How do altmetric sources evaluate scientific collaboration? An empirical investigation for Chinese collaboration publications

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to provide insights on the improvement of academic impact and social attention of Chinese collaboration articles from the perspective of altmetrics.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors retrieved articles which are from the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) and indexed by Nature Index as sampled articles. With the methods of distribution analysis, comparative analysis and correlation analysis, authors compare the coverage differences of altmetric sources for CAS Chinese articles and CAS international articles, and analyze the correlation between the collaborative information and the altmetric indicators.

Findings

Results show that the coverage of altmetric sources for CAS international articles is greater than that for CAS Chinese articles. Mendeley and Twitter cover a higher percentage of collaborative articles than other sources studied. Collaborative information, such as number of collaborating countries, number of collaborating institutions, and number of collaborating authors, show moderate or low correlation with altmetric indicator counts. Mendeley readership has a moderate correlation with altmetric indicators like tweets, news outlets and blog posts.

Practical implications

International scientific collaboration at different levels improves attention, academic impact and social impact of articles. International collaboration and altmetrics indicators supplement each other. The results of this study can help us better understand the relationship between altmetrics indicators of articles and collaborative information of articles. It is of great significance to evaluate the influence of Chinese articles, as well as help to improve the academic impact and social attention of Chinese collaboration articles.

Originality/value

To the best of authors’ knowledge, few studies focus on the use of altmetrics to assess publications produced through Chinese academic collaboration. This study is one of a few attempts that include the number of collaborating countries, number of collaborating institutions, and number of collaborating authors of scientific collaboration into the discussion of altmetric indicators and figured out the relationship among them.

Citation

Wang, X., Lv, T. and Hamerly, D. (2020), "How do altmetric sources evaluate scientific collaboration? An empirical investigation for Chinese collaboration publications", Library Hi Tech, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 563-576. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHT-05-2019-0101