment in achieving information transparency and efficiency, the advantage of strategies correlating to institutional setting, the critical need to provide incentives for adoption, and the usefulness of incremental implementation. The managerial and theoretical implications of these findings as well as future research opportunities are explored.     

How to consider fractional counting and field normalization in the statistical modeling of bibliometric data: A multilevel Poisson regression approach

The numerical-algorithmic procedures of fractional counting and field normalization are often mentioned as indispensable requirements for bibliometric analyses. Against the background of the increasing importance of statistics in bibliometrics, a multilevel Poisson regression model (level 1: publication, level 2: author) shows possible ways to consider fractional counting and field normalization in a statistical model (fractional counting I). However, due to the assumption of duplicate publications in the data set, the approach is not quite optimal. Therefore, a more advanced approach, a multilevel multiple membership model, is proposed that no longer provides for duplicates (fractional counting II). It is assumed that the citation impact can essentially be attributed to time-stable dispositions of researchers as authors who contribute with different fractions to the success of a publication’s citation. The two approaches are applied to bibliometric data for 254 scientists working in social science methodology. A major advantage of fractional counting II is that the results no longer depend on the type of fractional counting (e.g., equal weighting). Differences between authors in rankings are reproduced more clearly than on the basis of percentiles. In addition, the strong importance of field normalization is demonstrated; 60% of the citation variance is explained by field normalization.     

Towards a model of research data management readiness in Indonesian context: An investigation of factors and indicators through the fuzzy delphi method

The research data management (RDM) readiness model assists research institutions in measuring their readiness level and identifying gaps to develop a strategy for implementing RDM. The technology, organization, people, and environment (TOPE) framework was used as a guideline in selecting the appropriate factors and indicators. The fuzzy delphi method was employed to validate the factors and indicators derived from the literature review. Hardware, policy, management support, organizational structure, situation awareness, training, and funder policy are all factors that reached the expert consensus. Strategy is a factor that included two indicators that did not reach expert consensus. The final result of the analysis indicates that the proposed readiness model should include 13 factors with 32 indicators. This study reveals that the environment is a key dimension of RDM readiness, which previous studies have not discussed. Moreover, research institutions can employ the model to assess their readiness and identify areas for improvement, and to potentially reduce failures in RDM implementation.     

Customer agility and responsiveness through big data analytics for public value creation: A case study of Houston 311 on-demand services

A theoretical framework for big data analytics-enabled customer agility and responsiveness was developed from extant IS research. In on-demand service environments, customer agility involves dynamic capabilities in sensing and responding to citizens. Using this framework, a case study examined a large city government's 311 on-demand services which had leveraged big data analytics. While we found the localized big data analytics use by some of the 22 departments for enhanced customer agility and on-demand 311 services, city-wide systemic change in on-demand service delivery through big data analytics use was not evident. From the case study we identified key institutional mechanisms for linking customer agility to public value creation through 311 services. We posit how systemic use of big data analytics embedded into critical processes enables the government to co-create public values with citizens through 311 on-demand services, indicating the importance of creating a culture of analytics driven by strong political leadership.