Journal of Studies in Library and Information Science

Current Issue

By Issue

By Author

By Subject

Author Index

Keyword Index

About Journal

Aims and Scope

Editorial Board

Publication Ethics

Peer Review Process

Indexing and Abstracting

Related Links

FAQ

Subscription

Terms and conditions for manuscript submission

Forms

Paper Preparation Guide

Reviewers

Publication rate and activity of Iranian researchers in the field of industrial management in social networks

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Assistant Professor, Department of Knowledge and Information Science, Payame Noor University, Iran.

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Computer and IT. Jahrom University

3 Instructor of Department of Management, Payam Noor University, Iran

4 Masters Student, CSE and IT Department, Shiraz University

Abstract

Purpose: The significant influence of scientific and citation networks among scientific societies has caused that while identifying influential individuals and universities in each field, the issue of knowledge sharing is also highly considered. With this in mind, the present study investigates the relationship between Mendeley academic social network Altmetrics indices and Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases in the field of economy, management, and accounting.

Methodology: The present study is applied research that has been done in a descriptive-survey method with the Altmetrics approach. The statistical population of the research includes Iranian Authors and researchers in the field of economy, management, and accounting who had indexed documents in the Scopus database in the period of 2000-2019. 160 of the most prolific authors have been introduced and reviewed by Scopus. In order to analyze the data, in addition to descriptive statistics, in the inferential statistics section using Excel and SPSS software, a simple and multiple correlation test between the studied indicators has been used.

Results: The results show a significant and positive relationship between the indicators studied in Mendeley with the scientometric indicators of Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases. This relationship is very high in cases such as reading frequency, a number of citations, and HTML index score, Mendeley with Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, and weak in cases such as Mendeley reader index with Scopus co-authorship index. The results show that the degree of correlation between the citations received in Mendeley and other databases is very high. Also, the relationship between the authors' index in Mendeley and other databases is positive and significant. This relationship is stronger between Scopus and Web of Science than the other databases.

Conclusion: Due to the positive and significant relationship between Mendeley indicators and indicators of other databases, the use of this academic social network in publishing and sharing research results can attract more citations.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References
Ansari, M., Fallah, M., Noruzi, A., & Rasolabadi, M. (2019). Comparing the Presence of Researchers of Medical Universities of Western Provinces of Iran on ResearchGate and Scopus. Webology, 16(2), 257–274.
Bardus, M., Rassi, R. E., Chahrour, M., Akl, E. W., Raslan, A. S., Meho, L. I., & Akl, E. A. (2020). The Use of social media to Increase the Impact of Health Research: Systematic Review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 22(7), e15607.
Biranvand, A., & Shanbedi, Z. (2020). Investigating the effect of Altmetrics index of ResearchGate social network on research activities of Iranian authors and researchers in the field of nursing in databases. Knowledge Studies.
Cho, J. (2017). A comparative study of the impact of Korean research articles in four academic fields using altmetrics. Performance Measurement and Metrics. https://doi.org/10.1108/PMM-02-2016-0005
Htoo, T. H. H., & Na, J.-C. (2017). Disciplinary differences in altmetrics for social sciences. Online Information Review.
Mason, S. (2020). Adoption and usage of Academic Social Networks: a Japan case study. Scientometrics, 122(3), 1751-1767.
Mohammadi, E., & Thelwall, M. (2014). Mendeley readership altmetrics for the social sciences and humanities: Research evaluation and knowledge flows. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 65(8), 1627-1638.
Parabhoi, L., & Verma, M. K. (2019). Mendeley Readership Counts: An investigation of DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology.
Pooladian, A., & Borrego, Á. (2017). Twenty years of readership of library and information science literature under Mendeley's microscope. Performance Measurement and Metrics.
Riahinia, N., Rahimi, F., Jahangiri, M., Mirhaghjoo, S., & Alinezhad, F. (2018). Traditional Citation Indexes and Alternative Metrics of Readership. International Journal of Information Science and Management (IJISM), 16(2).
Ruan, Q. Z., Chen, A. D., Cohen, J. B., Singhal, D., Lin, S. J., & Lee, B. T. (2018). Alternative Metrics of Scholarly Output: The Relationship among Altmetric Score, Mendeley Reader Score, Citations, and Downloads in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 141(3), 801-809.
Saberi, M. K., & Ekhtiyari, F. (2019). Usage, captures, mentions, social media and citations of LIS highly cited papers: an altmetrics study. Performance Measurement and Metrics.
Sathianathen, N. J., Iii, R. L., Murphy, D. G., Loeb, S., Bakker, C., Lamb, A. D., & Weight, C. J. (2020). Social Media Coverage of Scientific Articles Immediately After Publication Predicts Subsequent Citations - #SoME_Impact Score: Observational Analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 22(4), e12288.
Thelwall, M., & Kousha, K. (2015). ResearchGate: Disseminating, communicating, and measuring Scholarship? Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(5).
Thelwall, M., & Kousha, K. (2017). ResearchGate versus Google Scholar: Which finds more early citations? Scientometrics, 112(2), 1125-1131.
Journal of Studies in Library and Information Science
Volume 12, Issue 4 - Serial Number 34
January 2021
Pages 51-61
Files
Share
How to cite
Statistics