Dot-science was launched in 2015 as a new academic top-level domain aimed to provide ‘a dedicated, easily accessible location for global Internet users with an interest in science’. The main objective of this work is to find out the general scholarly usage of this top-level domain. In particular, the following three questions are pursued: usage (number of web domains registered with the dot-science), purpose (main function and category of websites linked to these web domains), and impact (websites’ visibility and authority). To do this, 13,900 domain names were gathered through ICANN’s Domain Name Registration Data Lookup database. Each web domain was subsequently categorized, and data on web impact were obtained from Majestic’s API. Based on the results obtained, it is concluded that the dot-science top-level domain is scarcely adopted by the academic community, and mainly used by registrar companies for reselling purposes (35.5% of all web domains were parked). Websites receiving the highest number of backlinks were generally related to non-academic websites applying intensive link building practices and offering leisure or even fraudulent contents. Majestic’s trust flow metric has been proved an effective method to filter reputable academic websites. As regards primary academic-related dot-science web domain categories, 1175 (8.5% of all web domains registered) were found, mainly personal academic websites (342 web domains), blogs (261) and research groups (133). All dubious content reveals bad practices on the Web, where the tag ‘science’ is fundamentally used as a mechanism to deceive search engine algorithms.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Aguillo, I. F., Granadino, B., Ortega, J. L., & Prieto, J. A. (2006). Scientific research activity and communication measured with cybermetrics indicators. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(10), 1296–1302.
Aguillo, I. F., Ortega, J. L., & Fernández, M. (2008). Webometric ranking of world universities: Introduction, methodology, and future developments. Higher Education in Europe, 33(2–3), 233–244.
Aguillo, I., Ortega, J., Fernández, M., & Utrilla, A. (2010). Indicators for a webometric ranking of open access repositories. Scientometrics, 82(3), 477–486.
Almind, T. C., & Ingwersen, P. (1997). Informetric analyses on the World Wide Web: Methodological approaches to’webometrics’. Journal of Documentation, 53(4), 404–426.
Bar-Ilan, J. (2001). Data collection methods on the Web for infometric purposes—A review and analysis. Scientometrics, 50(1), 7–32.
Barjak, F. (2006). The role of the internet in informal scholarly communication. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(10), 1350–1367.
Barjak, F., Li, X., & Thelwall, M. (2007). Which factors explain the web impact of scientists’ personal homepages? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(2), 200–211.
Björneborn, L., & Ingwersen, P. (2004). Toward a basic framework for webometrics. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 55(14), 1216–1227.
Bollen, J., & Sompel, H. V. D. (2008). Usage impact factor: The effects of sample characteristics on usage-based impact metrics. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology, 59(1), 136–149.
Bollen, J., Van de Sompel, H., Hagberg, A., & Chute, R. (2009). A principal component analysis of 39 scientific impact measures. PLoS ONE, 4(6), e6022.
Chudnovskiy, A. (2017). Categorization system (U.S. Patent No. 9679048). https://patents.google.com/patent/US9679048
Chudnovskiy, A. (2019). Categorization system (U.S. Patent, No. 10404739). https://patents.google.com/patent/US10404739B2
Fortunato, S., Bergstrom, C. T., Börner, K., Evans, J. A., Helbing, D., Milojević, S., et al. (2018). Science of science. Science, 359(6379), eaao0185.
Halvorson, T., Szurdi, J., Maier, G., Felegyhazi, M., Kreibich, C., Weaver, N., Levchenko, K,. & Paxson, V. (2012). The BIZ top-level domain: ten years later. In International Conference on Passive and Active Network Measurement (pp. 221–230). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
Ingwersen, P. (1998). The calculation of web impact factors. Journal of Documentation, 54(2), 236–243.
Kousha, K., Thelwall, M., & Rezaie, S. (2010). Using the web for research evaluation: The integrated online impact indicator. Journal of Informetrics, 4(1), 124–135.
Larsen, C. (2015). The .Science of Shady TLD use. Symantec Official Blog. https://www.symantec.com/connect/blogs/science-shady-tld-use
Li, X., Thelwall, M., Wilkinson, D., & Musgrove, P. (2005). National and international university departmental Web site interlinking: Part 1: Validation of departmental link analysis. Scientometrics, 64(2), 151–185.
Li, X., Thelwall, M., Wilkinson, D., & Musgrove, P. (2005). National and international university departmental Web site interlinking: Part 2: Link patterns. Scientometrics, 64(2), 187–208.
Luzón, M. J. (2009). Scholarly hyperwriting: The function of links in academic weblogs. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(1), 75–89.
Más-Bleda, A., & Aguillo, I. F. (2013). Can a personal website be useful as an information source to assess individual scientists? The case of European highly cited researchers. Scientometrics, 96(1), 51–67.
Más-Bleda, A., Thelwall, M., Kousha, K., & Aguillo, I. F. (2014). Successful researchers publicizing research online. Journal of Documentation, 70(1), 148–172.
Minguillo, D., & Thelwall, M. (2012). Mapping the network structure of science parks: An exploratory study of cross-sectoral interactions reflected on the web. Aslib Proceedings, 64(4), 332–357.
Orduña-Malea, E., & Aguillo, I. F. (2015). Cibermetría. Midiendo el espacio red. Barcelona: UOC Publishing.
Orduña-Malea, E. (2013). Aggregation of the web performance of internal university units as a method of quantitative analysis of a university system: The case of Spain. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(10), 2100–2114.
Orduña-Malea, E., & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2015). The dark side of open access in Google and Google Scholar: The case of Latin-American repositories. Scientometrics, 102(1), 829–846.
Ortega, J. L., & Aguillo, I. F. (2009). Mapping world-class universities on the web. Information Processing and Management, 45(2), 272–279.
Park, H. W., & Thelwall, M. (2003). Hyperlink analyses of the World Wide Web: A review. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2003.tb00223.x.
Payne, N., & Thelwall, M. (2007). A longitudinal study of academic webs: growth and stabilization. Scientometrics, 71(3), 523–539.
Shema, H., Bar-Ilan, J., & Thelwall, M. (2012). Research blogs and the discussion of scholarly information. PLoS ONE, 7(5), e35869.
Thelwall, M. (2002). Conceptualizing documentation on the web: an evaluation of different heuristic-based models for counting links between university web sites. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(12), 995–1005.
Thelwall, M. (2003). Web use and peer interconnectivity metrics for academic Web sites. Journal of information science, 29(1), 1–10.
Thelwall, M. (2004). Link analysis: An information science approach. Amsterdam: Academic Press.
Thelwall, M. (2006). Interpreting social science link analysis research: a theoretical framework. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(1), 60–68.
Thelwall, M. (2009). Introduction to webometrics: Quantitative web research for the social sciences. New York: Morgan & Claypool.
Thelwall, M. (2010). Webometrics: Emergent or Doomed? Information Research, 15(4), n4.
Thelwall, M. (2012). A history of webometrics. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 38(6), 18–23.
Thelwall, M. (2012). Journal impact evaluation: a webometric perspective. Scientometrics, 92(2), 429–441.
Thelwall, M., & Kousha, K. (2015). Web indicators for research evaluation. Part 1: Citations and links to academic articles from the Web. El Profesional de la Información, 24, 5.
Thelwall, M., Li, X., Barjak, F., & Robinson, S. (2008). Assessing the international web connectivity of research groups. Aslib Proceedings, 60(1), 18–31.
Thelwall, M., & Sud, P. (2011). A comparison of methods for collecting web citation data for academic organizations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(8), 1488–1497.
Thelwall, M., Sud, P., & Wilkinson, D. (2012). Link and co-inlink network diagrams with URL citations or title mentions. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(4), 805–816.
Utrilla-Ramírez, A. M., Aguillo, I. F., & Ortega, J. L. (2011). Visibilidad de la web hospitalariaiberoamericana. Perspectiva de suactividadcientífica en internet. MedicinaClínica, 137(13), 605–611.
Vaughan, L., & Romero-Frías, E. (2014). Web search volume as a predictor of academic fame: An exploration of Google trends. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(4), 707–720.
Vaughan, L., & Thelwall, M. (2003). Scholarly use of the Web: What are the key inducers of links to journal Web sites? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(1), 29–38.
W3 Techs: Web Technology Surveys (2020). Usage statistics of .science for websites. W3 Techs. https://w3techs.com/technologies/details/tld-science-.
Warren, H. R., Raison, N., & Dasgupta, P. (2017). The rise of altmetrics. Jama, 317(2), 131–132.
About this article
Cite this article
Orduña-Malea, E. Dot-science top level domain: Academic websites or dumpsites?. Scientometrics (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03832-8
- Top-level domains
- Scientific communication
- Web authority
- Academic websites