scholarly journals Personal Publications Lists Serve as a Reliable Calibration Parameter to Compare Coverage in Academic Citation Databases with Scientific Social Media

2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 125 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Hughes
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
Online Information ◽  
Calibration Parameter ◽  
German Speaking ◽  
Coverage Rates ◽  
Citation Databases ◽  
Calibration Parameters

A Review of: Hilbert, F., Barth, J., Gremm, J., Gros, D., Haiter, J., Henkel, M., Reinhardt, W., & Stock, W.G. (2015). Coverage of academic citation databases compared with coverage of scientific social media: personal publication lists as calibration parameters. Online Information Review 39(2): 255-264. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/OIR-07-2014-0159 Abstract Objective – The purpose of this study was to explore coverage rates of information science publications in academic citation databases and scientific social media using a new method of personal publication lists as a calibration parameter. The research questions were: How many publications are covered in different databases, which has the best coverage, and what institutions are represented and how does the language of the publication play a role? Design – Bibliometric analysis. Setting – Academic citation databases (Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar) and scientific social media (Mendeley, CiteULike, Bibsonomy). Subjects – 1,017 library and information science publications produced by 76 information scientists at 5 German-speaking universities in Germany and Austria. Methods – Only documents which were published between 1 January 2003 and 31 December 2012 were included. In that time the 76 information scientists had produced 1,017 documents. The information scientists confirmed that their publication lists were complete and these served as the calibration parameter for the study. The citations from the publication lists were searched in three academic databases: Google Scholar, Web of Science (WoS), and Scopus; as well as three social media citation sites: Mendeley, CiteULike, and BibSonomy and the results were compared. The publications were searched for by author name and words from the title. Main results – None of the databases investigated had 100% coverage. In the academic databases, Google Scholar had the highest amount of coverage with an average of 63%, Scopus an average of 31%, and lowest was WoS with an average of 15%. On social media sites, Bibsonomy had the highest coverage with an average of 24%, Mendeley had an average coverage of 19%, and the lowest coverage was CiteULike with an average of 8%. Conclusion – The use of personal publication lists are reliable calibration parameters to compare coverage of information scientists in academic citation databases with scientific social media. Academic citation databases had a higher coverage of publications, in particular, Google Scholar, compared to scientific social media sites. The authors recommend that information scientists personally publish work on social media citation databases to increase exposure. Formulating a publication strategy may be useful to identify journals with the most exposure in academic citation databases. Individuals should be encouraged to keep personal publication lists and these can be used as calibration parameters as a measure of coverage in the future.

Coverage of academic citation databases compared with coverage of scientific social media

2015 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 255-264 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fee Hilbert ◽  
Julia Barth ◽  
Julia Gremm ◽  
Daniel Gros ◽  
Jessica Haiter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Information Services ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Calibration Parameter ◽  
German Speaking ◽  
Citation Databases ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to show how the coverage of publications is represented in information services. Academic citation databases (Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar) and scientific social media (Mendeley, CiteULike, BibSonomy) were analyzed by applying a new method: the use of personal publication lists of scientists. Design/methodology/approach – Personal publication lists of scientists of the field of information science were analyzed. All data were taken in collaboration with the scientists in order to guarantee complete publication lists. Findings – The demonstrated calibration parameter shows the coverage of information services in the field of information science. None of the investigated databases reached a coverage of 100 percent. However Google Scholar covers a greater amount of publications than other academic citation databases and scientific social media. Research limitations/implications – Results were limited to the publications of scientists working at an information science department from 2003 to 2012 at German-speaking universities. Practical implications – Scientists of the field of information science are encouraged to review their publication strategy in case of quality and quantity. Originality/value – The paper confirms the usefulness of personal publication lists as a calibration parameter for measuring coverage of information services.

scholarly journals The impact of open access citation and social media on leading top Information Science journals

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (77) ◽  
pp. 117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paulo Roberto Cintra ◽  
Ariadne Chloe Furnival ◽  
Douglas Henrique Milanez
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Open Access ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
Redes Sociales ◽  
Journal Citation Reports ◽  
Acceso Abierto ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Journal Citation

El objetivo de esta investigación fue verificar las posibles ventajas que el acceso abierto puede ofrecer al área de la Ciencia de la Información. Para ello, se analizaron los indicadores bibliométricos de citas y los datos de altmetría en 16 revistas científicas híbridas, seleccionadas mediante el Journal Citation Reports y filtradas con base en sus respectivos factores de impacto. La recolección de datos fue realizada en Web of Science, Google Scholar, Altmetric.com y Mendeley. Esta verificación se realizó en dos periodos de tiempo diferentes para examinar si hubo alguna influencia del acceso abierto en el tiempo. Los resultados indican que el acceso abierto puede ofrecer una ventaja en el número de citas y menciones en las redes sociales para el conjunto de artículos de las revistas analizadas aquí, y que esta ventaja es mayor para los casos en que los autores pagaron el cargo por procesamiento del artículo a garantizar la disponibilidad inmediata del artículo en acceso abierto al momento de la publicación. En la conclusión se afirma que no es sólo el acceso abierto el que provoca una mayor cantidad de citas a un artículo, aunque ayuda, sino la calidad del propio artículo.

Evaluation of the Online-Presence of ABA-Verified Burn Centers

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (5) ◽  
pp. 1063-1068
Author(s):  
Christian Tapking ◽  
Daniel Popp ◽  
Gabriel Hundeshagen ◽  
Khosrow S Houschyar ◽  
Valentin Haug ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Patient Care ◽  
Healthcare Services ◽  
General Information ◽  
Online Information ◽  
Healthcare Information ◽  
Burn Centers ◽  
Online Presence ◽  
German Speaking ◽  
Research And Education

Abstract Currently, patients seek healthcare information online. An up-to-date online presence is vital for success among the competition amid hospitals. Hospital websites have become an important medium to communicate with patients, provide information about certain diseases/conditions, and advertise healthcare services. This study aims to evaluate burn centers websites verified by the American Burn Association (ABA). The online presence of the 73 ABA-verified burn centers was evaluated according to criteria previously published by Benedikt et al. This included general information on burns, first aid, treatment at the burn unit, research, and education. ABA-verified burn centers were then compared with 48 German-speaking burn centers evaluated by Benedikt et al. Online information about patient care including treatment options and techniques was more often present in ABA-verified burn centers. However, this information was still provided in only half of the websites. Furthermore, ABA-verified burn centers more often used multimedia-based elements and social media platforms. On the other hand, German-speaking burn centers more often provided translations, general information (eg, staff and ward) about the burn center, as well as research and education. This study demonstrates that although many burn centers have well-designed websites, relevant burn-related information on patient care, research, and education is often missing or sparse. Today, most patients look for healthcare information online. Also, applicants for residency or fellowship programs tend to get a first picture of their potential employer on websites or social media. Keeping websites and social media up-to-date and informative can improve recruitment of patients and employees.

scholarly journals A citation analysis of Serbian Dental Journal using Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar

2010 ◽  
Vol 57 (4) ◽  
pp. 201-211 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jelena Jacimovic ◽  
Ruzica Petrovic ◽  
Slavoljub Zivkovic
Keyword(s):  
Web Of Science ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
Bibliographic Databases ◽  
Thomson Scientific ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Comprehensive Picture ◽  
Citation Counts ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Citation Databases

Introduction. For a long time, The Institute for Scientific Information (ISI, now Thomson Scientific, Philadelphia, US) citation databases, available online through the Web of Science (WoS), had an unique position among bibliographic databases. The emergence of new citation databases, such as Scopus and Google Scholar (GS), call in question the dominance of WoS and the accuracy of bibliometric and citation studies exclusively based on WoS data. The aim of this study was to determine whether there were significant differences in the received citation counts for Serbian Dental Journal (SDJ) found in WoS and Scopus databases, or whether GS results differed significantly from those obtained by WoS and Scopus, and whether GS could be an adequate qualitative alternative for commercial databases in the impact assessment of this journal. Material and Methods. The data regarding SDJ citation was collected in September 2010 by searching WoS, Scopus and GS databases. For further analysis, all relevant data of both, cited and citing articles, were imported into Microsoft Access? database. Results. One hundred and fifty-eight cited papers from SDJ and 249 received citations were found in the three analyzed databases. 74% of cited articles were found in GS, 46% in Scopus and 44% in WoS. The greatest number of citations (189) was derived from GS, while only 15% of the citations, were found in all three databases. There was a significant difference in the percentage of unique citations found in the databases. 58% originated from GS, while Scopus and WoS gave 6% and 4% unique citations, respectively. The highest percentage of databases overlap was found between WoS and Scopus (70%), while the overlap between Scopus and GS was 18% only. In case of WoS and GS the overlap was 17%. Most of the SDJ citations came from original scientific articles. Conclusion. WoS, Scopus and GS produce quantitatively and qualitatively different citation counts for SDJ articles. None of the examined databases can provide a comprehensive picture and it is necessary to take into account all three available sources.

scholarly journals Practicing What You Preach: Evaluating Access of Open Access Research

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Teresa Schultz
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Library Science ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Creative Commons ◽  
Copyright Ownership ◽  
Published Research

The open access movement seeks to encourage all researchers to make their works openly available and free of paywalls so more people can access their knowledge. Yet some researchers who study open access (OA) continue to publish their work in paywalled journals and fail to make it open. This project set out to study just how many published research articles about OA fall into this category, how many are being made open (whether by being published in a gold OA or hybrid journal or through open deposit), and how library and information science authors compare to other disciplines researching this field. Because of the growth of tools available to help researchers find open versions of articles, this study also sought to compare how these new tools compare to Google Scholar in their ability to disseminating OA research. From a sample collected from Web of Science of articles published since 2010, the study found that although a majority of research articles about OA are open in some form, a little more than a quarter are not. A smaller rate of library science researchers made their work open compared to non-library science researchers. In looking at the copyright of these articles published in hybrid and open journals, authors were more likely to retain copyright ownership if they printed in an open journal compared to authors in hybrid journals. Articles were more likely to be published with a Creative Commons license if published in an open journal compared to those published in hybrid journals.

scholarly journals Architektura informacji w piśmiennictwie zagranicznym 1982–2018. Analiza ilościowa

2018 ◽  
Vol 56 (2(112)) ◽  
pp. 88-111
Author(s):  
Anna Matysek
Keyword(s):  
Information Science ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Google Books

Cel/Teza: Celem artykułu jest przedstawienie procesu kształtowania się zainteresowania problematyką architektury informacji w światowym piśmiennictwie.Koncepcja/Metody badań: Rozwój literatury dotyczącej architektury informacji przebadano na podstawie analizy bibliometrycznej piśmiennictwa zagranicznego na ten temat, opublikowanego do końca 2018 r. Piśmiennictwo to zostało zidentyfikowane na podstawie baz Scopus, Web of Science i Library and Information Science Abstract oraz serwisów Google Scholar, Google Books i księgarni Amazon. Analizę ilościową rozkładu chronologicznego i tematycznego piśmiennictwa uzupełnia wskazanie najważniejszych autorów, książek i czasopism, a także najczęściej cytowanych publikacji.Wyniki i wnioski: Zidentyfikowano 2269 publikacji dotyczących problematyki architektury informacji o bardzo zróżnicowanej tematyce, przede wszystkim z zakresu systemów informacyjnych i nauki o informacji. Wyniki analizy wskazują, że zainteresowanie różnymi aspektami architektury informacji zwiększa się nieprzerwanie od 2000 r., co zostało potwierdzone rosnącą liczbą publikacji i ich cytowań.Oryginalność/Wartość poznawcza: W polskim piśmiennictwie nie podejmowano dotychczas próby analizy literatury z zakresu architektury informacji. Artykuł może być punktem wyjścia do pogłębionej analizy tematycznej oraz stanowić materiał porównawczy dla podobnych badań.

Usage, captures, mentions, social media and citations of LIS highly cited papers: an altmetrics study

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Karim Saberi ◽  
Faezeh Ekhtiyari
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Quantitative Research ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Statistical Tests ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Highly Cited Papers ◽  
Usage Patterns ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Highly Cited

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate the usage, captures, mentions, social media and citations of highly cited papers of Library and information science (LIS). Design/methodology/approach This study is quantitative research that was conducted using scientometrics and altmetrics indicators. The research sample consists of LIS classic papers. The papers contain highly cited papers of LIS that are introduced by Google Scholar. The research data have been gathered from Google Scholar, Scopus and Plum Analytics Categories. The data analysis has been done by Excel and SPSS applications. Findings The data indicate that among the highly cited articles of LIS, the highest score regarding the usage, captures, mentions and social media and the most abundance of citations belong to “Citation advantage of open access articles” and “Usage patterns of collaborative tagging systems.” Based on the results of Spearman statistical tests, there is a positive significant correlation between Google Scholar Citations and all studied indicators. However, only the correlation between Google Scholar Citations with capture metrics (p-value = 0.047) and citation metrics (p-value = 0.0001) was statistically significant. Originality/value Altmetrics indicators can be used as complement traditional indicators of Scientometrics to study the impact of papers. Therefore, the Altmetrics knowledge of LIS researchers and experts and practicing new studies in this field will be very important.

scholarly journals Social Networks and Open Innovation: Business Academic Productivity

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 158
Author(s):  
Eva M. Sánchez-Teba ◽  
Mercedes Rodríguez-Fernández ◽  
Ana I. Gaspar-González
Keyword(s):  
Technology Acceptance ◽  
Open Innovation ◽  
Network Effects ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
Academic Productivity ◽  
Business And Society ◽  
Empirical Level ◽  
Acceptance Model

Is there any type of relationship between the academic productivity of business researchers and their social networking activity? What does this mean in terms of open innovation? With these objectives, in this paper we have focused on the Technology Acceptance Model and the concept of performativity, filling the gap that exists in the current scientific literature. At the empirical level, we carried out a review of 211 articles from the Web of Science (SSCI), obtaining a total set of 12,939 data points. Our statistical model has showed a clear symbiotic relationship between productivity in Google Scholar and presence in ResearchGate. Furthermore, researchers with a greater presence on LinkedIn or Twitter have low Google Scholar or Web of Science h-indices. We concluded that there is currently a dissociation between academic and professional online networks, something that does not help the applicability of research in business and society, the enduring aim of any search for knowledge. Information Science can play an important role in helping to bridge the gap between academia and the real world. Furthermore, in order to contribute to enhancing the role of universities in open innovation practices, it is essential to design and implement new tools such as online communities that stimulate interaction and facilitate network effects.

Infodemic surrounding COVID-19: Can LIS students recognize and categorize “problematic information” types on social media?

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shamima Yesmin ◽  
S.M. Zabed Ahmed
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Wrong Answer ◽  
Student Groups ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Correct Definition ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
And Task

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate Library and Information Science (LIS) students’ understanding of infodemic and related terminologies and their ability to categorize COVID-19-related problematic information types using examples from social media platforms. Design/methodology/approach The participants of this study were LIS students from a public-funded university located at the south coast of Bangladesh. An online survey was conducted which, in addition to demographic and study information, asked students to identify the correct definition of infodemic and related terminologies and to categorize the COVID-related problematic social media posts based on their inherent problem characteristics. The correct answer for each definition and task question was assigned a score of “1”, whereas the wrong answer was coded as “0”. The percentages of correctness score for total and each category of definition and task-specific questions were computed. The independent sample t-test and ANOVA were run to examine the differences in total and category-specific scores between student groups. Findings The findings revealed that students’ knowledge concerning the definition of infodemic and related terminologies and the categorization of COVID-19-related problematic social media posts was poor. There was no significant difference in correctness scores between student groups in terms of gender, age and study levels. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first time an effort was made to understand LIS students’ recognition and classification of problematic information. The findings can assist LIS departments in revising and improving the existing information literacy curriculum for students.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document