Differences between journals and years in the proportions of students, researchers and faculty registering Mendeley articles

2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/2436/621125
Title:
Differences between journals and years in the proportions of students, researchers and faculty registering Mendeley articles
Authors:
Thelwall, Mike ( 0000-0001-6065-205X )
Abstract:
This article contains two investigations into Mendeley reader counts with the same dataset. Mendeley reader counts provide evidence of early scholarly impact for journal articles, but reflect the reading of a relatively young subset of all researchers. To investigate whether this age bias is constant or varies by narrow field and publication year, this article compares the proportions of student, researcher and faculty readers for articles published 1996-2016 in 36 large monodisciplinary journals. In these journals, undergraduates recorded the newest research and faculty the oldest, with large differences between journals. The existence of substantial differences in the composition of readers between related fields points to the need for caution when using Mendeley readers as substitutes for citations for broad fields. The second investigation shows, with the same data, that there are substantial differences between narrow fields in the time taken for Scopus citations to be as numerous as Mendeley readers. Thus, even narrow field differences can impact on the relative value of Mendeley compared to citation counts.
Publisher:
Springer
Journal:
Scientometrics
Issue Date:
Jul-2018
URI:
http://hdl.handle.net/2436/621125
Additional Links:
https://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.authorThelwall, Mikeen
dc.date.accessioned2018-02-20T12:06:09Z-
dc.date.available2018-02-20T12:06:09Z-
dc.date.issued2018-07-
dc.identifier.issn0138-9130en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2436/621125-
dc.description.abstractThis article contains two investigations into Mendeley reader counts with the same dataset. Mendeley reader counts provide evidence of early scholarly impact for journal articles, but reflect the reading of a relatively young subset of all researchers. To investigate whether this age bias is constant or varies by narrow field and publication year, this article compares the proportions of student, researcher and faculty readers for articles published 1996-2016 in 36 large monodisciplinary journals. In these journals, undergraduates recorded the newest research and faculty the oldest, with large differences between journals. The existence of substantial differences in the composition of readers between related fields points to the need for caution when using Mendeley readers as substitutes for citations for broad fields. The second investigation shows, with the same data, that there are substantial differences between narrow fields in the time taken for Scopus citations to be as numerous as Mendeley readers. Thus, even narrow field differences can impact on the relative value of Mendeley compared to citation counts.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherSpringeren
dc.relation.urlhttps://link.springer.com/journal/volumesAndIssues/11192en
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.subjectAltmetricsen
dc.subjectMendeleyen
dc.subjectcitation analysisen
dc.titleDifferences between journals and years in the proportions of students, researchers and faculty registering Mendeley articlesen
dc.typeArticleen
dc.identifier.journalScientometricsen
dc.date.accepted2018-02-
rioxxterms.funderInternalen
rioxxterms.identifier.projectUoW200218MTen
rioxxterms.versionAMen
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttps://creativecommons.org/CC BY-NC-ND 4.0en
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2018-02-21en
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.