IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/infome/v12y2018i1p237-248.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Could scientists use Altmetric.com scores to predict longer term citation counts?

Author

Listed:
  • Thelwall, Mike
  • Nevill, Tamara

Abstract

Altmetrics from Altmetric.com are widely used by publishers and researchers to give earlier evidence of attention than citation counts. This article assesses whether Altmetric.com scores are reliable early indicators of likely future impact and whether they may also reflect non-scholarly impacts. A preliminary factor analysis suggests that the main altmetric indicator of scholarly impact is Mendeley reader counts, with weaker news, informational and social network discussion/promotion dimensions in some fields. Based on a regression analysis of Altmetric.com data from November 2015 and Scopus citation counts from October 2017 for articles in 30 narrow fields, only Mendeley reader counts are consistent predictors of future citation impact. Most other Altmetric.com scores can help predict future impact in some fields. Overall, the results confirm that early Altmetric.com scores can predict later citation counts, although less well than journal impact factors, and the optimal strategy is to consider both Altmetric.com scores and journal impact factors. Altmetric.com scores can also reflect dimensions of non-scholarly impact in some fields.

Suggested Citation

  • Thelwall, Mike & Nevill, Tamara, 2018. "Could scientists use Altmetric.com scores to predict longer term citation counts?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 237-248.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:12:y:2018:i:1:p:237-248
    DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2018.01.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157717303905
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thelwall, Mike, 2016. "The discretised lognormal and hooked power law distributions for complete citation data: Best options for modelling and regression," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 336-346.
    2. Thelwall, Mike & Wilson, Paul, 2014. "Regression for citation data: An evaluation of different methods," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 963-971.
    3. Stegehuis, Clara & Litvak, Nelly & Waltman, Ludo, 2015. "Predicting the long-term citation impact of recent publications," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 642-657.
    4. Mike Thelwall & Paul Wilson, 2016. "Mendeley readership altmetrics for medical articles: An analysis of 45 fields," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 67(8), pages 1962-1972, August.
    5. Brett Buttliere & Jürgen Buder, 2017. "Personalizing papers using Altmetrics: comparing paper ‘Quality’ or ‘Impact’ to person ‘Intelligence’ or ‘Personality’," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(1), pages 219-239, April.
    6. repec:spr:scient:v:113:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-017-2557-x is not listed on IDEAS
    7. M.H. MacRoberts & B.R. MacRoberts, 2010. "Problems of citation analysis: A study of uncited and seldom-cited influences," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(1), pages 1-12, January.
    8. repec:spr:scient:v:98:y:2014:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-013-1117-2 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. David I. Stern, 2014. "High-Ranked Social Science Journal Articles Can Be Identified from Early Citation Information," Crawford School Research Papers 1406, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    10. repec:bla:jinfst:v:68:y:2017:i:3:p:762-779 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Hadas Shema & Judit Bar-Ilan & Mike Thelwall, 2015. "How is research blogged? A content analysis approach," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(6), pages 1136-1149, June.
    12. repec:spr:scient:v:101:y:2014:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-014-1264-0 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. repec:spr:scient:v:101:y:2014:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-014-1229-3 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Mike Thelwall, 2016. "Interpreting correlations between citation counts and other indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(1), pages 337-347, July.
    15. repec:spr:scient:v:63:y:2005:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-005-0228-9 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. George A. Lozano & Vincent Larivière & Yves Gingras, 2012. "The weakening relationship between the impact factor and papers' citations in the digital age," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(11), pages 2140-2145, November.
    17. Mike Thelwall & Nabeil Maflahi, 2015. "Are scholarly articles disproportionately read in their own country? An analysis of mendeley readers," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(6), pages 1124-1135, June.
    18. repec:pal:jorsoc:v:59:y:2008:i:8:d:10.1057_palgrave.jors.2602428 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. repec:spr:scient:v:94:y:2013:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0775-9 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Franceschet, Massimo & Costantini, Antonio, 2011. "The first Italian research assessment exercise: A bibliometric perspective," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 275-291.
    21. Rodrigo Costas & Zohreh Zahedi & Paul Wouters, 2015. "Do “altmetrics” correlate with citations? Extensive comparison of altmetric indicators with citations from a multidisciplinary perspective," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(10), pages 2003-2019, October.
    22. repec:spr:scient:v:102:y:2015:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-014-1420-6 is not listed on IDEAS
    23. repec:spr:scient:v:98:y:2014:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-013-1167-5 is not listed on IDEAS
    24. Stephan B. Bruns & David I. Stern, 2016. "Research assessment using early citation information," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(2), pages 917-935, August.
    25. Ehsan Mohammadi & Mike Thelwall & Kayvan Kousha, 2016. "Can Mendeley bookmarks reflect readership? A survey of user motivations," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 67(5), pages 1198-1209, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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:eee:infome:v:12:y:2018:i:1:p:237-248. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/joi .

    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.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.