Internet Policy Blog wijst op het door JISC gefinancierde rapport van Erik T. Meyer, research fellow aan de Universiteit van Oxford, getiteld Splashes and Ripples: Synthesizing the Evidence on the Impacts of Digital Resources (met mogelijkheid tot raadplegen full-text)
Het rapport "moves beyond (the usual) anecdotal evidence to a more empirically-based understanding on a variety of impacts that have been measured by qualitative and quantitative methods"
Erik Meyer: "In the synthesis report we argue that “impact” is more than crude measures of number of visitors, or numbers of links. We recommend using a variety of qualitative and quantitative measures to understand the types of impacts resources have on research, teaching, learning, and for the wider public. The case studies in the synthesis report illustrate how both high-traffic sites and more specialized collections can demonstrate and enhance their impacts."
Showing posts with label impact van publicatie. Show all posts
Showing posts with label impact van publicatie. Show all posts
Monday, May 23, 2011
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Het meten van wetenschappelijke impact
In hun artikel in PLos ONE, A principal component analysis of 39 scientific impact measures weten Johan Bollen, Herbert Van de Sompel, Aric Hagberg en Ryan Chute op overtuigende wijze aan te tonen dat wetenschappelijke impact niet enkel vastgesteld kan worden aan de hand van een enkele indicator, lees de Journal Impact Factor (JIF) van Thomson.
Sterker nog, het meten van impact vraagt om een multi-dimensionale constructie, waarbij de JIF slechts een marginale rol speelt "and should thus be used with caution", aldus de auteurs.
Naschrift: Kijk ook eens naar The Keynote Equivalent? van blogger Martin Weller.
Sterker nog, het meten van impact vraagt om een multi-dimensionale constructie, waarbij de JIF slechts een marginale rol speelt "and should thus be used with caution", aldus de auteurs.
Naschrift: Kijk ook eens naar The Keynote Equivalent? van blogger Martin Weller.
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Correlatie tussen citaties en downloads
De impact van een wetenschappelijk artikel wordt standaard gemeten aan de hand van het aantal citaties. Online tijdschriften bieden daarnaast de mogelijkheid om ook het aantal unieke downloads van een artikel vast te stellen. Andrew B. Watson beschrijft de mate van correlatie tussen de twee meetmethoden in zijn artikel Comparing citations and downloads for individual articles in het Journal of Vision.
Watson concludeert:
1. Overall correlation between total downloads and total citations of Journal of Vision articles is 0.74.
2. Citations and downloads increase with article age in a characteristic way, but relative to downloads, citations are delayed by about 2 years and reduced by a factor of about 45.
3. For papers published in a single year, the correlation is as high as 0.8, and usually above 0.6.
4. The correlation between age-normalized statistics of DemandFactor (downloads/year) and CiteFactor (citations/year) is about 0.62.
5. Download statistics provide a useful indicator, two years in advance, of eventual citations. Downloads are also a useful measure in their own right of the interest and significance of individual articles.
Watson concludeert:
1. Overall correlation between total downloads and total citations of Journal of Vision articles is 0.74.
2. Citations and downloads increase with article age in a characteristic way, but relative to downloads, citations are delayed by about 2 years and reduced by a factor of about 45.
3. For papers published in a single year, the correlation is as high as 0.8, and usually above 0.6.
4. The correlation between age-normalized statistics of DemandFactor (downloads/year) and CiteFactor (citations/year) is about 0.62.
5. Download statistics provide a useful indicator, two years in advance, of eventual citations. Downloads are also a useful measure in their own right of the interest and significance of individual articles.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
