| Title |
Research data explored: an extended analysis of citations and altmetrics
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scientometrics, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11192-016-1887-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Isabella Peters, Peter Kraker, Elisabeth Lex, Christian Gumpenberger, Juan Gorraiz |
| Abstract |
In this study, we explore the citedness of research data, its distribution over time and its relation to the availability of a digital object identifier (DOI) in the Thomson Reuters database Data Citation Index (DCI). We investigate if cited research data "impacts" the (social) web, reflected by altmetrics scores, and if there is any relationship between the number of citations and the sum of altmetrics scores from various social media platforms. Three tools are used to collect altmetrics scores, namely PlumX, ImpactStory, and Altmetric.com, and the corresponding results are compared. We found that out of the three altmetrics tools, PlumX has the best coverage. Our experiments revealed that research data remain mostly uncited (about 85 %), although there has been an increase in citing data sets published since 2008. The percentage of the number of cited research data with a DOI in DCI has decreased in the last years. Only nine repositories are responsible for research data with DOIs and two or more citations. The number of cited research data with altmetrics "foot-prints" is even lower (4-9 %) but shows a higher coverage of research data from the last decade. In our study, we also found no correlation between the number of citations and the total number of altmetrics scores. Yet, certain data types (i.e. survey, aggregate data, and sequence data) are more often cited and also receive higher altmetrics scores. Additionally, we performed citation and altmetric analyses of all research data published between 2011 and 2013 in four different disciplines covered by the DCI. In general, these results correspond very well with the ones obtained for research data cited at least twice and also show low numbers in citations and in altmetrics. Finally, we observed that there are disciplinary differences in the availability and extent of altmetrics scores. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 36 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 5 | 14% |
| Austria | 3 | 8% |
| Germany | 3 | 8% |
| Netherlands | 2 | 6% |
| Australia | 2 | 6% |
| France | 2 | 6% |
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Norway | 1 | 3% |
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 17% |
| Unknown | 10 | 28% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 22 | 61% |
| Scientists | 10 | 28% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 8% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 248 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 3 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 1% |
| Germany | 2 | <1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 2 | <1% |
| Cuba | 1 | <1% |
| Austria | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 9 | 4% |
| Unknown | 223 | 90% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Librarian | 70 | 28% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 31 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 26 | 10% |
| Researcher | 25 | 10% |
| Other | 19 | 8% |
| Other | 50 | 20% |
| Unknown | 27 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 83 | 33% |
| Computer Science | 47 | 19% |
| Arts and Humanities | 17 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 4% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 4% |
| Other | 39 | 16% |
| Unknown | 41 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 48. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 October 2022.
All research outputs
#891,034
of 25,760,414 outputs
Outputs from Scientometrics
#113
of 2,964 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,588
of 414,729 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientometrics
#2
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,760,414 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,964 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 414,729 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.