Group items tagged

Bibliometric methods can be used to assess many types of impact. See the example from Science-Metrics and the Univeristy of Leiden Book of Abstracts.

VOSviewer, a freely available computer program is used for constructing and viewing bibliometric maps. Unlike programs such as SPSS and Pajek, which are commonly used for bibliometric mapping, VOSviewer pays special attention to the graphical representation of bibliometric maps. (Journal impact analysis)

Studying Scientific Discourse on the Web using Bibliometrics: A Chemistry Blogging Case Study

"The information science field of webometrics is "the study of the quantitative aspects of the construction and use of information resources, structures and technologies on the web drawing on bibliometric and informetric approaches" [1] or, more generally, "the study of web-based content with primarily quantitative methods for social science research goals using techniques that are not specific to one field of study"[2]."

Bibliometric and usage-based analyses and tools highlight the value of information about scholarship contained within the network of authors, articles and usage data. Less progress has been made on populating and using the author side of this network than the article side, in part because of the difficulty of unambiguously identifying authors. I briefly review a sample of author identifier schemes, and consider use in scholarly repositories. I then describe preliminary work at arXiv to implement public author identifiers, services based on them, and plans to make this information

Since the publication of Robert K. Merton's theory of cumulative advantage in science (Matthew Effect), several empirical studies have tried to measure its presence at the level of papers, individual researchers, institutions or countries.

Usage data, still an active research area, can address many shortcomings of citation analysis. A state-of-the-art in usage-based informetrics, the article can inspire the development of usage metadata for DPLA system. .

"a study is undertaken of a selection of papers from the fie ld of c ommunication, comparing the number of cit ations received with their 2.0 i ndicators. The results s how that the most cited articles within recent years also have significantly hi gher altmetric indicators. Next follows a review of the principal empirical studies undertaken, centering on the correlations between bibliometric and al ternative indicators. To conclude, the main limitations of altmetrics are highlighted , alongside a reflective consideration of the role altmetrics may play in capturing the impact of research in Web 2.0 platforms"

Review of citation data tools

From the abstract: ", we propose a social framework based on crowdsourced annotations of scholars, designed to keep up with the rapidly evolving disciplinary and interdisciplinary landscape. We describe a system called Scholarometer, which provides a service to scholars by computing citation-based impact measures. This creates an incentive for users to provide disciplinary annotations of authors, which in turn can be used to compute disciplinary metrics. We first present the system architecture and several heuristics to deal with noisy bibliographic and annotation data. We report on data sharing and interactive visualization services enabled by Scholarometer. Usage statistics, illustrating the data collected and shared through the framework, suggest that the proposed crowdsourcing approach can be successful. Secondly, we illustrate how the disciplinary bibliometric indicators elicited by Scholarometer allow us to implement for the first time a universal impact measure proposed in the literature. Our evaluation suggests that this metric provides an effective means for comparing scholarly impact across disciplinary boundaries."

Attempts at gaming Google Scholar's metrics with fake papers, but frustrations reported with Scholar's lack of transparency

* A common reason for measuring the impact of research is to demonstrate accountability, but results of measuring can also be used to guide improvements in research and programming. * Health research impacts generally include: knowledge production; research capacity-building; informed decision-making; health and health sector benefits; and economic benefits. * Among some of the widely used methods for measuring the benefits from research are bibliometric analysis, economic rate of return, peer review, case studies, logic modelling, and benchmarking. Taking a multi-indicator, multi-method approach is advised.

This article describes a study, involving a set of articles published in scholarly journals by faculty members of the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HKUST) that have also been deposited in the HKUST Institutional Repository. The study was

questioning of citation counts and research metrics