• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

挪威学者在学术网站上的数字足迹——他们在哪里以及都是谁?

Digital Presence of Norwegian Scholars on Academic Network Sites--Where and Who Are They?

作者信息

Mikki Susanne, Zygmuntowska Marta, Gjesdal Øyvind Liland, Al Ruwehy Hemed Ali

机构信息

University of Bergen Library, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2015 Nov 13;10(11):e0142709. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0142709. eCollection 2015.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0142709
PMID:26565408
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4643921/
Abstract

The use of academic profiling sites is becoming more common, and emerging technologies boost researchers' visibility and exchange of ideas. In our study we compared profiles at five different profiling sites. These five sites are ResearchGate, Academia.edu, Google Scholar Citations, ResearcherID and ORCID. The data set is enriched by demographic information including age, gender, position and affiliation, which are provided by the national CRIS-system in Norway. We find that approximately 37% of researchers at the University of Bergen have at least one profile, the prevalence being highest (> 40%) for members at the Faculty of Psychology and the Faculty of Social Sciences. Across all disciplines, ResearchGate is the most widely used platform. However, within Faculty of Humanities, Academia.edu is the preferred one. Researchers are reluctant to maintain multiple profiles, and there is little overlap between different services. Age turns out to be a poor indicator for presence in the investigated profiling sites, women are underrepresented and professors together with PhD students are the most likely profile holders. We next investigated the correlation between bibliometric measures, such as publications and citations, and user activities, such as downloads and followers. We find different bibliometric indicators to correlate strongly within individual platforms and across platforms. There is however less agreement between the traditional bibliometric and social activity indicators.

摘要

学术简介网站的使用越来越普遍,新兴技术提高了研究人员的知名度和思想交流。在我们的研究中,我们比较了五个不同简介网站上的个人资料。这五个网站分别是ResearchGate、Academia.edu、谷歌学术引用、ResearcherID和ORCID。数据集通过包括年龄、性别、职位和所属机构在内的人口统计信息得到充实,这些信息由挪威国家CRIS系统提供。我们发现,卑尔根大学约37%的研究人员至少有一个个人资料,心理学系和社会科学系成员的普及率最高(>40%)。在所有学科中,ResearchGate是使用最广泛的平台。然而,在人文学院内,Academia.edu是首选平台。研究人员不愿意维护多个个人资料,不同服务之间几乎没有重叠。事实证明,年龄并不是在所调查的简介网站上是否有资料的一个好指标,女性代表不足,教授和博士生是最有可能拥有个人资料的群体。接下来,我们研究了文献计量指标(如出版物和引用)与用户活动(如下载量和关注者)之间的相关性。我们发现不同的文献计量指标在各个平台内部以及跨平台之间都有很强的相关性。然而,传统文献计量指标和社交活动指标之间的一致性较低。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/27f7/4643921/88b6301eea98/pone.0142709.g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/27f7/4643921/6ccb94e90885/pone.0142709.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/27f7/4643921/102361c9aa73/pone.0142709.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/27f7/4643921/92bd990f9343/pone.0142709.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/27f7/4643921/88b6301eea98/pone.0142709.g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/27f7/4643921/6ccb94e90885/pone.0142709.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/27f7/4643921/102361c9aa73/pone.0142709.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/27f7/4643921/92bd990f9343/pone.0142709.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/27f7/4643921/88b6301eea98/pone.0142709.g004.jpg

相似文献

1
Digital Presence of Norwegian Scholars on Academic Network Sites--Where and Who Are They?挪威学者在学术网站上的数字足迹——他们在哪里以及都是谁?
PLoS One. 2015 Nov 13;10(11):e0142709. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0142709. eCollection 2015.
2
Use of author identifier services (ORCID, ResearcherID) and academic social networks (Academia.edu, ResearchGate) by the researchers of the University of Caen Normandy (France): A case study.法国卡昂诺曼底大学研究人员对作者标识符服务(ORCID、ResearcherID)和学术社交网络(Academia.edu、ResearchGate)的使用:一项案例研究。
PLoS One. 2020 Sep 2;15(9):e0238583. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0238583. eCollection 2020.
3
Online platforms and social networks for the creation of research profiles.在线平台和社交网络用于创建研究档案。
Farm Hosp. 2020 Jan 1;44(1):20-25. doi: 10.7399/fh.11304.
4
The Association Between Professional Accounts on Social Networks Twitter and ResearchGate and the Number of Scientific Publications and Citations Among Anesthesia Researchers: Observational Study.社交媒体平台 Twitter 和 ResearchGate 上的专业账号与麻醉研究人员的科研出版物数量和引用次数的关联:观察性研究。
J Med Internet Res. 2021 Oct 15;23(10):e29809. doi: 10.2196/29809.
5
[Google Scholar and the h-index in biomedicine: the popularization of bibliometric assessment].[谷歌学术与生物医学领域的h指数:文献计量评估的普及]
Med Intensiva. 2013 Jun-Jul;37(5):343-54. doi: 10.1016/j.medin.2013.01.008. Epub 2013 Mar 19.
6
A bibliometric overview of 30 years of medical sciences productivity in iran.伊朗医学科学 30 年生产力的文献计量概述。
Arch Iran Med. 2010 Jul;13(4):313-7.
7
The h-index outperforms other bibliometrics in the assessment of research performance in general surgery: a province-wide study.h 指数在普通外科研究绩效评估中优于其他文献计量指标:一项全省范围的研究。
Surgery. 2013 Apr;153(4):493-501. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2012.09.006. Epub 2013 Mar 7.
8
Generational differences in international research collaboration: A bibliometric study of Norwegian University staff.代际差异在国际研究合作中的体现:对挪威大学教职工的文献计量研究。
PLoS One. 2021 Nov 29;16(11):e0260239. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0260239. eCollection 2021.
9
Researcher and Author Profiles: Opportunities, Advantages, and Limitations.研究者与作者简介:机遇、优势与局限
J Korean Med Sci. 2017 Nov;32(11):1749-1756. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2017.32.11.1749.
10
Scholarly productivity and national institutes of health funding of foundation for anesthesia education and research grant recipients: insights from a bibliometric analysis.麻醉教育与研究基金会资助获得者的学术生产力与美国国立卫生研究院资金情况:文献计量分析的见解
Anesthesiology. 2015 Sep;123(3):683-91. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000000737.

引用本文的文献

1
Dynamic academic networking concept and its links with English language skills and research productivity-non-Anglophone context.动态学术网络概念及其与英语语言技能和研究生产力的关系——非英语环境。
PLoS One. 2021 Feb 2;16(2):e0245980. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0245980. eCollection 2021.
2
Use of author identifier services (ORCID, ResearcherID) and academic social networks (Academia.edu, ResearchGate) by the researchers of the University of Caen Normandy (France): A case study.法国卡昂诺曼底大学研究人员对作者标识符服务(ORCID、ResearcherID)和学术社交网络(Academia.edu、ResearchGate)的使用:一项案例研究。
PLoS One. 2020 Sep 2;15(9):e0238583. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0238583. eCollection 2020.
3

本文引用的文献

1
Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics.文献计量学:《莱顿研究指标宣言》
Nature. 2015 Apr 23;520(7548):429-31. doi: 10.1038/520429a.
2
Characterizing social media metrics of scholarly papers: the effect of document properties and collaboration patterns.描述学术论文的社交媒体指标:文献属性和合作模式的影响
PLoS One. 2015 Mar 17;10(3):e0120495. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0120495. eCollection 2015.
3
Online collaboration: Scientists and the social network.在线协作:科学家与社交网络
Researcher and Author Profiles: Opportunities, Advantages, and Limitations.
研究者与作者简介:机遇、优势与局限
J Korean Med Sci. 2017 Nov;32(11):1749-1756. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2017.32.11.1749.
Nature. 2014 Aug 14;512(7513):126-9. doi: 10.1038/512126a.
4
The number of scholarly documents on the public web.公共网络上的学术文献数量。
PLoS One. 2014 May 9;9(5):e93949. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0093949. eCollection 2014.
5
An introduction to social media for scientists.科学家社交媒体入门
PLoS Biol. 2013;11(4):e1001535. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001535. Epub 2013 Apr 23.
6
Altmetrics: Value all research products.替代计量学:重视所有研究成果。
Nature. 2013 Jan 10;493(7431):159. doi: 10.1038/493159a.
7
Citation indexes for science; a new dimension in documentation through association of ideas.科学引文索引;通过思想关联实现文献记录的新维度。
Science. 1955 Jul 15;122(3159):108-11. doi: 10.1126/science.122.3159.108.