IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jinfst/v69y2018i9p1122-1133.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How important is scientific software in bioinformatics research? A comparative study between international and Chinese research communities

Author

Listed:
  • Bo Yang
  • Ronald Rousseau
  • Xue Wang
  • Shuiqing Huang

Abstract

Software programs are among the most important tools in data‐driven research. The popularity of well‐known packages and corresponding large numbers of citations received bear testimony of the contribution of scientific software to academic research. Yet software is not generally recognized as an academic outcome. In this study, a usage‐based model is proposed with varied indicators including citations, mentions, and downloads to measure the importance of scientific software. We performed an investigation on a sample of international bioinformatics research articles, and on a sample from the Chinese community. Our analysis shows that scientists in the field of bioinformatics rely heavily on scientific software: the major differences between the international community and the Chinese example being how scientific packages are mentioned in publications and the time gap between the introduction of a package and its use. Biologists publishing in international journals tend to apply the latest tools earlier; Chinese scientists publishing in Chinese tend to follow later. Further, journals with higher impact factors tend to publish articles applying the latest tools earlier.

Suggested Citation

  • Bo Yang & Ronald Rousseau & Xue Wang & Shuiqing Huang, 2018. "How important is scientific software in bioinformatics research? A comparative study between international and Chinese research communities," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 69(9), pages 1122-1133, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jinfst:v:69:y:2018:i:9:p:1122-1133
    DOI: 10.1002/asi.24031
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24031
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/asi.24031?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Robert Tomaszewski, 2023. "Visibility, impact, and applications of bibliometric software tools through citation analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(7), pages 4007-4028, July.
    2. Enrique Orduña-Malea & Rodrigo Costas, 2021. "Link-based approach to study scientific software usage: the case of VOSviewer," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(9), pages 8153-8186, September.
    3. Lu Jiang & Xinyu Kang & Shan Huang & Bo Yang, 2022. "A refinement strategy for identification of scientific software from bioinformatics publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(6), pages 3293-3316, June.
    4. Li, Kai & Chen, Pei-Ying & Yan, Erjia, 2019. "Challenges of measuring software impact through citations: An examination of the lme4 R package," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 449-461.
    5. Pan, Xuelian & Yan, Erjia & Cui, Ming & Hua, Weina, 2019. "How important is software to library and information science research? A content analysis of full-text publications," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 397-406.
    6. Wang, Yuzhuo & Zhang, Chengzhi, 2020. "Using the full-text content of academic articles to identify and evaluate algorithm entities in the domain of natural language processing," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(4).
    7. Yuzhuo Wang & Chengzhi Zhang & Kai Li, 2022. "A review on method entities in the academic literature: extraction, evaluation, and application," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2479-2520, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jinfst:v:69:y:2018:i:9:p:1122-1133. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.asis.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.