Advertisement

The Development of a Webometric Criterion for Ranking Researchers

  • P. A. KalachikhinEmail author
Information Analysis
  • 36 Downloads

Abstract

This paper explores the possibility of extracting scientometric data from social media. Basic approaches to typification and classification of altmetrics are presented. The advantages and disadvantages of using altmetrics as scientometric indicators are investigated. The concept of webification of bibliometric indicators is introduced. Several examples of webometric indicators are discussed. Webometric indicators are designed to evaluate academic performance of researchers. A new criterion is introduced for the use in the performance-based ranking of researchers. This criterion applies webometric indicators that are calculated on the basis of altmetrics.

Keywords

altmetrics webification semi-webometric indicators performance publication social media 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    MLE on Open Science Altmetrics and Rewards—Different types of Altmetrics. https://rio.jrc.ec.europa.eu/en/ library/mle-open-science-%E2%80%93-report-differenttypes- altmetrics.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gutmann, P., The commercial malware industry, DEFCON Conference, 2007. http://stacykonkiel.org/ sociologybot/?platform=hootsuite.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jeng, W., DesAutels, S., He, D., and Li, L., Information exchange on an academic social networking site: A multidiscipline comparison on ResearchGate Q&A, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol., 2017, vol. 68, no. 3, pp. 638–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Haustein, S., Peters, I., Bar-Ilan, J., Priem, J., Shema, H., and Terliesher, J., Coverage and adoption of altmetrics sources in the bibliometric community, Scientometrics, 2014, vol. 101, no. 2, pp. 1145–1163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sugimoto, C.R., Work, S., Larivière, V., and Haustein, S., Scholarly use of social media and altmetrics: A review of the literature, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol., 2017, vol. 68, no. 9, pp. 2037–2062.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hassan, S.U., Imran, M., Gillani, U., Aljohani, N.R., Bowman, T.D., and Didegah, F., Measuring social media activity of scientific literature: An exhaustive comparison of Scopus and novel altmetrics Big Data, Scientometrics, 2017, vol. 113, no. 2, pp. 1037–1057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Valuing science and scholarship. Relations between quality, impact and indicators. www.cwts.nl/research/ cwts-research-program-2017-2022.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Martín-Martín, A., Orduña-Malea, E., Ayllón, J.M., and López-Cózar, E.D., The counting house: Measuring those who count. Presence of Bibliometrics, Scientometrics, Informetrics, Webometrics and Altmetrics in the Google Scholar Citations, ResearcherID, ResearchGate, Mendeley & Twitter, arXiv preprint arXiv:1602.02412, 2016. https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/ papers/1602/1602.02412.pdf.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hoffmann, C.P., Lutz, C., and Meckel, M., A relational altmetric? Network centrality on ResearchGate as an indicator of scientific impact, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol., 2016, vol. 67, no. 4, pp. 765–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bornmann, L., Do altmetrics point to the broader impact of research? An overview of benefits and disadvantages of altmetrics, J. Inf., 2014, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 895–903.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Haustein, S., Grand challenges in altmetrics: Heterogeneity, data quality and dependencies, Scientometrics, 2016, vol. 108, no. 1, pp. 413–423.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bornmann, L. and Haunschild, R., Measuring fieldnormalized impact of papers on specific societal groups: An altmetrics study based on Mendeley Data, Res. Eval., 2017, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 230–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bornmann, L., Alternative metrics in scientometrics: A meta-analysis of research into three altmetrics, Scientometrics, 2015, vol. 103, no. 3, pp. 1123–1144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zahedi, Z., Costas, R., and Wouters, P., How well developed are altmetrics? A cross-disciplinary analysis of the presence of 'alternative metrics' in scientific publications, Scientometrics, 2014, vol. 101, no. 2, pp. 1491–1513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lapinski, S., Piwowar, H., and Priem, J., Riding the crest of the altmetrics wave: How librarians can help prepare faculty for the next generation of research impact metrics, arXiv preprint arXiv:1305.3328, 2013. https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1305/1305.3328.pdf.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Waltman, L., van Eck, N.J., van Leeuwen, T.N., Visser, M.S., and van Raan, A.F., Towards a new crown indicator: Some theoretical considerations, J. Inf., 2011, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 37–47.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hassan, S.U. and Gillani, U.A., Altmetrics of “altmetrics” using Google Scholar, Twitter, Mendeley, Facebook, Google-plus, CiteULike, Blogs and Wiki, arXiv preprint arXiv:1603.07992, 2016. https://arxiv.org/ftp/ arxiv/papers/1603/1603.07992.pdf.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ovadia, S., ResearchGate and Academia.edu: Academic social networks, Behav. Soc. Sci. Libr., 2014, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 165–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kalachikhin, P.A., Patterns for constructing scientific citation index, Autom. Doc. Math. Linguist., 2017, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 171–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Allerton Press, Inc. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.All-Russian Institute for Scientific and Technical InformationRussian Academy of SciencesMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations