|
|
E-LIS. E-prints in Library and Information Science >
List of countries by continent >
AMERICA: North and Central America >
United States >
Conference Proceedings >
Downloads vs. Citations: Relationships, Contributing Factors and Beyond, 2007. In The 11th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics,Madrid, Spain,25-27 June 2007.International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics. (Published) [Conference Proceedings].
See the references list of this item
Citable URI:
http://hdl.handle.net/10760/11085
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format | Visibility |
|---|
| DownloadsVsCitations.pdf | | 183.03 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open
|
|
| Editor(s): | Chu, Heting
Krichel, Thomas |
| Title: | Downloads vs. Citations: Relationships, Contributing Factors and Beyond |
| Subjects: | B. Information use and sociology of information > BB. Bibliometric methods |
| Date: | 2007 |
| Abstract: | Citations to 200 top downloaded papers at RePEc, a digital library in economics, were obtained from SSCI and Google Scholar respectively to address questions relating to downloads and their corresponding citations. This study finds that top downloaded documents are used in various degrees when citation is regarded as an indicator of usage. Results also show that a single downloaded paper selected for this study on average receives twice as many citations from Google Scholar as that from SSCI although the latter has been established much earlier in time. According to the coefficients computed, downloads appear having a moderate relationship with citations. However, other measures such as the download vs citation ratio indicate a stronger connection between the two. While author’s reputation positively affect both download and citation frequencies, other factors (e.g., targeted readers and subject content) seem in play differently for the documents that are repeatedly downloaded or cited. In a nutshell, an infrastructure that encourages downloading at digital libraries would eventually lead to higher usage of their resources. |
| Conference: | The 11th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics |
| Conference Date: | 25-27 June 2007 |
| Location: | Madrid, Spain |
| Publisher: | International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics |
| Keywords: | digital libraries; downloads; citations; usage analysis; Google Scholar |
| Country: | United States |
| Type: | Conference Proceedings |
| Rights: | http://eprints.rclis.org/copyright/ |
|
References
- Barrueco Cruz, J. M., & Krichel, T. (2000). Cataloging economics preprints: An introduction to the RePEc project. Journal of Internet Cataloging, 3(3), 227 -241. http://openlib.org/home/krichel/papers/shankari.html.
- Bauer, K., & Bakkalbasi, N. (2005). An examination of citation counts in a new scholarly communication environment. D-Lib Magazine, 11(9), http://www.dlib.org/dlib/september05/bauer/09bauer.html.
- Bollen, J., Van de Sompel, H., Smith, J. A., & Luce, R. (2005). Toward alternative metrics of journal impact: A comparison of download and citation data. Information Processing & Management, 41, 1419-1440.
- Brown, Cecelia. (2001a) The E-volution of preprints in the scholarly communication of physicists and astronomers. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 52(3), 187-200.
- Charbonneau, L. (March 2006). Google Scholar service matches Thomson ISI citation index. University Affairs. http://www.universityaffairs.ca/issues/2006/march/google_scholar_01.html.
- Coats, A. J. S. (2005). Top of the charts: Download versus citations in the International Journal of Cardiology. International Journal of Cardiology, 105(2), 123-125.
- Darmoni, S. J., Roussel, F., Benichou, J., Faure, G. C., Thirion, B., & Pinhas, N. (2000). Reading factor as a credible alternative to impact factor: A preliminary study. Technology and Health Care, 8(3-4), 174-175.
- Davis, P. M., & Fromerth, M. J. (2006). Does the arXiv lead to higher citations and reduced publisher downloads for mathematics articles? http://arxiv.org/abs/cs.DL/0603056.
- Fosmire, Michael. (2004). Scan it and they will come … But will they cite it? Science & Technology Libraries, 25(1/2), 55-72.
- Garfield. E. (November 4, 1985). Contemporary classics in the life sciences: An autographical feast. Current Contents, (44), 3-8.
- Garfield. E. (June 9, 1986). Do Nobel Prize winners write citation classics? Current Contents, (23), 3-8.
- Jasco, P. (2005). As we may search – Comparison of major features of the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar citation-based and citation-enhanced database. Current Contents, 89(9), 1537-1547.
- Kaplan, N. R., & Nelson, M. L. (2002). Determining the publication impact of a digital library. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 51(4), 324-339.
- Moed, H. F. (2005). Statistical relationships between downloads and citations at the level of individual documents within a single journal. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 56(10), 1088-1097.
- Noruzi, A. (2005). Google Scholar: The next generation of citation indexes. Libri, 55(4), 170-180.
- Roth, D. L. (2005). The emergence of competitors to the Science Citation Index and the Web of Science. Current Science, 89(9), 1531-1536.
|
