Do Mendeley reader counts reflect the scholarly impact of conference papers? An investigation of computer science and engineering

Aduku, Kuku Joseph; Thelwall, Mike; Kousha, Kayvan

dc.contributor.author	Aduku, Kuku Joseph
dc.contributor.author	Thelwall, Mike
dc.contributor.author	Kousha, Kayvan
dc.date.accessioned	2017-04-26T11:18:44Z
dc.date.available	2017-04-26T11:18:44Z
dc.date.issued	2017-04-13
dc.identifier.citation	Aduku, K.J., Thelwall, M. & Kousha, K. (2017) Do Mendeley reader counts reflect the scholarly impact of conference papers? An investigation of computer science and engineering. Scientometrics 112 (1), pp 573–581.
dc.identifier.issn	0138-9130
dc.identifier.doi	10.1007/s11192-017-2367-1
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/2436/620457
dc.description	This is an accepted manuscript of an article published by Springer in Scientometrics on 13/04/2017, available online: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2367-1 The accepted version of the publication may differ from the final published version.
dc.description.abstract	Counts of Mendeley readers may give useful evidence about the impact of published re-search. Although previous studies have found significant positive correlations between counts of Mendeley readers and citation counts for journal articles, it is not known if this is equally true for conference papers. To fill this gap, Mendeley readership data and Scopus citation counts were extracted for both journal articles and conference papers published in 2011 in four fields for which conferences are important: Computer Science Applications; Computer Software; Building & Construction Engineering; and Industrial & Manufacturing Engineer-ing. Mendeley readership counts correlated moderately with citation counts for both journal articles and conference papers in Computer Science Applications and Computer Software. The correlations were much lower between Mendeley readers and citation counts for confer-ence papers than for journal articles in Building & Construction Engineering and Industrial & Manufacturing Engineering. Hence, there seem to be disciplinary differences in the useful-ness of Mendeley readership counts as impact indicators for conference papers, even between fields for which conferences are important.
dc.format	application/pdf
dc.language.iso	en
dc.publisher	Springer
dc.relation.url	http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-017-2367-1
dc.subject	Mendeley
dc.subject	Scientometrics
dc.subject	Readership indicators
dc.title	Do Mendeley reader counts reflect the scholarly impact of conference papers? An investigation of computer science and engineering
dc.type	Journal article
dc.identifier.journal	Scientometrics
dc.date.accepted	2017-03-01
rioxxterms.funder	University of Wolverhampton
rioxxterms.identifier.project	UoW260417MT
rioxxterms.version	AM
rioxxterms.licenseref.uri	https://creativecommons.org/CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate	2018-04-13
dc.source.volume	112
dc.source.issue	1
dc.source.beginpage	573
dc.source.endpage	581
refterms.dateFCD	2018-10-19T08:41:03Z
refterms.versionFCD	AM
refterms.dateFOA	2018-04-13T00:00:00Z
html.description.abstract	Counts of Mendeley readers may give useful evidence about the impact of published re-search. Although previous studies have found significant positive correlations between counts of Mendeley readers and citation counts for journal articles, it is not known if this is equally true for conference papers. To fill this gap, Mendeley readership data and Scopus citation counts were extracted for both journal articles and conference papers published in 2011 in four fields for which conferences are important: Computer Science Applications; Computer Software; Building & Construction Engineering; and Industrial & Manufacturing Engineer-ing. Mendeley readership counts correlated moderately with citation counts for both journal articles and conference papers in Computer Science Applications and Computer Software. The correlations were much lower between Mendeley readers and citation counts for confer-ence papers than for journal articles in Building & Construction Engineering and Industrial & Manufacturing Engineering. Hence, there seem to be disciplinary differences in the useful-ness of Mendeley readership counts as impact indicators for conference papers, even between fields for which conferences are important.