چکیده:
This study aimed to assess the paths through which save metrics (on CiteULike, Mendeley, and Figshare) and discussion metrics (on Twitter, Facebook, and Wikipedia) influence citation. This descriptive-correlation study investigates the relationships between different variables based on its proposed conceptual model. Systematic and stratified sampling was employed and, using the Cochrane formula, the sample size was determined to be 1892 articles. Data were collected using the PLOS altmetrics, and path analysis was administered to test the conceptual model by using AMOS software. The results convey that Mendeley was the most effective path resulting to citation. Mendeley has a positive and significant relationship with citation via save as an intermediator. Twitter also had a negative and significant relationship with citation via discussion as an intermediating factor. Yet, neither save metrics on CiteULike and Figshare nor discussion on Facebook and Wikipedia does create a path of influence on citation. Identifying the effective paths through which social networks affect citation via altmetrics and presenting a final model of those paths could enrich and expand the theoretical foundations in the field of altmetrics. Besides identifying the most effective social networks and paths for online scientific interactions that lead to citation, the implications of this research can provide deeper insights for policy makers, editors and scholars.
خلاصه ماشینی:
com Abstract This study aimed to assess the paths through which save metrics (on CiteULike, Mendeley, and Figshare) and discussion metrics (on Twitter, Facebook, and Wikipedia) influence citation.
Altmetrics, Visibility, Citation, Save Metrics, Discussion, Pathway, Path Analysis, PLOS System, Intermediation, Mendeley, CiteULike, Figshare, Twitter, Facebook, Wikipedia.
Another study on the relationship between ArXiv publications, number of Tweets, Google Scholar citations and download counts in 4606 scientific articles yielded a significant correlation between these variables (Shuai, Pepe and Bollen, 2012).
Determine the direction of the impact of visibility on citation index (in Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed Central, and CrossRefl via save (on CiteULike, Mendeley, and Figshare) in the PLOS system; 2.
Determine the direction of the impact of visibility on citation index (in Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed Central, and CrossRef) via discussion (on Wikipedia, Facebook, and Twitter) in the PLOS system.
Visibility exerts an influence on citation index (in Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed Central, and CrossRefi via save (on CiteULike, Mendeley, and Figshare) in the PLOS system 2.
All these values were presented in integrated PLOS One system (that is save from CiteULike, Mendeley, and Figshare; discussion from Facebook, Twitter, and Wikipedia; recommendation from F1000; citation from Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed Central and CrossRefl.
The results conveyed that visibility not only directly influenced citation, but also exerted its effect through the intermediating variable of save on Mendeley and discussion on Twitter by 0.