A comparative study of the impact of Korean research articles in four academic fields using altmetrics

Jane Cho

34 citations0/0 files storedPerformance Measurement and Metrics

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

scientometrics and bibliometrics research Academic Publishing and Open Access Web visibility and informetrics

Abstract

Purpose Alternative metrics (altmetrics) are non-traditional metrics to measure the social impact of research results, which were unable to be assessed by the previous methods, by calculating how research results are reflected in various social media. The purpose of this paper is to measure and compare the impact of Korean study results in four fields that were published in international journals using altmetrics. Design/methodology/approach This study analysed the impact of 383 Korean research articles published by international journals in the field of medical science, engineering, social science and arts and humanities through altmetrics and compared it with bibliometrics. Findings As a result, the frequency of research articles which are “discussed” through social media such as Twitter was shown to be highest in the medical science than in other fields. In addition, the frequency of research articles which were “saved” through reference management tool such as Mendeley was shown to be higher in the social science and the arts and humanities than in other fields. Furthermore, as a result of a correlation analysis between altmetrics and bibliometrics, it is found that there exists a positive correlation between the number of articles which were “saved” in Mendeley and “cited” in follow-up studies. Originality/value This study examined the impact of the articles originating in non-English-speaking nations; it could be referred by other non-English-speaking nations that are trying to identify invisible impact of their research output on global society. By finding the academic field which are receiving special attention from global community using altmetrics, researchers could prospect country’s overall research impact and utilize it to make a future R&D plan.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 34 citations exist upstream.

References

2014Do “altmetrics” correlate with citations? Extensive comparison of altmetric indicators with citations from a multidisciplinary perspective 2013Tweeting biomedicine: An analysis of tweets and citations in the biomedical literature 2014How well developed are altmetrics? A cross-disciplinary analysis of the presence of ‘alternative metrics’ in scientific publications 2015Characterizing Social Media Metrics of Scholarly Papers: The Effect of Document Properties and Collaboration Patterns 2012Altmetrics in the wild: Using social media to explore scholarly impact 2009Article-Level Metrics and the Evolution of Scientific Impact 2014M endeley readership altmetrics for the social sciences and humanities: Research evaluation and knowledge flows 2013Altmetrics: Rethinking the Way We Measure

Cited by

2018An altmetric investigation of the online visibility of South Korea-based scientific journals 2019Do altmetrics correlate with citations? A study based on the 1,000 most-cited articles 2021Approaching the Social Impact of Research Through a Literature Review 2018Research evaluation of Asian countries using altmetrics: comparing South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, and China

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.