Can Alternative Indicators Overcome Language Biases in Citation Counts? A Comparison of Spanish and UK research

2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/2436/619200
Title:
Can Alternative Indicators Overcome Language Biases in Citation Counts? A Comparison of Spanish and UK research
Authors:
Mas-Bleda, Amalia; Thelwall, Mike ( 0000-0001-6065-205X )
Abstract:
This study compares Spanish and UK research in eight subject fields using a range of bibliometric and social media indicators. For each field, lists of Spanish and UK journal articles published in the year 2012 and their citation counts were extracted from Scopus. The software Webometric Analyst was then used to extract a range of altmetrics for these articles, including patent citations, online presentation mentions, online course syllabus mentions, Wikipedia mentions and Mendeley reader counts and Altmetric.com was used to extract Twitter mentions. Results show that Mendeley is the altmetric source with the highest coverage, with 80% of sampled articles having one or more Mendeley readers, followed by Twitter (34%). The coverage of the remaining sources was lower than 3%. All of the indicators checked either have too little data or increase the overall difference between Spain and the UK and so none can be suggested as alternatives to reduce the bias against Spain in traditional citation indexes.
Publisher:
Springer
Journal:
Scientometrics
Issue Date:
2016
URI:
http://hdl.handle.net/2436/619200
DOI:
10.1007/s11192-016-2118-8
Additional Links:
http://link.springer.com/journal/volumesAndIssues/11192
Type:
Article
Language:
en
ISSN:
0138-9130
Appears in Collections:
Statistical Cybermetrics Research Group

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorMas-Bleda, Amaliaen
dc.contributor.authorThelwall, Mikeen
dc.date.accessioned2016-09-01T09:39:20Z-
dc.date.available2016-09-01T09:39:20Z-
dc.date.issued2016-
dc.identifier.issn0138-9130en
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s11192-016-2118-8-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2436/619200-
dc.description.abstractThis study compares Spanish and UK research in eight subject fields using a range of bibliometric and social media indicators. For each field, lists of Spanish and UK journal articles published in the year 2012 and their citation counts were extracted from Scopus. The software Webometric Analyst was then used to extract a range of altmetrics for these articles, including patent citations, online presentation mentions, online course syllabus mentions, Wikipedia mentions and Mendeley reader counts and Altmetric.com was used to extract Twitter mentions. Results show that Mendeley is the altmetric source with the highest coverage, with 80% of sampled articles having one or more Mendeley readers, followed by Twitter (34%). The coverage of the remaining sources was lower than 3%. All of the indicators checked either have too little data or increase the overall difference between Spain and the UK and so none can be suggested as alternatives to reduce the bias against Spain in traditional citation indexes.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherSpringeren
dc.relation.urlhttp://link.springer.com/journal/volumesAndIssues/11192en
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.subjectAltmetricsen
dc.subjectsocial media metricsen
dc.subjectalternative indicatorsen
dc.subjectcountry comparisonen
dc.subjectlanguage biasen
dc.subjectresearch productionen
dc.titleCan Alternative Indicators Overcome Language Biases in Citation Counts? A Comparison of Spanish and UK researchen
dc.typeArticleen
dc.identifier.journalScientometricsen
dc.date.accepted2016-08-29-
rioxxterms.funderInternalen
rioxxterms.identifier.projectUoW010916AMen
rioxxterms.versionAMen
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttps://creativecommons.org/CC BY-NC-ND 4.0en
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2018-01-01en
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License
Creative Commons
All Items in WIRE are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.