Abstract
Statistically, top scholars tend to accumulate a large number of publications during their tenure. While the patterns illustrating their scientific impact are monotonous and it is difficult to get a concrete comprehension to the academic development of the scholars’ output. So we address the issue of graphically presenting and comparing the impact of individual scholars’ publications. Besides, with the development of Web 2.0, more information about the social impact of a scholar’s work is becoming increasingly available and relevant. Thus comes the challenge of how to quickly compare among a scholar’s entire collection of publications, and pinpoint those with higher social popularity as well as academic influence. To this end, we propose a graphical article-level metric, namely Scholarly Output Graph (SOG). SOG captures three dimensions including journal impact factor (JIF), scientific impact and social popularity, and reflects not only the quality of the publications but also the immediate responses from social networks. With the visual cues of block length, width and color, users can intuitively locate articles of higher scientific impact, JIF and social popularity. Additionally, SOG proves to be widely applicable, practical and flexible as a navigation tool for filtering publications. To demonstrate the usability of SOG, we design a literature navigation homepage with a list of 50 researchers in computer science with their individual scholarly output graphs and the results can be found at http://impact.linkscholar.org/SOGExample.html.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bar-Ilan, J., Haustein, S., Peters, I., Priem, J., Shema, H., Terliesner, J.: Beyond citations: Scholars’ visibility on the social web. In: Proceedings of 17th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators. 52900, pp. 98–109 (2012)
Haendel, M.A., Vasilevsky, N.A., Wirz, J.A.: Dealing with data: a case study on information and data management literacy. J. PLoS biol. 10(5), e1001339 (2012)
Alexander, R., Sarah, D.R.: Accounting for Impact? the journal impact factor and the making of biomedical research in the Netherlands. J. Minerva 53(2), 117–139 (2015)
Elliott, D.B.: The impact factor: a useful indicator of journal quality or fatally flawed? J. Ophthalmic Physiol. Optics 34(1), 4–7 (2014)
Kamat, P.V., Schatz, G.C.: Journal impact factor and the real impact of your paper. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 6(15), 3074–3075 (2015)
Wenli, G.: Beyond journal impact and usage statistics: using citation analysis for collection development. Serials Libr. Printed Page Digital Age 70(1–4), 121–127 (2016)
Hirsch, J.: An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 102(46), 16569–16572 (2005)
Ball, P.: Index aims for fair ranking of scientists. Nature 436, 900 (2005)
Glanzel, W.: On the opportunities and limitations of the h-index. Sci. Focus 1, 10–11 (2006)
Alonso, S., Cabrerizo, F.J., Herrera-Viedma, E., et al.: h-Index: a review focused in its variants.computation and standardization for different scientific fields. J. Informetrics 3(4), 273–289 (2009)
Bar-Ilan, J., Levene, M.: The hw-rank: An h-index variant for ranking web pages. Scientometrics 102(3), 2247–2253 (2015)
Van Eck, N.J., Waltman, L., van Raan, A.F.J., et al.: Citation analysis may severely underestimate the impact of clinical research as compared to basic research. PLoS One 8(4), e62395 (2013)
Das, A.K., Mishra, S.: Genesis of altmetrics or article-level metrics for measuring efficacy of scholarly communications: Current perspectives. Scientometrics 39(2), 1–16 (2014)
Martin, F.: What can article-level metrics do for you? PLoS Biol. 10(11), e1001687 (2013)
Neylon, C.: Article-level metrics and the evolution of scientific impact. PLoS Biol. 7(11), e1000242 (2009)
Shema, H., Bar-Ilan, J., Thelwall, M.: Do blog citations correlate with a higher number of future citations? Research blogs as a potential source for alternative metrics. J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 65(5), 1018–1027 (2014)
Lu, Z.: PubMed and beyond: a survey of web tools for searching biomedical literature. Database 2011(1), 56–65 (2011)
Priem, J., Hemminger, B.H.: Scientometrics 2.0: new metrics of scholarly impact on the social web. First Monday 15(7) (2010)
Liu, Y., Huang, Z., Yan, Y., et al.: Science Navigation Map: an interactive data mining tool for literature analysis. In: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on World Wide Web Companion, International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee, pp. 591–596 (2015)
Adie, E., Roe, W.: Altmetric: enriching scholarly content with article-level discussion and metrics. Learn. Publish. 26(1), 11–17 (2013)
Thelwall, M., Haustein, S., Larivire, V., et al.: Do altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other social web services (2013)
Haustein, S., Siebenlist, T.: Applying social bookmarking dat to evaluate journal usage. J. Informetrics 5(3), 446–457 (2011)
Gunn, W.: Social signals reflect academic impact: what it means when a scholar adds a paper to Mendeley. Inf. Stand. Q. 25(2), 33–39 (2013)
Liu, Y., Huang, Z., Fang, J., Yan, Y.: An article level metric in the context of research community. In: Proceedings of the companion publication of the 23rd international conference on World Wide Web companion, pp. 1197–1202. International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee (2014)
Eysenbach, G.: Can tweets predict citations? Metrics of social impact based on twitter and correlation with traditional metrics of scientific impact. J. Med. Internet Res. 13(4), e123 (2011)
Weller, K., Puschmann, C.: Twitter for scientific communication: how can citations/ references be identified and measured. In: Proceedings of the ACM WebSci 2011, pp. 1–4 (2011)
Thelwall, M., Tsou, A., Weingart, S., Holmberg, K., Haustein, S.: Tweeting links to academic articles. Cybermetrics: Int. J. Scientometrics Informetrics Bibliometrics 17, 1–8 (2013)
Bollen, J., Van de Sompel, H., Smith, J.A., Luce, R.: Toward alternative metrics of journal impact: a comparison of download and citation data. Inf. Process. Manage. 41(6), 1419–1440 (2005)
Zahedi, Z., Costas, R., Wouters, P.: How well developed are altmetrics? A cross-disciplinary analysis of the presence of alternative metrics in scientific publications. Scientometrics 101(2), 1491–1513 (2014)
Zahedi, Z., Fenner, M., Costas, R.: How consistent are altmetrics providers? Study of 1000 PLoS ONE publications using the PLOS ALM, Mendeley and Altmetric.com APIs. In altmetrics 14. Workshop at the Web Science Conference. Bloomington, USA (2014)
Li, X., Thelwall, M., Giustini, D.: Validating online reference managers for scholarly impact measurement. Scientometrics 91(2), 461–471 (2012)
Ling, X., Liu, Y., Huang, Z., Shah, P.K., Li, C.: A graphical article-level metric for intuitive comparison of large-scale literatures. Scientometrics 106(1), 41–50 (2015)
Alhoori, H., Kanan, T., Fox, E.A., Furuta, R., Giles, C.L., Pennsylvania, T.: On the relationship between open access and altmetrics. In: iConference 2015 Proceedings, pp. 1–8 (2015)
Bornmann, L.: What do altmetrics counts mean? A plea for content analyses. J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 67(4), 1016–1017 (2016)
Bornmann, L.: Alternative metrics in scientometrics: a meta-analysis of research into three altmetrics. Scientometrics 103(3), 1123–1144 (2015)
Acknowledgements
This work was supported in part by the Natural Science Foundation of China grant 61300087,61502069, 61672128; the Natural Science Foundation of Liaoning grant 2015020003; and by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities grant DUT15QY40, DUT16ZD(G)02.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Liu, Y., Lin, D., Li, J., Shan, S. (2016). Scholarly Output Graph: A Graphical Article-Level Metric Indicating the Impact of a Scholar’s Publications. In: Li, J., Li, X., Wang, S., Li, J., Sheng, Q. (eds) Advanced Data Mining and Applications. ADMA 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10086. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49586-6_40
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49586-6_40
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-49585-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-49586-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)