Mendeley readership counts: An investigation of temporal and disciplinary differences

  title={Mendeley readership counts: An investigation of temporal and disciplinary differences},
  author={Mike Thelwall and Pardeep Sud},
Mike Thelwall, Pardeep Sud Scientists and managers using citation-based indicators to help evaluate research cannot evaluate recent articles because of the time needed for citations to accrue. Reading occurs before citing, however, and so it makes sense to count readers rather than citations for recent publications. To assess this, Mendeley readers and citations were obtained for articles from 2004 to late 2014 in 5 broad categories (agriculture, business, decision science, pharmacy, and the… CONTINUE READING
Related Discussions
This paper has been referenced on Twitter 4 times. VIEW TWEETS


Publications citing this paper.
Showing 1-10 of 25 extracted citations


Publications referenced by this paper.
Showing 1-10 of 68 references

A Comparison of Web of Science and Scopus for Iranian Publications and Citation Impact

M. A. Erfanmanesh, F. Didegah
International Journal of Information Science & Management, • 2013
View 4 Excerpts
Highly Influenced

Disentangling the meaning of ‘altmetrics’: content analysis of Web of Science scientific publications. Figshare

R. Costas, Z. Zahedi, P. Wouters

Do highly cited researchers successfully use the social

A. Mas-Bleda, M. Thelwall, K. Kousha, I. F. Aguillo
web? Scientometrics, • 2014

Similar Papers

Loading similar papers…