Abstract
AbstractScientific software is a fundamental player in modern science, participating in all stages of scientific knowledge production. Software occasionally supports the development of trivial tasks, while at other instances it determines procedures, methods, protocols, results, or conclusions related with the scientific work. The growing relevance of scientific software as a research product with value of its own has triggered the development of quantitative science studies of scientific software. The main objective of this study is to illustrate a link-based webometric approach to characterize the online mentions to scientific software across different analytical frameworks. To do this, the bibliometric software VOSviewer is used as a case study. Considering VOSviewer’s official website as a baseline, online mentions to this website were counted in three different analytical frameworks: academic literature via Google Scholar (988 mentioning publications), webpages via Majestic (1,330 mentioning websites), and tweets via Twitter (267 mentioning tweets). Google scholar mentions shows how VOSviewer is used as a research resource, whilst mentions in webpages and tweets show the interest on VOSviewer’s website from an informational and a conversational point of view. Results evidence that URL mentions can be used to gather all sorts of online impacts related to non-traditional research objects, like software, thus expanding the analytical scientometric toolset by incorporating a novel digital dimension.
Funder
South African DST‐NRF Center of Excellence in Scientometrics and Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Library and Information Sciences,Computer Science Applications,General Social Sciences
Reference52 articles.
1. Bruns, A., Weller, K., Zimmer, M., & Proferes, N. J. (2014). A topology of Twitter research: Disciplines, methods, and ethics. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 66(3), 250–261.
2. Cronin, B., Snyder, H. W., Rosenbaum, H., Martinson, A., & Callahan, E. (1998). Invoked on the Web. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(14), 1319–1328.
3. Delgado López-Cózar, E., Orduna-Malea, E., & Martín-Martín, A. (2019). Google Scholar as a data source for research assessment. In W. Glänzel, H. Moed, U. Schmoch, & M. Thelwall (Eds.), Springer handbook of science and technology indicators (pp. 95–127). Springer.
4. Delgado López-Cózar, E., Orduna-Malea, E., Martín-Martín, A., & Ayllón, J. M. (2017). Google Scholar: The big data bibliographic tool. In F. J. Cantú-Ortiz (Ed.), Research analytics: Boosting university productivity and competitiveness through scientometrics (pp. 59–80). Taylor and Francis.
5. Díaz-Faes, A., Bowman, T. D., & Costas, R. (2019). Towards a second generation of ‘social media metrics’: Characterizing Twitter communities of attention around science. PLoS ONE, 14(5), e0216408. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0216408
Cited by
70 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献