Altmetrics for Country-Level Research Assessment

  • Hamed Alhoori
  • Richard Furuta
  • Myrna Tabet
  • Mohammed Samaka
  • Edward A. Fox
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8839)

Abstract

Changes are occurring in scholarly communication and the geography of science.Policymakersand research funding agencies are looking for ways to measure the comprehensive impact of research and benefit from the research experiences of other nations. Recently, altmetrics have been used to measure broader impact of research activities.In this paper, we study altmetrics based on the country-levelimpact andfind that altmetrics can support research evaluation for all countries studied. We compare altmetrics with several traditional metrics and findsignificant relationshipsbetween country-level altmetrics and the number of publications, citations, h-index, and gross domestic expenditure on research and development (GERD). We also find a significant yearly increase in the number of articles published between 2010 and 2014 that received altmetrics.

Keywords

Altmetrics Research Evaluation R&D GDP H-index 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Zhou, P.: The growth momentum of China in producing international scientific publications seems to have slowed down. Information Processing & Management 49, 1049–1051 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Leydesdorff, L., Wagner, C.: Macro-level indicators of the relations between research funding and research output. Journal of Informetrics 3, 353–362 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bornmann, L., Leydesdorff, L.: Macro-indicators of citation impacts of six prolific countries: InCites data and the statistical significance of trends. PLOS ONE. 8, e56768 (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    King, D.A.: The scientific impact of nations. Nature 430, 311–316 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Adie, E., Roe, W.: Altmetric: enriching scholarly content with article-level discussion and metrics. Learned Publishing 26, 11–17 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Priem, J., Piwowar, H.A., Hemminger, B.M.: Altmetrics in the wild: Using social media to explore scholarly impact. arXiv:1203.4745 (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Alhoori, H., Furuta, R.: Can social reference management systems predict a ranking of scholarly venues? In: Aalberg, T., Papatheodorou, C., Dobreva, M., Tsakonas, G., Farrugia, C.J. (eds.) TPDL 2013. LNCS, vol. 8092, pp. 138–143. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Thelwall, M., Maflahi, N.: Are scholarly articles disproportionately read in their own country? An analysis of Mendeley readers. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology (2014), doi: 10.1002/asi.23252Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Vinkler, P.: Correlation between the structure of scientific research, scientometric indicators and GDP in EU and non-EU countries. Scientometrics 74, 237–254 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Moya-Anegón, F., Herrero-Solana, V.: Science in America Latina: A comparison of bibliometric and scientific-technical indicators. Scientometrics 46, 299–320 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tasli, L., Kacar, N., Aydemir, E.H.: Scientific productivity of OECD countries in dermatology journals within the last 10-year period. International Journal of Dermatology 51, 665–671 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Meo, S.A., Al Masri, A.A., Usmani, A.M., Memon, A.N., Zaidi, S.Z.: Impact of GDP, Spending on R&D, Number of Universities and Scientific Journals on Research Publications among Asian Countries. PLOS ONE 8 (2013)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Smith, R.: Measuring the social impact of research. BMJ 323, 528 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Alhoori, H., Furuta, R.: Understanding the Dynamic Scholarly Research Needs and Behavior as Applied to Social Reference Management. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Digital Libraries, pp. 169–178 (2011)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bar-Ilan, J., Haustein, S., Peters, I., Priem, J., Shema, H., Terliesner, J.: Beyond citations: Scholars ’ visibility on the social Web. In: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators, Montréal, Canada, pp. 98–109 (2012)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mohammadi, E., Thelwall, M.: Mendeley readership altmetrics for the social sciences and humanities: Research evaluation and knowledge flows. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 65, 1627–1638 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Haustein, S., Peters, I., Sugimoto, C.R., Thelwall, M., Larivière, V.: Tweeting biomedicine: An analysis of tweets and citations in the biomedical literature. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 65, 656–669 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zahedi, Z., Costas, R., Wouters, P.: How well developed are altmetrics? A cross-disciplinary analysis of the presence of ‘alternative metrics’ in scientific publications. Scientometrics (2014), doi:10.1007/s11192-014-1264-0Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Holmberg, K., Thelwall, M.: Disciplinary differences in Twitter scholarly communication. Scientometrics (2014), doi:10.1007/s11192-014-1229-3Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Alhoori, H., Furuta, R.: Do Altmetrics Follow the Crowd or Does the Crowd Follow Altmetrics? In: 2014 IEEE/ACM Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL) (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hamed Alhoori
    • 1
  • Richard Furuta
    • 1
  • Myrna Tabet
    • 2
  • Mohammed Samaka
    • 3
  • Edward A. Fox
    • 4
  1. 1.Dept. of Computer Science and EngineeringTexas A&M UniversityCollege StationUSA
  2. 2.Qatar University LibraryQatar UniversityDohaQatar
  3. 3.Dept. of Computer ScienceQatar UniversityDohaQatar
  4. 4.Dept. of Computer ScienceVirginia TechBlacksburgUSA

Personalised recommendations