• Publications
  • Influence
Academia.edu: Social network or Academic Network?
Academic social network sites Academia.edu and ResearchGate, and reference sharing sites Mendeley, Bibsonomy, Zotero, and CiteULike, give scholars the ability to publicize their research outputs andExpand
ResearchGate: Disseminating, communicating, and measuring Scholarship?
The results show that rankings based on ResearchGate statistics correlate moderately well with other rankings of academic institutions, suggesting that ResearchGate use broadly reflects the traditional distribution of academic capital. Expand
Assessing the citation impact of books: The role of Google Books, Google Scholar, and Scopus
Comparing the citation counts to 1,000 books submitted to the 2008 U.K. Research Assessment Exercise from Google Books and Google Scholar with Scopus citations shows that in book-oriented disciplines in the social sciences, arts, and humanities, online book citations may be sufficiently numerous to support peer review for research evaluation, at least in the United Kingdom. Expand
ResearchGate articles: Age, discipline, audience size, and impact
It is shown that ResearchGate is dominated by recent articles, which attract about three times as many views as older articles and has low to moderate positive correlations with both Scopus citations and Mendeley readers, which is consistent with them tending to reflect a wider audience than Scopus‐publishing scholars. Expand
ResearchGate versus Google Scholar: Which finds more early citations?
The results show that in March 2017, ResearchGate found less citations than did Google Scholar but more than both Web of Science and Scopus, suggesting that ResearchGate is not predominantly tapping a fundamentally different source of data than Google Scholar. Expand
Do highly cited researchers successfully use the social web?
The extent to which successful scientists have social web presences, focusing on one influential group: highly cited researchers working at European institutions, is assessed, and the impact of these presences is assessed. Expand
Are wikipedia citations important evidence of the impact of scholarly articles and books?
The results show that citations from Wikipedia to articles are too rare for most research evaluation purposes, with only 5% of articles being cited in all fields, and so Wikipedia is not recommended for evaluations affecting stakeholder interests. Expand
Web indicators for research evaluation. Part 2: Social media metrics
This literature review assesses indicators derived from social media sources, including both general and academic sites. Such indicators have been termed altmetrics, influmetrics, social mediaExpand
Google Scholar citations and Google Web-URL citations: A multi-discipline exploratory analysis
We use a new data gathering method, “WebsURL citation,” WebsURL and Google Scholar to compare traditional and Web-based citation patterns across multiple disciplines (biology, chemistry, physics,Expand
Google Scholar citations and Google Web/URL citations: A multi-discipline exploratory analysis
A new data gathering method “Web/URL Citation” is introduced and used as a basis to compare traditional and Web-based citation patterns across multiple disciplines, suggesting that counting a maximum of one hit per site produces a better measure for assessing the impact of OA journals or articles. Expand