Métricas en transición: evaluación de indicadores tradicionales y alternativos en revistas latinoamericanas de ciencias sociales.

Calle Pesántez, Sofía Elizabeth and Salvador Olivan, Jose Antonio Métricas en transición: evaluación de indicadores tradicionales y alternativos en revistas latinoamericanas de ciencias sociales. Ibersid, 2025, vol. 19, n. 1, pp. 81-95. [Journal article (Paginated)]

[thumbnail of Texto completo]
Preview
 Text (Texto completo)
Ibersid_2025.pdf - Published version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives.
Download (1MB) | Preview

English abstract

Altmetrics are transforming the evaluation of scientific impact by complementing traditional bibliometric indicators with a broader and more dynamic perspective on research influence in the digital age. In this context, the scientific ecosystem is undergoing a shift in its prevailing evaluation model as it has been understood in recent years. The main objective of this study is to analyze the distribution of Latin American social science journals indexed in the Scimago Journal Rank (SJR) 2023, and the evolution of their traditional and alternative metrics during the period 2017 – 2023, in order to identify growth dynamics and significant differences related to the impact assessment of scientific publications. The analysis considered the annual scores of 12 alternative metrics and 9 traditional metrics across 356 journals, as well as data obtained through a survey administered to the editors of the journals studied. The findings reveal limited regional representation of social sciences within the SJR, and an uneven pattern of regional editorial production led by Brazil followed by Chile, Colombia and Mexico. In traditional metrics, a sustained growth in SJR, CiteScore and JCI scores was identified, with a slower integration in Journal Citation Reports (JCR) metrics, accompanied by a consolidated editorial use in impact assessment. Altmetrics presented low and scattered values. Mentions on X (Twitter), Wikipedia, mainstream media and blogs exhibited statistically significant growth, while Mendeley readership, Facebook mentions and citations in Dimensions reflected a decrease. This asymmetric behaviour suggests an ongoing transition in the modes of scientific dissemination, although the traditional citation-based model prevails.

Spanish abstract

Las altmetrics están transformando la evaluación del impacto científico, complementando los indicadores bibliométricos tradicionales con una visión más amplia y dinámica de la influencia de la investigación en la era digital, es decir, el ecosistema científico atraviesa un cambio en su modelo tal cual se ha conocido en los últimos años. El objetivo principal de este estudio es analizar la distribución de las revistas de ciencias sociales de América Latina, indexadas en el Scimago Journal Rank (SJR) 2023, y la evolución de sus métricas tradicionales y alternativas en el período 2017 – 2023, para identificar dinámicas de crecimiento y diferencias significativas relacionadas con la evaluación de impacto de las publicaciones científicas. El análisis consideró las puntuaciones anuales de 12 métricas alternativas y 9 métricas tradicionales de 356 revistas, así como, los datos obtenidos a partir de la aplicación de una encuesta a los editores de las revistas estudiadas. Los resultados revelan una representación regional limitada para las ciencias sociales dentro del SJR y un patrón desigual en la producción editorial regional liderada por Brasil seguido de Chile, Colombia y México. En métricas tradicionales se identificó un crecimiento sostenido de las puntuaciones SJR, CiteScore y JCI, con una integración más lenta en métricas del Journal Citation Reports (JCR), acompañado por un uso editorial consolidado en la evaluación de impacto. Las métricas alternativas presentaron valores bajos y dispersos. Las menciones en X (Twitter), Wikipedia, medios de comunicación y blogs mostraron un crecimiento estadísticamente significativo, mientras que lectores en Mendeley, menciones en Facebook y citas en Dimensions reflejaron un descenso. Este comportamiento asimétrico sugiere una transición en curso en los modos de difusión científica, aunque prevalece el modelo tradicional basado en citas.

Item type: Journal article (Paginated)
Keywords: métricas alternativas, indicadores bibliométricos, revistas científicas, América Latina, Ciencias sociales, impacto científico, alternative metrics, bibliometric indicators, Latin American scientific journals, social sciences, scientific impact
Subjects: B. Information use and sociology of information > BB. Bibliometric methods
Depositing user: Jose Antonio Salvador-Oliván
Date deposited: 03 Jul 2025 05:27
Last modified: 03 Jul 2025 05:27
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10760/46951

References

Akella, A. P., Alhoori, H., Kondamudi, P. R., Freeman, C., & Zhou, H. (2021). Early indicators of scientific impact: Predicting citations with altmetrics. // Journal of Informetrics, 15:2, 101128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2020.101128

Alperin, J. P. (2015). Geographic variation in social media metrics: An analysis of Latin American journal articles. // Aslib Journal of Information Management. 67:3, 289–304. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-12-2014-0176

Alperin, J. P.; Fischman, G. (2015). Made in Latin America. Open access, scholarly journals, and regional innovations. // http://libreria.clacso.org/publicacion.php?p=1001&c=8

Alvarez Yero, J. C.; Ríos Barrios, I.; Pino Estévez, P. R.; Luc Djakli, C.; Alvarez Yero, J. C.; Ríos Barrios, I.; Pino Estévez, P. R.; Luc Djakli, C. (2021). Symbiosis of bibliometric and alternative indicators for an integrated metric index. // Humanida-des Médicas. 21:2, 524–542.

Archambault, É.; Larivière, V. (2010). The limits of bibliometrics for the analysis of the social science et humanities literature. // http://www.ost.uqam.ca/publications/the-limits-of-bibliometrics-for-the-analysis-of-the-social-science-et-humanities-literature/

Banshal, S. K.; Singh, V. K.; Muhuri, P. K. (2021). Can altmetric mentions predict later citations? A test of validity on data from ResearchGate and three social media platforms. // Online Information Review. 45:3, 517–536. https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-11-2019-0364

Barata, G. (2019). More relevant alternative metrics for Latin America. // Transinformação. 31, e190031. https://doi.org/10.1590/2318-0889201931e190031

Bellis, N. D. (2009). Bibliometrics and Citation Analysis: From the Science Citation Index to Cyber-metrics. Scarecrow Press.

Borba, V. da R.; Alvarez, G. R.; Caregnato, S. E. (2019). Análise Altmétrica da Produção Científica das Revistas brasileiras em Ciência da Informação Qualis A1 (2011–2017) no Mendeley. // Encontros Bibli: Revista Eletrônica de Biblioteconomia e Ciência da Informação. 24:55, Article 55. https://doi.org/10.5007/1518-2924.2019.e58658

Bornmann, L. (2014). Do altmetrics point to the broader impact of research? An overview of benefits and disadvantages of altmetrics. // Journal of Informetrics. 8:4, 895–903. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2014.09.005

Bornmann, L.; Haunschild, R. (2017). Measuring field-normalized impact of papers on specific societal groups: An altmetrics study based on Mendeley Data. // Research Evaluation. 26:3, 230–241. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvx005

Calisto-Breiding, C.; Peña-Pallauta, P.; Arellano-Rojas, P. (2021). Transformando la evaluación científica en las políticas de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación (CTI) de América Latina y el Caribe. Un estudio desde la altmetría. // Información, cultura y sociedad. 45, Article 45. https://doi.org/10.34096/ics.i45.10075

Chen, W. M. Y.; Bukhari, M.; Cockshull, F.; Galloway, J. (2020). The relationship between citations, downloads and alternative metrics in rheumatology publications: A bibliometric study. // Rheumatology. 59:2, 277–280. https://doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/kez163

Cho, J. (2017). A comparative study of the impact of Korean research articles in four academic fields using altmetrics. // Performance Measurement and Metrics. 18:1, 38–51. https://doi.org/10.1108/PMM-02-2016-0005

Cho, J. (2021a). Altmetrics analysis of highly cited academic papers in the field of library and information science. // Scientometrics. 126:9, 7623–7635. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04084-w

Cho, J. (2021b). Altmetrics of highly cited research papers in social science. // Serials Review. 47:1, 17–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2021.1882652

Costas, R.; Zahedi, Z.; Wouters, P. (2015). Do «altmetrics» correlate with citations? Extensive comparison of altmetric indicators with citations from a multidisciplinary perspective. // Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66:10, 2003–2019. https://doi.org/f

Demachki, É.; Maricato, J. de M. (2022). Coverage of data sources and correlations between altmetrics and citation indicators: The case of a Brazilian portal of open access journals. // Serials Review. 48:(1–2), 151–166. https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2022.2066967

Diamandis, E. P. (2017). The Journal Impact Factor is under attack – use the CAPCI factor instead. // BMC Medicine. 15:1, 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-016-0773-5

Ergüt, Ö.; Camkıran, C. (2021). Altmetrics and social network analysis of economics, econometrics and finance research: The case study of Turkey. // Annals of Library and Information Studies (ALIS). 68:2, Article 2. https://doi.org/10.56042/alis.v68i2.38609

Fang, Z.; Costas, R.; Tian, W.; Wang, X.; Wouters, P. (2020). An extensive analysis of the presence of altmetric data for Web of Science publications across subject fields and research topics. // Scientometrics. 124:3, 2519–2549. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03564-9

Garfield, E. (1972). Citation Analysis as a Tool in Journal Evaluation. // Science. 178:4060, 471–479. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.178.4060.471

Garfield, E. (2006). The History and Meaning of the Journal Impact Factor. // JAMA. 295:1, 90–93. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.295.1.90

Garfield, E.; Sher, I. H. (1963). New factors in the evaluation of scientific literature through citation indexing. // American Documentation. 14:3, 195–201. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.5090140304

Ghasemian, A.; Nojavan, F.; Asnafi, A. R.; Jabbari, F. (2024). Evaluation of quality performance and social effectiveness of arts and humanities journals indexed in the Web of Science Database. // DESIDOC Journal of Library and Information Technology. 44:1, 17–24. https://doi.org/10.14429/djlit.44.1.18970

Gilstrap, D. L.; Whitver, S. M.; Scalfani, V. F.; Bray, N. J. (2023). Citation Metrics and Boyer’s Model of Scholarship: How Do Bibliometrics and Altmetrics Respond to Research Impact? // Innovative Higher Education. 48:4, 679–698. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-023-09648-7

Gontijo, M. C. A.; Araújo, R. F. de (2025). The public debate on social distancing in the context of COVID-19: Analysis of communities of attention on X (Twitter). // RDBCI: Revista Digital de Biblioteconomia e Ciência da Informação. 23, e025002. https://doi.org/10.20396/rdbci.v23i00.8675743/en

Gregorio-Chaviano, O.; Jiménez-Contreras, E. (2024). Propuesta para la evaluación de revistas y la investigación en ciencias sociales y humanidades en Colombia: Una mirada desde las métricas Dialnet. // Revista Científica. 49:1, Article 1. https://doi.org/10.14483/23448350.21447

Hadad, S.; Aharony, N.; Raban, D. R. (2024). Unlocking Scholarly Realms: Revealing Discipline-Specific Publication and Citation Benefits in Open Access. // Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 61:1, 925–927. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.1142

Haunschild, R.; Bornmann, L. (2016). Normalization of Mendeley reader counts for impact assessment. // Journal of Informetrics. 10:1, 62–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2015.11.003

Haustein, S.; Bowman, T. D.; Costas, R. (2016). Interpreting “Altmetrics”: Viewing acts on social media through the lens of citation and social theories. // Sugimoto, C. R. (Ed.) (2016). Theories of Informetrics and Scholarly Communication. De Gruyter Saur, pp. 372–406. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110308464-022

Haustein, S.; Bowman, T. D.; Holmberg, K.; Tsou, A.; Sugimoto, C. R.; Larivière, V. (2016). Tweets as impact indicators: Examining the implications of automated “bot” accounts on Twitter. // Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67:1, 232–238. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23456

Haustein, S.; Peters, I.; Bar-Ilan, J.; Priem, J.; Shema, H.; Terliesner, J. (2014). Coverage and adoption of altmetrics sources in the bibliometric community. // Scientometrics. 101:2, 1145–1163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1221-3

Holmberg, K.; Thelwall, M. (2014). Disciplinary differences in Twitter scholarly communication. // Scientometrics. 101:2, 1027–1042. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1229-3

Jung, H.; Lee, K.; Song, M. (2016). Examining characteristics of traditional and Twitter citation. // Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics. 1. https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2016.00006

Keng, S.-T.; Ooi, P.-B.; Pang, K.-Y.; Phan, C.-W. (2022). Awareness, familiarity and usage of traditional research metrics and altmetrics among academics in Malaysia. // Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science. 27:3, Article 3. https://doi.org/10.22452/mjlis.vol27no3.1

Knipp, R. (2024). Digital Scholarship from the Periphery: Insights from Researchers in Chile on Academia.edu and ResearchGate. // Journal of Interactive Media in Education. 2024:1. https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.856

Lemke, S.; Mazarakis, A.; Peters, I. (2021). Conjoint analysis of researchers’ hidden preferences for bibliometrics, altmetrics, and usage metrics. // Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 72:6, 777–792. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24445

Leydesdorff, L. (2009). How are new citation-based journal indicators adding to the bibliometric tool-box? // Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60:7, 1327–1336. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21024

Li, H.; Hou, J. (2024). Revalidation of the applicability of Altmetrics indicators in article-level evaluation: An empirical analysis of papers of different types of citation trajectories. // Journal of Informetrics. 18:4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2024.101573

Maddi, A.; Sapinho, D. (2022). Article processing charges, altmetrics and citation impact: Is there an economic rationale? // Scientometrics. 127:12, 7351–7368. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04284-y

Maggio, L. A.; Leroux, T. C.; Meyer, H. S.; Jr, A. R. A. (2018). #MedEd: Exploring the relationship between altmetrics and traditional measures of dissemination in health professions education. // Perspectives on Medical Education. 7:4. https://doi.org/10.1007/S40037-018-0438-5

Maricato, J. D. M.; Regina Da Silva, M.; Ramos, T. B. C. (2023). Coverage and correlations between open citations in Crossref and readership in Mendeley: Different fields of Brazilian science. // Journal of Scientometric Research. 12:1, 176–186. https://doi.org/10.5530/jscires.12.1.015

Martín-Martín, A.; Orduna-Malea, E.; Thelwall, M.; Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2018). Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: A systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories. // Journal of Informetrics. 12:4, 1160–1177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.09.002

Mingers, J.; Leydesdorff, L. (2015). A review of theory and practice in scientometrics. // European Journal of Operational Research. 246:1, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.04.002

Moreira De Oliveira, T.; Barata, G.; Uribe-Tirado, A. (2021). Ten Years of Altmetrics: A Review of Latin America Contributions. // Journal of Scientometric Research. 10:(1s), s102–s114. https://doi.org/10.5530/jscires.10.1s.26

Nath, A.; Jana, S.; Kerketta, S. (2020). Who reads PLOS research articles? Extensive analysis of the Mendeley readership categories of PLOS journals. // Journal of Scientometric Research. 9:3, 245–252. https://doi.org/10.5530/JSCIRES.9.3.32

Olive, R.; Townsend, S.; Phillips, M. G. (2023). ‘Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted’: Searching for the value of metrics and altmetrics in sociology of sport journals. // International Review for the Sociology of Sport. 58:3, 431–454. https://doi.org/10.1177/10126902221107467

Ortiz Núñez, R.; Jaillier Castrillón, É. (2024). Alternative metrics and social impact of research about Social Sciences in Cuba. // Research Evaluation. 33. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvae043

Priem, J. (2014). Altmetrics. // https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9445.003.0019

Priem, J.; Groth, P.; Taraborelli, D. (2012). The Altmetrics Collection. // PLOS ONE. 7:11, e48753. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0048753

Priem, J.; Taraborelli, D.; Groth, P.; Neylon, C. (2010). Altmetrics: A manifesto. // https://zenodo.org/records/12684249

Roldan-Valadez, E.; Salazar-Ruiz, S. Y.; Ibarra-Contreras, R.; Rios, C. (2019). Current concepts on bibliometrics: A brief review about impact factor, Eigenfactor score, CiteScore, SCImago Journal Rank, Source-Normalised Impact per Paper, H-index, and alternative metrics. // Irish Journal of Medical Science. 188:3, 939–951. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-018-1936-5

Rozemblum, C.; Alperin, J. P.; Unzurrunzaga, C. (2021). Limitations of Scopus as a source of indicators: In search for a more comprehensive understanding of the visibility of Argentinian social science journals. // E-Ciencias de La Información. 11:2, 35–58. https://doi.org/10.15517/eci.v11i2.44300

Saberi, M. K.; Ekhtiyari, F. (2019). Usage, captures, mentions, social media and citations of LIS highly cited papers: An altmetrics study. // Performance Measurement and Metrics. 20:1, 37–47. https://doi.org/10.1108/PMM-10-2018-0025

Salatino, M. (2018). Más Allá de la Indexación: Circuitos de Publicación de Ciencias Sociales en Argentina y Brasil. // Dados. 61, 255–287. https://doi.org/10.1590/001152582018152

Sedighi, M. (2020). Evaluating the impact of research using the altmetrics approach (case study: The field of scientometrics). // Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication. 69:(4/5), 241–252. https://doi.org/10.1108/GKMC-02-2019-0013

Shang, H.; Feng, C.; Sun, L. (2016). Evaluation of academic papers with academic influence—proposing two new indicators of academic inheritance effect and long-term citation. // Kexue Tongbao/Chinese Science Bulletin. 61:26, 2853–2860. https://doi.org/10.1360/N972016-00925

Silva, M. R.; Maricato, J. de M. (2023). Sistema de recompensas da ciência e os meios alternativos de avaliar o impacto social: Percepções de pesquisadores que utilizam o referencial teórico bourdieusiano. // Informação & Sociedade. 33. https://periodicos.ufpb.br/ojs2/index.php/ies/article/view/67818

Sud, P.; Thelwall, M. (2014). Evaluating altmetrics. // Scientometrics. 98:2, 1131–1143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1117-2

Sugimoto, C. R.; Work, S.; Larivière, V.; Haustein, S. (2016). Scholarly use of social media and altmetrics: A review of the literature (arXiv:1608.08112). // arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1608.08112

Trishchenko, N. D.; Makeenko, M. I. (2024). The Impact of Open Access on Citation Counts and Alternative Metrics of Articles in Leading International Scientific Journals on Media and Communication. // Journal of Siberian Federal University – Humanities and Social Sciences. 17:8, 1602–1611

Uribe-Tirado, A.; Ochoa-Gutiérrez, J.; Ruiz-Nuñez, K.; Fajardo-Bermúdez, M. (2019). Visibilidad e impacto altmétrico de los investigadores de la Universidad de Antioquia: Metodología aplicable a universidades. // Transinformação. 31, e190016. https://doi.org/10.1590/2318-0889201931e190016

Vílchez-Román, C.; Huamán-Delgado, F.; Al-huay-Quispe, J. (2021). Social dimension activates the usage and academic impact of Open Access publications in Andean countries: A structural modeling-based approach. // Information Development. 37:2, 209–220. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266666920901849

Wang, M.; Jiao, S.; Chai, K.-H.; Chen, G. (2019). Building journal’s long-term impact: Using indicators detected from the sustained active articles. // Scientometrics. 121:1, 261–283. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03196-8

Williams, K. (2022). What counts: Making sense of metrics of research value. // Science and Public Policy. 49:3, 518–531. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scac004

Yang, S.; Zheng, M.; Yu, Y.; Wolfram, D. (2021). Are Altmetric.com scores effective for research impact evaluation in the social sciences and humanities? // Journal of Informetrics. 15:1, 101120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2020.101120


Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item
Contact us
Send email Sponsors
Sponsor: AIMS Sponsor: D&P Sponsor: UniNa CAB Get connected
Facebook Facebook Twitter Twitter Linkedin LinkedIn RSS RSS