论文部分内容阅读
【目的】以SCI高被引论文为实证分析对象,通过分析论文的引用频次与在线使用、分享的相关性及表现,验证Altmetrics指标在揭示优质文献方面的有效性。【方法】通过匹配DOI,将高被引论文的引文数据与ALMs组合,对论文的引用频次与在线使用、分享数据进行Spearman相关性检验,并对PLOS系列期刊的在线使用与分享情况逐一分析。【结果】研究表明:引用次数与论文的在线分享Figshare呈弱正相关(r=0.081,p=0.01);与Cite ULike标引量呈中度相关(r=0.252,p=0.01);与Mendeley使用量的相关性最大(r=0.376,p=0.01)。部分期刊的Mendeley使用量在一定程度上揭示了高影响力文献。【局限】只针对特定学科PLOS系列期刊,因此数据的全面性存在一定的欠缺,得出的结论能否推而广之,有待于进一步研究。【结论】论文的高被引与其对应的在线使用与分享的相关度不高,显示出在线使用(Mendeley,Cite ULike)与分享(Figshare)的数据在揭示高影响力文献方面存在一定的不足。
【Objective】 The objective of this paper is to examine the effectiveness of the Altmetrics indicator in revealing quality literature by analyzing highly cited papers in SCI and analyzing the relevance and performance of quotations, online usage and sharing. [Methods] By matching DOI, citation data of highly cited papers were combined with ALMs, Spearman correlation test was used to analyze the frequency and online usage of the papers, and the data was shared. The online use and sharing of PLOS journals was analyzed one by one. 【Results】 The results showed that there was a weak positive correlation between the number of citations and Figshare (r = 0.081, p = 0.01) and Cite ULike index (r = 0.252, p = 0.01) The use of the most relevant (r = 0.376, p = 0.01). Mendeley usage in some journals reveals to some extent the high impact literature. [Limitations] Only for a specific discipline PLOS series of journals, so there is a certain lack of comprehensive data, the conclusions drawn can be extended, pending further study. [Conclusion] The high degree of citation of the essay is not correlated with the corresponding online usage and sharing, indicating that there are some shortcomings in the disclosure of high-impact literature on online usage (Mendeley, Cite ULike) and sharing (Figshare) data.