Search

In this paper we extend the perspective of the scholarly impact from the traditional citations to other forms of scientific communication among scholars in the mirror of the PlumX and Web of Science (WoS) data. There are in total eight indicators out of three categories including Captures, Citations, and Usage analysed in the study. The results of this study shows that Captures and Usage indicators measure very different aspects of research impact, although both of them show some similarity from the perspective of citations. The Characteristic Scores and Scales method was applied to different types of altmetric indicators for the first time and its robustness of the method was proved again.

Proceeding from the results of an earlier pilot study usage and citation impact data from the 2013 annual volume of the Web of Science Core Collection were collected and used to build indicators. Besides basic indicators on citation impact, usage counts and international collaboration, we applied the method of Characteristic Scores and Scales to analyse the distributions of citations and usage counts to further test the relation between the usage and citation impact. The results could confirm and extend the results of the previous study to a larger set of subjects and countries. In addition, a new journal metric, the Journals Usage Index, is proposed to supplement journal impact measures by a usage based index.

In this study usage counts and times cited from Web of Science Core Collection (WoS) were collected for articles published in 2013 with Belgian, Israeli and Iranian addresses. We investigated the relations among three indicators related to citation impact, usage counts and co-authorship, respectively. In addition, we applied the method of Characteristic Scores and Scales (CSS) to analyse the distributions of citations and usage counts to further test the relation between the usage and citation impact. The results show that citations and usage counts in WoS correlate significantly, especially in the social sciences. However, higher numbers of co-authors are not associated with higher usage counts or citations. Furthermore, the stability of CSS-class distributions substantiates the applicability of CSS in characterising both usage and citation distributions. Distinctly different patterns in citations and usage are observed, but the similarities within citations and usage in these fields are somewhat unexpected.

This study aims to gain a better understanding of communication patterns in different publication types and the applicability of the Book Citation Index (BKCI) for building indicators for use in both informetrics studies and research evaluation. The authors investigated the differences not only in citation impact between journal and book literature, but also in citation patterns between edited books and their monographic authored counterparts. The complete 2005 volume of the Web of Science Core Collection database including the three journal databases and the BKCI has been processed as source documents. The results of this study show that books are more heterogeneous information sources and addressed to more heterogeneous target groups than journals. Comparatively, the differences between edited and authored books in terms of the citation impact are not so impressive as books versus journals. Advanced models and indicators which have been developed for periodicals also work for books--however with some limitations.

A work strand planned by the Science Europe Working Group on Research Policy and Programme Evaluation aims at mapping the state of affairs in data collection and their use at European funding and research organisations. In particular, the project identifies and proposes solutions for issues experienced by the Member Organisations (MO) regarding collection, standardisation and treatment of data related to the analysis and ex-post evaluation of activities funded or performed by MOs. This is implemented through a survey sent to the MOs. The survey was analysed with special attention to the particular needs of funding and performing organisations. On the basis of the results and the discussion among the work strand members and within the WG, we draw a preliminary set of conclusions to produce guidance on relevant topics, including researcher and funding identification, potential, properties and limitations of data and indicators that are used in the context of measurement of research output and its assessment, classification systems used in sciences systems including their various types and issues of availability, confidentiality and harmonisation of data and indicators. Feedback from such discussions will be used to identify areas for further action by Science Europe.