Usage versus citation behaviours in four subject areas

被引:1
作者
Juan Gorraiz
Christian Gumpenberger
Christian Schlögl
机构
[1] University of Vienna,Vienna University Library, Bibliometrics Department
[2] University of Graz,Institute of Information Science and Information Systems
来源
Scientometrics | 2014年 / 101卷
关键词
Citations; Downloads; Citation metrics; Usage metrics; Impact factor; Usage factor; Disciplinary differences; Articles in press;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
This study puts an emphasis on the disciplinary differences observed for the behaviour of citations and downloads. This was exemplified by studying citations over the last 10 years in four selected fields, namely, arts and humanities, computer science, economics, econometrics, and finance, and oncology. Differences in obsolescence characteristics were studied using synchronic as well as diachronic counts. Furthermore, differences between document types were taken into consideration and correlations between journal impact and journal usage measures were calculated. The number of downloads per document remains almost constant for all four observed areas within the last four years, varying from approximately 180 (oncology) to 300 (economics). The percentage of downloaded documents is higher than 90 % for all areas. The number of citations per document ranges from one (arts and humanities) to three (oncology). The percentages of cited documents range from 40 to 56 %. According to our study, 50–140 downloads correspond to one citation. A differentiation according to document type reveals further download- and citation-specific characteristics for the observed subject areas. This study points to the fact that citations can only measure the impact in the ‘publish or perish’ community; however, this approach is neither applicable to the whole scientific community nor to society in general. Downloads may not be a perfect proxy to estimate the overall usage. Nevertheless, they measure at least the intention to use the downloaded material, which is invaluable information in order to better understand publication and communication processes. Usage metrics should consider the unique nature of downloads and ought to reflect their intrinsic differences from citations.
引用
收藏
页码:1077 / 1095
页数:18
相关论文
共 45 条
[1]  
Bollen J(2008)Usage impact factor: The effects of sample characteristics on usage-based impact metrics Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 59 136-149
[2]  
Van de Sompel H(2005)Toward alternative metrics of journal impact: A comparison of download and citation data Information Processing and Management 41 1419-1440
[3]  
Bollen J.(2006)Earlier web usage statistics as predictors of later citation impact Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 57 1060-1072
[4]  
Sompel H.(2008)The top papers by download and citations from the International Journal of Cardiology 131 e1-e3
[5]  
Smith J. A.(2005) in 2007 Library Hi Tech 23 598-609
[6]  
Luce R.(2002)Lessons learned from analyzing library database usage data Journal of the Medical Library Association 90 323-327
[7]  
Brody T(2006)Reading factor: A new bibliometric criterion for managing digital libraries The Journal of Academic Librarianship 32 512-517
[8]  
Harnad S(2010)Can electronic journal usage data replace citation data as a measure of journal use? An empirical examination Liber Quarterly 20 80-93
[9]  
Carr L(2011)Going beyond citations: SERUM—a new tool provided by a network of libraries Journal of Informetrics 5 446-457
[10]  
Coats AJS(2006)Applying social bookmarking data to evaluate journal usage The Serials Librarian 50 163-172