Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorThelwall, Mike
dc.date.accessioned2017-09-04T14:45:41Z
dc.date.available2017-09-04T14:45:41Z
dc.date.issued2017-09-19
dc.identifier.citationThelwall, M. (2017) ‘Do Mendeley reader counts indicate the value of arts and humanities research?’, Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 51(3), pp. 781–788. doi: 10.1177/0961000617732381.
dc.identifier.issn0961-0006
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/0961000617732381
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2436/620648
dc.descriptionThis is an accepted manuscript of an article published by Sage in Journal of Librarianship and Information Science on 19/09/2017, available online: https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000617732381 The accepted version of the publication may differ from the final published version.
dc.description.abstractMendeley reader counts are a good source of early impact evidence for the life and natural sciences articles because they are abundant, appear before citations, and correlate moderately or strongly with citations in the long term. Early studies have found less promising results for the humanities and this article assesses whether the situation has now changed. Using Mendeley reader counts for articles in twelve arts and humanities Scopus subcategories, the results show that Mendeley reader counts reflect Scopus citation counts in most arts and humanities as strongly as in other areas of scholarship. Thus, Mendeley can be used as an early citation impact indicator in the arts and humanities, although it is unclear whether reader or citation counts reflect the underlying value of arts and humanities research.
dc.formatapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherSage
dc.relation.urlhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0961000617732381
dc.subjectMendeley
dc.subjectaltmetrics
dc.subjectscientometrics
dc.subjectarts
dc.subjecthumanities
dc.subjectresearch evaluation
dc.titleDo Mendeley reader counts indicate the value of arts and humanities research?
dc.typeJournal article
dc.identifier.journalJournal of Librarianship & Information Science
dc.date.accepted2017-08-31
rioxxterms.funderUniversity of Wolverhampton
rioxxterms.identifier.projectUoW040917MT
rioxxterms.versionAM
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttps://creativecommons.org/CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2017-12-01
dc.source.volume51
dc.source.issue3
dc.source.beginpage781
dc.source.endpage788
refterms.dateFCD2018-07-26T12:30:43Z
refterms.versionFCDAM
refterms.dateFOA2017-12-01T00:00:00Z
html.description.abstractMendeley reader counts are a good source of early impact evidence for the life and natural sciences articles because they are abundant, appear before citations, and correlate moderately or strongly with citations in the long term. Early studies have found less promising results for the humanities and this article assesses whether the situation has now changed. Using Mendeley reader counts for articles in twelve arts and humanities Scopus subcategories, the results show that Mendeley reader counts reflect Scopus citation counts in most arts and humanities as strongly as in other areas of scholarship. Thus, Mendeley can be used as an early citation impact indicator in the arts and humanities, although it is unclear whether reader or citation counts reflect the underlying value of arts and humanities research.


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
ArtsHumanitiesMendeley_preprint.pdf
Size:
813.0Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

https://creativecommons.org/CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as https://creativecommons.org/CC BY-NC-ND 4.0