No abstract

No abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to present a comprehensive analysis of the current status and development of the digital journalism field from 1987 to 2021 using the Dimensions database.Design/methodology/approachUsing the Dimensions.ai database, 1734 articles were identified through search strategies which were published from 1987 to 2021. The downloaded results were analysed using specific parameters with the help of bibliometric and science mapping tools: Biblioshiny, VOSviewer and CiteSpace. The key contributions of the present comprehensive bibliometric study of the digital journalism field can be seen in terms of the following aspects: (1) Publication analysis from the perspectives of publication growth, key journals, contributing authors, institutions and countries done through Biblioshiny package. (2) Citation network analysis from the perspective of co-citation structure of papers, authors, countries and institutions done through VOSviewer. (3) Timeline analysis and keywords burst detection to identify hotspots and research trends in digital journalism with the help of CiteSpace.FindingsThe first paper with the keyword digital journalism was published in the year 1989. From 2011 onwards, there has been growth in digital journalism literature. The most popular journal in digital journalism studies is Digital Journalism, Journalism, Journalism Practice, Journalism Studies. Lewis, S.C. has contributed the most number of papers in digital journalism. Further, authors from the countries the USA, Spain, Brazil and UK have contributed immensely. The citation network of authors, institutions and countries contributing to digital journalism studies has also been explored in the study. Through burst analysis, hot topics in digital journalism were identified.Originality/valueThe paper provides a complete overview of the growth of digital journalism literature published from 1987 to 2021. The originality of this work lies in the triangulation of Biblioshiny, VOSviewer and CiteSpace software to present various aspects of bibliometric study. Findings of the study can help the researchers to identify areas as well as journals, authors, institutions working actively in the field of digital journalism.

PurposeThe main purpose of this study is to explore and validate the question “whether altmetric mentions can predict citations to scholarly articles”. The paper attempts to explore the nature and degree of correlation between altmetrics (from ResearchGate and three social media platforms) and citations.Design/methodology/approachA large size data sample of scholarly articles published from India for the year 2016 is obtained from the Web of Science database and the corresponding altmetric data are obtained from ResearchGate and three social media platforms (Twitter, Facebook and blog through Altmetric.com aggregator). Correlations are computed between early altmetric mentions and later citation counts, for data grouped in different disciplinary groups.FindingsResults show that the correlation between altmetric mentions and citation counts are positive, but weak. Correlations are relatively higher in the case of data from ResearchGate as compared to the data from the three social media platforms. Further, significant disciplinary differences are observed in the degree of correlations between altmetrics and citations.Research limitations/implicationsThe results support the idea that altmetrics do not necessarily reflect the same kind of impact as citations. However, articles that get higher altmetric attention early may actually have a slight citation advantage. Further, altmetrics from academic social networks like ResearchGate are more correlated with citations, as compared to social media platforms.Originality/valueThe paper has novelty in two respects. First, it takes altmetric data for a window of about 1–1.5 years after the article publication and citation counts for a longer citation window of about 3–4 years after the publication of article. Second, it is one of the first studies to analyze data from the ResearchGate platform, a popular academic social network, to understand the type and degree of correlations.Peer reviewThe peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-11-2019-0364

No abstract

No abstract

Alternative metrics or altmetrics are article level metrics that have been used to quantify the attention given to scholarly papers in online fora or social media. In some way it was sought to replace journal level metrics such as the Impact Factor and also to see if early altmetric scores could predict highly cited papers. Early studies, done soon after altmetrics was suggested in 2013, were somewhat premature as the use of social media was not widely prevalent, and their results may no longer be relevant at the present time when use levels have risen significantly. In the past year, 2016, Altmetric.com has tracked over 17 million mentions of 2.7 million different research outputs. Of these, the top 100 most-discussed journal articles of 2016 were presented with details of journals in which the research was published, affiliations of authors, fields, countries, etc. 1 ..Our attempt is to obtain a bibliometric profile of these papers with high altmetric scores, to see the underlying patterns and characteristics that motivate high public attention. In parallel we have analyzed top 100 highly cited papers from the same year. Our objective in this empirical study is to examine the similarities and distinguishing features of scientific attention as measured by citations and public attention in online fora.

No abstract