摘要
[目的/意义]揭示不同替代计量数据库数据的特点,以明确基于这些替代计量数据库的研究和服务的适用性和局限性,同时为面向不同目标选取合适的替代计量数据库提供参考。[方法/过程]在充分调研主流替代计量数据库的基础上,选取Altmetric.com、CrossRef和PLoS ALM三家替代计量数据库作为研究对象,通过调研对比分析了不同替代计量数据库的数据政策,采用统计分析对比了不同替代计量数据库数据数值的差异。[结果/结论]不同替代计量数据库在保障数据透明性、可重复性和准确性上采取的具体策略不尽相同,并且各有特色。在数据数值的表现方面,Altmetric数据库的Twitter数据数值最高,CED提取Wikipedia数据的范围最为广泛,PLoS ALM的Facebook数据数值更高,而Reddit、F1000、DataCite和Wordpress这四种替代计量数据体现出较强的一致性。
[Purpose/Significance]This study has revealed the characteristics of data from different altmetrics databases,in order to clarify the applicability and limitation of research and services based on these altmetrics databases.Moreover,the study will provide reference for selecting the proper altmetrics database for different purposes.[Method/Process]After thorough investigation of major altmetrics databases,the study has selected Altmetric.com,CrossRef and PLoS ALM as research object,and compared data policy as well as the consistency of data value of these altmetrics databases.[Result/Conclusion]Different altmetrics databases have adopted different and unique data policy to guarantee their transparency,reproducibility and accuracy.As regards data value,Altmetric has the highest value in Twitter mention count,CED has the widest range of Wikipedia data tracking,while PLoS ALM has higher Facebook mention count.Reddit,F1000,DataCite and Wordpress have demonstrated relatively strong consistency.
作者
余厚强
尹梓涵
Yu Houqiang;Yin Zihan(School of Information Management,Sun Yat-Sen University,Guangzhou 510006;School of Economics&Management,Nanjing University of Science&Technology,Nanjing 210094)
出处
《情报杂志》
CSSCI
北大核心
2021年第5期111-117,共7页
Journal of Intelligence
基金
教育部人文社会科学青年基金“替代计量数据质量评估体系的构建与实证研究”(编号:18YJC870023)
国家自然科学青年基金项目“结合情境数据的替代计量指标多元化内涵识别与表征研究”(编号:71804067)
中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金(编号:30920021203)的研究成果之一。
