[Objective] This empirical case study aims to validate the effectiveness of using Altmetrics indicators to identify high quality articles. [Methods] First, we retrieved the online usage and sharing data of highly cited papers published by the PLOS journals from social platforms (i.e., CiteULike, Mendeley and Figshare). Second, we examined relationship between these Altmetrics and SCI citation counts of the target papers. [Results] The correlation coefficient between the SCI citation data and the Altmetrics generated by Mendeley was strong (r = 0.376, p = 0.01). Meanwhile, the other two correlation coefficients were weaker. The online usage data from Mendeley might help us identify high impact literature published by specific journals. [Limitations] This research only investigated a few subjects covered by the PLOS serial journals. More research is needed to check the relationship between Altmetrics and citation counts in other fields. [Conclusions] Online usages & sharing data from CiteULike, Mendeley and Figshare might not be able to effectively identify the high impact literature.
Brody T, Harnad S, Carr L.Earlier Web Usage Statistics as Predictors of Later Citation Impact[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2005, 57(8): 1060-1072.
[2]
Garfield E.Citation Analysis as a Tool in Journal Evaluation[J]. Science, 1972, 178(4060): 471-479.
[3]
Garfield E.Citation Indexing for Studying Science[J]. Nature, 1970, 227(5259): 669-671.
[4]
NISO Altmetrics Standards Project White Paper (Draft 4) [EB/OL]. (2014-06-06). [2016-06-28]. .
[5]
Taraborelli D. Soft Peer Review: Social Software and Distributed Scientific Evaluation [EB/OL]. (2008-05-20). [2016-06-08]. .
[6]
Neylon C, Wu S.Article-level Metrics and the Evolution of Scientific Impact[J]. PLOS Biology, 2009, 7(11): e1000242.
[7]
Priem J, Hemminger B M. Scientometrics 2.0: New Metrics of Scholarly Impact on the Social Web [EB/OL]. (2010-07- 05). [2016-06-08]. .
[8]
Priem J, Taraborelli D, Groth P, et al. Altmetrics: A Manifesto [EB/OL]. (2010-10-26). [2016-06-08]. .
[9]
Galligan F, Dyas-Correia S.Altmetrics: Rethinking the Way We Measure[J]. Serials Review, 2013, 39(1): 56-61.
[10]
Melero R.Altmetrics - A Complement to Conventional Metrics[J]. Biochemia Medica, 2015, 25(2): 152-160.
[11]
Gordon G, Lin J, Cave R, et al.The Question of Data Integrity in Article-Level Metrics[J]. PLOS Biology. 2015, 13(8): e1002161.
[12]
Ebrahimy S, Setareh F, Hosseinchari M.Assessing the Relationship Between the Alternative Metrics of Visibility and Social Bookmarking with Citation Index in PLOS Altmetrics[J]. Iranian Journal of Information Processing Management, 2016, 31(3): 845-864.
[13]
Bornmann L.Alternative Metrics in Scientometrics: A Meta-analysis of Research into Three Altmetrics[J]. Scientometrics, 2015, 103(3): 1123-1144.
[14]
Haustein S, Peters I, Bar-Ilan J, et al.Coverage and Adoption of Altmetrics Sources in the Bibliometric Community[J]. Scientometrics, 2014, 101(2): 1145-1163.
[15]
Li X M, Thewall M, Giustini D.Validating Online Reference Managers for Scholarly Impact Measurement[J]. Scientometrics, 2011, 91(2): 461-471.
[16]
Bornmann L.Usefulness of Altmetrics for Measuring the Broader Impact of Research: A Case Study Using Data from PLOS and F1000 Prime[J]. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 2015, 67(3): 305-319.
(Liu Chunli, He Qincheng.Study on Correlation of Different Altmetrics Indicators for Paper Evaluation Based on Three Academic Social Networking Tools: Mendeley, F1000 and Google Scholar[J]. Journal of the China Society for Scientific and Technical Information, 2013, 32(2): 206-212.)
(You Qingbin, Wei Bo, Tang Shanhong.Evaluation Model Construction to Evaluate Article’s Influence Based on Altmetrics[J]. Library and Information Service, 2014, 58(22): 5-11.)
(Song Liping, Wang Jianfang, Wang Shuyi.Observation of F1000, Mendeley and Traditional Bibliometric Indicators from the Perspective of Scientific Assessment[J]. Journal of Library Science in China, 2014, 40(4): 48-54.)
(Liu Xiaojuan, Zhou Jianhua, You Bin.Study on Correlation Between Altmetrics Indicators and Traditional Scientometric Indicators Based on Mendeley and WoS[J]. Library and Information Service, 2015, 59(3): 112-118.)
(Jin Wei, Zhao Rongying, Yin Ge.An Analysis of the Accumulation State and the Validity of User Readership Data in Online Reference Managers——Take the Indicators of Altmetrics as an Example[J]. New Technology of Library and Information Service, 2015(11): 75-81.)
[22]
Mohammadi E, Thelwall M.Mendeley Readership Altmetrics for the Social Sciences and Humanities: Research Evaluation and Knowledge Flows[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2014, 65(8): 1627-1638.
[23]
Shrivastava R, Mahajan P.Relationship Between Citation Counts and Mendeley Readership Metrics: A Case of Top 100 Cited Papers in Physics[J]. New Library World, 2016, 117(3-4): 229-238.
[24]
Hane P J. Sharing Research Data—New Figshare for Institutions [EB/OL]. (2013-09-16). [2016-06-28]. .
[25]
Hahnel M. Figshare: A New Way to Publish Scientific Research Data [EB/OL]. (2012-01-18). [2016-06-08]. .
