Coverage and adoption of altmetrics sources in the bibliometric community
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
A higher number of Mendeley readers suggests that a publication is frequently accessed by fellow researchers, which could lead to collaboration and citation opportunities.
“A higher number of Mendeley readers suggests that a publication is frequently accessed by fellow researchers, which could lead to collaboration and citation opportunities (Bornmann, 2015; Haustein et al., 2014).”
From Can ChatGPT be used to predict citation counts, readership, and social media interaction? An exploration among 2222 scientific abstracts (2024) · cites this paper as Haustein et al., 2014
Cites
The Discovery of Grounded Theory; Strategies for Qualitative Research
Glaser, B. G., Strauss, A. L., & Strutzel, E. (1968) · Nursing Research · doi:10.1097/00006199-196807000-00014 · Cited by 39,449 · see citing works
Do Altmetrics Work? Twitter and Ten Other Social Web Services
Thelwall, M., Haustein, S., Larivière, V., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0064841 · Cited by 907 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Bornmann, L. (2014) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2014.09.005 · Cited by 578 · see citing works
A systematic identification and analysis of scientists on Twitter
Ke, Q., Ahn, Y.-Y., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2017) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0175368 · Cited by 175 · see citing works
Availability of digital object identifiers (DOIs) in web of science and scopus
Gorraiz, J., Melero-Fuentes, D., Gumpenberger, C., & Valderrama-Zurián, J.-C. (2016) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2015.11.008 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
Citation-Based Journal Rankings: Key Questions, Metrics, and Data Sources
Walters, W. H. (2017) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2017.2761400 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
Tale of Three Databases: The Implication of Coverage Demonstrated for a Sample Query
Bar-Ilan, J. (2018) · Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics · doi:10.3389/frma.2018.00006 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
Self-citationAvailability of digital object identifiers in publications archived by PubMed
Boudry, C., & Chartron, G. (2017) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-016-2225-6 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
de Winter, J. (2024) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-024-04939-y · Cited by 34 · see citing works
“A higher number of Mendeley readers suggests that a publication is frequently accessed by fellow researchers, which could lead to collaboration and citation opportunities (Bornmann, 2015; Haustein et al., 2014).”
Bornmann, L., & Haunschild, R. (2016) · Online Information Review · doi:10.1108/oir-09-2015-0314 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Changes in Scholarly Reading in Finland Over a Decade: Influences of E-Journals and Social Media
Tenopir, C., Late, E., Talja, S., & Christian, L. (2019) · Libri · doi:10.1515/libri-2018-0120 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
- Authors
- Haustein, S., Peters, I., Bar-Ilan, J., Priem, J., Shema, H., & Terliesner, J.
- Affiliations
- Science-Metrix (Canada) (CA)
- ZBW – Leibniz-Informationszentrum Wirtschaft (DE)
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
- Bar-Ilan University (IL)
- Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf (DE)
- Venue
- Scientometrics
- Published
- 2014-01-04
- Volume
- 101
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 1145-1163
- ISSN
- 0138-9130 (ISSN-L)
- 1588-2861
- OpenAlex
- W2038196424
- Cited by
- 264
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 32 · 2017: 40 · 2016: 27 · 2015: 24 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 36.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Scientometrics (publishedVersion)
- ZBW Publication Archive (ZBW – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics) (acceptedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Web visibility and informetrics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Library Science and Information
- Keywords
- altmetrics, social media use, research impact metrics, Mendeley, CiteULike, reference management software, social bookmarking, Twitter, LinkedIn, Academia.edu, ResearchGate
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
