Power Laws in altmetrics: An empirical analysis

Banshal, Sumit Kumar; Gupta, Solanki; Lathabai, Hiran H.; Singh, Vivek Kumar

doi:10.1016/j.joi.2022.101309

Cited by 14 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Costas et al (2016) discovered that Twitter mentions exhibit a highly skewed distribution, a nding supported by Thelwall & Wilson (2016) and Thelwall & Nevill (2018) in their reports on the skewed nature of altmetrics distributions. Banshal et al (2022) demonstrated that both citations and altmetrics adhere to a power law distribution, further bolstering the notion of altmetrics' predictive power. While these highlight the parallelism between citations and altmetrics, some advantages of altmetric studies can claim are discussed next.…”

Section: Introduction and Related Workmentioning

confidence: 69%

“…As altmetrics is being debated as a foreteller of citations, signi cantly since altmetric scores correlate highly with citations and recently the power law behavior of altmetrics (just like citations) is revealed by Banshal et al (2022), these works are supposed to be earning commendable citations too. These clusters are anticipated to show remarkable growth as publications accumulate citations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Altmetrics comprises different metrics computed from different kinds of events about scholarly articles on social media platforms and academic, social networks. It has become extremely popular for emerging topic analysis as it is suitable to gauge initial research trends as an upsurge is found among researchers' activity on various platforms like Twitter and Facebook, as well as academic social networks like Academia, Mendeley, and ResearchGate, to share and disseminate their research results (Banshal et al, 2022). Some facts about altmetrics justify this study's choice of altmetrics-based analysis.…”

Section: Introduction and Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Early research trends on ChatGPT: a review based on Altmetrics and science mapping analysis

Raman

lathabhai

Diwakar

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the three months following its launch in November 2022, ChatGPT, the LLM bot employing deep learning algorithms to generate human-like responses, has been the subject of numerous research articles (n=385). Identifying early attention to this research is highly intriguing. As citations for these publications may take time to accumulate, our study focused on examining the early attention of ChatGPT research using the Altmetric Attention Score (AAS), a composite attention score developed by Digital Science. Our findings from the total set of publications and the top publications according to the highest AAS scores reveal the following trends: (i) The United States, Japan, and the United Kingdom are the top countries that published most of the top research articles related to ChatGPT. (ii) The most frequently mentioned source titles include journals like Nature, Science, and preprint sources like medRxiv and arXiv. (iii) Among the fields of research (FoR) to which ChatGPT publications align, 'information and computing sciences' and 'biomedical and clinical sciences' received the highest mentions. (iv) Five major clusters were identified in the network formed by the interlinkage of FoRs. (v) The most prominent themes discussed in top articles within these five clusters include ChatGPT usage in medical writing and determining ChatGPT's role in scientific publishing. (vi) Scientists are found to be the major user category demonstrating the highest level of interest in ChatGPT research. By capturing these early trends in both ChatGPT research and the early attention to this research, our work offers valuable insights for ChatGPT enthusiasts, researchers, and policymakers in fields such as biomedical sciences, scientific publishing, and many others.

show abstract

Section: Introduction and Related Workmentioning

confidence: 69%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introduction and Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Early research trends on ChatGPT: a review based on Altmetrics and science mapping analysis

Raman

lathabhai

Diwakar

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…, 2018). The distribution of impact metrics is skewed for both citations and altmetrics (Banshal et al. , 2022), and the disciplinary aspect plays a relevant role for both the citations and altmetric scores (Banshal et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Scholars studied the differences between citations and altmetrics for Finnish articles (Didegah et al, 2018). The distribution of impact metrics is skewed for both citations and altmetrics (Banshal et al, 2022), and the disciplinary aspect plays a relevant role for both the citations and altmetric scores (Banshal et al, 2019;Htoo and Na, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The funding effect on citation and social attention: the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as a case study

Dorta-González

2023

OIR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeAcademic citation and social attention measure different dimensions in the impact of research results. The authors quantify the contribution of funding to both indicators considering the differences attributable to the research field and access type.Design/methodology/approachCitation and social attention accumulated until the year 2021 of more than 367 thousand research articles published in the year 2018 are studied. The authors consider funding acknowledgments (FAs) in the research articles. The data source is Dimensions, and the units of study are research articles in the United Nation (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).FindingsMost cited goals by researchers do not coincide with those that arouse greater social attention. A small proportion of articles accumulates a large part of the citations and most of the social attention. Both citation and social attention grow with funding. Thus, funded research has a greater probability of being cited in academic articles and mentioned in social media. Funded research receives on average two to three times more citations and 2.5 to 4.5 times more social attention than unfunded research. Moreover, the open access (OA) modalities gold and hybrid have the greatest advantages in citation and social attention due to funding.Research limitations/implicationsSpecific topics were studied in a specific period. Studying other topics and/or different time periods might result in different findings.Practical implicationsWhen funding to publish in open or hybrid access journals is not available, it is advisable to self-archiving the pre-print or post-print version in a freely accessible repository.Social implicationsAlthough cautiously, it is also advisable to consider the social impact of the research to complement the scientific impact in the evaluation of the research.Originality/valueThe joint evaluation of the effect of both funding and OA on social attention.

show abstract

Who tweets scientific publications? A large‐scale study of tweeting audiences in all areas of research

Zhang,

Gou,

Fang

et al. 2023

Asso for Info Science & Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study is to investigate the validity of tweets about scientific publications as an indicator of societal impact by measuring the degree to which the publications are tweeted beyond academia. We introduce methods that allow for using a much larger and broader data set than in previous validation studies. It covers all areas of research and includes almost 40 million tweets by 2.5 million unique tweeters mentioning almost 4 million scientific publications. We find that, although half of the tweeters are external to academia, most of the tweets are from within academia, and most of the external tweets are responses to original tweets within academia. Only half of the tweeted publications are tweeted outside of academia. We conclude that, in general, the tweeting of scientific publications is not a valid indicator of the societal impact of research. However, publications that continue being tweeted after a few days represent recent scientific achievements that catch attention in society. These publications occur more often in the health sciences and in the social sciences and humanities.

show abstract

Power Laws in altmetrics: An empirical analysis

Cited by 14 publications

References 48 publications

Early research trends on ChatGPT: a review based on Altmetrics and science mapping analysis

Early research trends on ChatGPT: a review based on Altmetrics and science mapping analysis

The funding effect on citation and social attention: the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as a case study

Who tweets scientific publications? A large‐scale study of tweeting audiences in all areas of research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About