Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Evaluating the Association between Citation Counts and Mendeley Readership: A Case Study of Highly Cited Papers in E-Learning

Sapna Verma

Abstract


Altmetric is an indicator which provides the attention for the publications on social media platforms. Mendeley is a free reference manager and an academic social network, through which altmetrics provides the readership counts on a various basis like demographic, geographic etc. The present study is carried out to evaluate the association between the citation counts and Mendeley readership by doing the case study of highly cited publications in E-Learning. In the digital era, the mode of learning is also shifted towards the digital platform, so the area E -learning is selected for the present study. The data were collected using Web of Science Core Collection (included SCI-Expanded, A&HCI, and SSCI) by selecting the top 25 highly cited publications in the area of E-Learning during 2012 - 2017. The study found that Mendeley Readership was higher as compared to citations received for the publications in both the year and the main reason for this is that it has a large coverage for measuring readership. One of the most important things of the Mendeley is that it does not provide statistics for zero readerships unlike the citations because if the publication does not have a single citation, the citation database shows that statistics also. The study also recommends that Mendeley readership counts can be used as complementary indicators for research evaluation.


Full Text:

PDF

References


Beel, J., Gipp, B., Langer, S., & Breitinger, C. (2016). Research-paper recommender systems: A literature survey. International Journal on Digital Libraries, 17(4), 305–338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00799-015-0156-0

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. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20373

Duy, J., & Vaughan, L. (2006). Can electronic journal usage data replace citation data as a measure of journal use? An empirical examination. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 32(5), 512–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2006.05.005

Eldakar, M. A. M. (2019). Who reads international Egyptian academic articles? An altmetrics analysis of Mendeley readership categories. Scientometrics, 121(1), 105–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03189-7

Eysenbach, G. (2011). Can Tweets Predict Citations? Metrics of Social Impact Based on Twitter and Correlation with Traditional Metrics of Scientific Impact. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 13(4), e123. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.2012

Garfield, E. (2006). The History and Meaning of the Journal Impact Factor. JAMA, 295(1), 90. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.295.1.90

Garfield, E. (2011). Full text downloads and citations: Some reflections. Keynote Lecture at the Seminar “Scientific Measurement and Mapping, 22.

Gunn, W. (2013). Social Signals Reflect Academic Impact: What it Means When a Scholar Adds a Paper to Mendeley. Information Standards Quarterly, 25(2), 33. https://doi.org/10.3789/isqv25no2.2013.06

Haustein, S., Larivière, V., Thelwall, M., Amyot, D., & Peters, I. (2014). Tweets vs. Mendeley readers: How do these two social media metrics differ? It - Information Technology, 56(5). https://doi.org/10.1515/itit-2014-1048

Haustein, S., Peters, I., Bar-Ilan, J., Priem, J., Shema, H., & Terliesner, J. (2014). Coverage and adoption of altmetrics sources in the bibliometric community. Scientometrics, 101(2), 1145–1163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1221-3

Henning, V., & Reichelt, J. (2008). Mendeley—A Last.fm For Research? 2008 IEEE Fourth International Conference on EScience, 327–328. https://doi.org/10.1109/eScience.2008.128

Holt, Z., Richard, E. W., Isaku, T., Daniel, L. R. (2011). Mendeley: Creating Communities of Scholarly Inquiry Through Research Collaboration. TechTrends, 55(1), 32–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-011-0467-y

Kostoff, R. N. (1998). The use and misuse of citation analysis in research evaluation. Scientometrics, 43(1), 27–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02458392

Li, X., Thelwall, M., & Giustini, D. (2012). Validating online reference managers for scholarly impact measurement. Scientometrics, 91(2), 461–471. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0580-x

MacMillan, D. (2012). Mendeley: Teaching scholarly communication and collaboration through social networking. Library Management, 33(8/9), 561–569. https://doi.org/10.1108/01435121211279902

Meho, L. I. (2007). The rise and rise of citation analysis. Physics World, 20(1), 32–36. https://doi.org/10.1088/2058-7058/20/1/33

Neylon, C., & Wu, S. (2009). Article-Level Metrics and the Evolution of Scientific Impact. PLoS Biology, 7(11), e1000242. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1000242

Price, D.S., & Gursey, S. (1976). Studies in Scientometrics, Part I: Transience and Continuance in Scientific Authorship. International Forum for Information and Documentation.

Priem, J., Groth, P., & Taraborelli, D. (2012). The Altmetrics Collection. PLoS ONE, 7(11), e48753. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0048753

Reher, S., & Stefaine H. (2010). Social Bookmarking in STM Putting Services to the Acid Test. Online (Wilton, Connecticut), 34(6), 34–42.

Rodgers,E., & Sarah,B. (2013). A Look at Altmetrics and Its Growing Significance to Research Libraries.

Ruan, Q. Z., Chen, A. D., Cohen, J. B., Singhal, D., Lin, S. J., & Lee, B. T. (2018). Alternative Metrics of Scholarly Output: The Relationship among Altmetric Score, Mendeley Reader Score, Citations, and Downloads in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 141(3), 801–809. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000004128

Shrivastava, R., & Mahajan, P. (2016). Relationship between citation counts and Mendeley readership metrics: A case of top 100 cited papers in Physics. New Library World, 117(3/4), 229–238. https://doi.org/10.1108/NLW-09-2015-0064

Thelwall, M. (2017). Are Mendeley reader counts high enough for research evaluations when articles are published? Aslib Journal of Information Management, 69(2), 174–183. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-01-2017-0028

Thelwall, M., & Maflahi, N. (2015). Are scholarly articles disproportionately read in their own country? An analysis of mendeley readers. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(6), 1124–1135. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23252

Thelwall, M., & Wilson, P. (2016). Mendeley readership altmetrics for medical articles: An analysis of 45 fields. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(8), 1962–1972. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23501

Van Steen, J., & Eijffinger, M. (1998). Evaluation practices of scientific research in the Netherlands. Research Evaluation, 7(2), 113–122. https://doi.org/10.1093/rev/7.2.113

Waltman, L., Van Eck, N. J., van Leeuwen, T. N., Visser, M. S., & van Raan, A. F. J. (2011). Towards a new crown indicator: An empirical analysis. Scientometrics, 87(3), 467–481. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0354-5

Wang, J. (2013). Citation time window choice for research impact evaluation. Scientometrics, 94(3), 851–872. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0775-9

Zahedi, Z., Costas, R., & Wouters, P. (2017). Mendeley readership as a filtering tool to identify highly cited publications. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68(10), 2511–2521. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23883


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Disclaimer 2016-2019 © Indian Library Association (ILA), All Rights Reserved.

Designed and Developed by Dr. Mohammad Nazim under the direction of Prof. Shabahat Husain.