Usage metrics vs classical metrics: analysis of Russia’s research output
This paper discusses the results of a pilot project investigating Russian scholarly publications using the altmetric indicators “Usage Count Last 180 days” (U1) and “Usage Count Since 2013” (U2) introduced by Web of Science. We explored the relationship between citation impact and both types of usage counts. The data set consisted of 37,281 records (publications) indexed by SCI-E in 2015. Seven broad research areas were selected to observe citation patterns and usage counts. A significant difference was found between mean citations and mean usage counts (U2) in a few research areas. We discovered a significant Kendall rank correlation between the citation metrics and usage metrics at the article level. This correlation is particularly strong for the longer period usage metric (U2). We also analyzed the relationship between usage metrics and traditional journal-level citation metrics. Very weak correlation was observed.
KeywordsCitations Web of Science usage counts Kendall correlation Impact factor Russia
The authors are very grateful to Prof. W. Glanzel for his support and feedback on how to improve our work. We express our gratitude to Diane Gal for her enormous editing work. This project was partly supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (RFBR) (Grant: 17-02-00,157).
- Chi, P. S., & Glänzel, W. (2017b). Impact and usage indicators for the assessment of research in scientific disciplines and journals. Scientometrics. In press.Google Scholar
- Costas, R., Zahedi, Z., & Wouters, P. (2015). Do “Altmetric” correlate with citations? extensive comparison of altmetric indicators with citations from a multidisciplinary perspective. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology., 66(10), 2003–2019. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar