Altmetrics for the humanities: Comparing Goodreads reader ratings with citations to history books
نویسندگان
چکیده
Structured Abstract: Purpose: This paper assesses the value of Goodreads reader ratings as an altmetric research tool for measuring the wider impact of scholarly books published in the field of History. Design/methodology/approach: Book titles were extracted from the reference lists of articles that appeared in 604 history journals indexed in Scopus (2007-‐2011). The titles were cleaned and matched using an API in WorldCat.org (for publisher information) as well as Goodreads (for reader ratings). A set of N=8,538 books was first filtered based on Dewey Decimal Classification class 900 'History and Geography', then a subset of 997 books with the highest citations and reader ratings (i.e. top 25%) was analyzed separately based on additional characteristics. Findings: A weak correlation (0.212) was found between citation counts and reader rating counts for the full dataset (N=8,538). An additional correlation for the subset of 997 books indicated a similar weak correlation (0.190). Further correlations between citations, reader ratings, written reviews, and library holdings indicate that a reader rating was more likely to be given to a book on Goodreads if the book was held in an international library, including both public and academic libraries. Originality/Value: Altmetrics research has focused almost exclusively on scientific journal articles appearing on social media services (e.g., Twitter, Facebook). In this paper we show the potential of Goodreads reader ratings to identify the impact of books beyond academia. As a unique altmetric tool Goodreads can allow scholarly authors from the social sciences and humanities to measure the wider impact of their books.
منابع مشابه
Alternative Metrics for Book Impact Assessment: Can Choice Reviews be a Useful Source?
This article assesses whether academic reviews in Choice: Current Reviews for Academic Libraries could be systematically used for indicators of scholarly impact, uptake or educational value for scholarly books. Based on 451 Choice book reviews from 2011 across the humanities, social sciences and science, there were significant but low correlations between Choice ratings and citation and non-cit...
متن کاملGoodreads: A social network site for book readers
Goodreads is an Amazon-owned book-based social web site for members to share books, read, review books, rate books, and connect with other readers. Goodreads has tens of millions of book reviews, recommendations, and ratings that may help librarians and readers to select relevant books. This article describes a first investigation of the properties of Goodreads users, using a random sample of 5...
متن کاملMendeley readership altmetrics for the social sciences and humanities: Research evaluation and knowledge flows
Although there is evidence that counting the readers of an article in the social reference site, Mendeley, may help to capture its research impact, the extent to which this is true for different scientific fields is unknown. This study compares Mendeley readership counts with citations for different social sciences and humanities disciplines. The overall correlation between Mendeley readership ...
متن کاملAn automatic method for extracting citations from Google Books
Recent studies have shown that counting citations from books can help scholarly impact assessment and that Google Books (GB) is a useful source of such citation counts, despite its lack of a public citation index. Searching GB for citations produces approximate matches, however, and so its raw results need timeconsuming human filtering. In response, this article introduces a method to automatic...
متن کاملDo altmetrics correlate with citations? Extensive comparison of altmetric indicators with citations from a multidisciplinary perspective
An extensive analysis of the presence of different altmetric indicators provided by Altmetric.com across scientific fields is presented, particularly focusing on their relationship with citations. Our results confirm that the presence and density of social media altmetric counts are still very low and not very frequent among scientific publications, with 15%-24% of the publications presenting s...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
- Aslib J. Inf. Manag.
دوره 67 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2015