Mohammad Amin Erfnmanesh, Elahe Hosseini,
Volume 4, Issue 3 (12-2017)
Abstract
Objective: Although citation-based metrics have extensively been used for research evaluation and scientific impact, in recent years social media metrics have also introduced as alternative indicators. This research aims to investigate the presence and attentions received by scientific output of Iran in social media tools.
Research Methods: The current study is an applied research using altmetric and scientometric indicators. A total of 43076 documents which specified Iran as their affiliated country and indexed by Scopus in 2015, were selected as the population of the study. Findings: Results of the study showed relatively low altmetric coverage for scientific output of Iran, with only 5840 documents (13.55%) were mentioned at least once in social media.platforms. These documents have received 28517 mentions in 14 sources of attention, of which Mendeley makes up the highest share (87%), followed by Twitter (77.91%) and Facebook (17.87%). Studying the temporal trend of mentions showed that the highest share of attentions received mainly soon after publishing and then tended to demonstrate a decreasing trend. Almost half of the publications (49.24%) with altmetric score were published in medical sciences area. Moreover, scientific output published through international research collaboration showed higher altmetric scores compared with the mean altmetric score of the country.
Conclusion: Iranian researchers need to know more about the potential and advantages of social media tools in dissemination of scholarly output and evaluation of research impact.
Dr Hashem Atapour, Ms Zahra Shiravand, Dr Rasoul Zavaraqi,
Volume 5, Issue 4 (3-2019)
Abstract
Background and Aim: The last two decades have witnessed efforts to identify ways and tools of showing the value of science for society known as the social impact of science, the efforts that have been made under various titles such as social benefits, social quality, social utility, social relevance, and so on. Academic publications, especially academic articles, are objective representation of scientific activities. One question raised in this regard is which kind of academic articles can have much more social impact. Bornmann (2014) argues articles that review previous studies and provide evaluative reports are of greater potential for social impact. Accordingly, the purpose of this research is to compare the social impact of review articles with the original research articles indexed in the Web of science in four fields including psychology, pharmacy, biology, and agriculture.
Methods: Current research is an applied one and has applied altmetrics analysis. Research and review articles were retrieved from Web of Science database, and altmetric score of articles is collected using Bookmarklet tool of Altemetric.com. The population of this research is composed of review and research articles of abovementioned fields indexed in the Web of Science in 2015. Using a randomized stratified sampling method, a sample of the research population has been chosen for more investigation. SPSS software was used to analyze the data.
Results: The findings of this research shows that there is a significant difference between the altmetric score of review and research articles, in a way that the altmetric score of review articles is higher than research articles. Both review and research articles have been mentioned in Mendeley more than the other social media, but these articles have received the least mention from the Wikipedia.
Conclusion: It is concluded that review articles have more social impact than research articles. The fact that strengthens the position of review articles in the body of scientific publications more than before.
