1 |
Nuredini, K., & Peters, I. (2015, May 19-21). Economic and business studies journals and readership information from Mendeley. In F. Pehar, C. Schloegl, & C. Wolff (Eds.), Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium on Information Science (pp. 380-392). vwh-Verlag.
|
2 |
Maflahi, N., & Thelwall, M. (2016). When are readership counts as useful as citation counts? Scopus versus Mendeley for LIS journals. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(1), 191-199. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23369.
DOI
|
3 |
Mohammadi, E., & Thelwall, M. (2014). Mendeley readership altmetrics for the social sciences and humanities: Research evaluation and knowledge flows. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(8), 1627-1638. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23071.
DOI
|
4 |
Nath, A., Jana, S., & Kerketta, S. (2020). Who reads PLOS research articles? Extensive analysis of the Mendeley readership categories of PLOS journals. Journal of Scientometric Research, 9(3), 245-252. https://doi.org/10.5530/jscires.9.3.32.
DOI
|
5 |
Nath, A., Jana, S., & Santra, P. P. (2021). Characteristics of Mendeley readership for earth and planetary science articles: An exploratory study of 12 narrow Scopus fields. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, 41(6), 415-423. https://doi.org/10.14429/djlit.41.6.16961.
DOI
|
6 |
Pradhan, P. (2016). Analysis of Mendeley readership activities of Indian information and library science literature indexed in Web of Science. Paper presented at the International Conference on Marching Beyond the Libraries: The Role of Social Media and Networking (ICMBL 2016), Bhubaneswar, India.
|
7 |
Parabhoi, L., Borgohain, T., & Sahu, R. R. (2020). Mendeley readership count: An investigation of Sambalpur University publications from 1971-2018. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal). https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=8127&context=libphilprac.
|
8 |
Parabhoi, L., & Verma, M. K. (2020). Mendeley readership counts: An investigation of DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology. Journal of Science and Technology Metrics, 1(2), 62-70. https://www.dline.info/jstm/fulltext/v1n2/jstmv1n2_2.pdf.
|
9 |
Pooladian, A., & Borrego, A. (2016). A longitudinal study of the bookmarking of library and information science literature in Mendeley. Journal of Informetrics, 10(4), 1135-1142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.10.003.
DOI
|
10 |
Verma, S., & Madhusudhan, M. (2019). An altmetric comparison of highly cited digital library publications of India and China. Annals of Library and Information Studies, 66(2), 71-75. http://op.niscair.res.in/index.php/ALIS/article/view/24409/465477092.
|
11 |
Zahedi, Z., Costas, R., & Wouters, P. (2017). Mendeley readership as a filtering tool to identify highly cited publications. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68(10), 2511-2521. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23883.
DOI
|
12 |
Pooladian, A., & Borrego, A. (2017). Twenty years of readership of library and information science literature under Mendeley's microscope. Performance Measurement and Metrics, 18(1), 67-77. https://doi.org/10.1108/PMM-02-2016-0006.
DOI
|
13 |
Schlogl, C., Gorraiz, J., Gumpenberger, C., Jack, K., & Kraker, P. (2014). Comparison of downloads, citations and readership data for two information systems journals. Scientometrics, 101(2), 1113-1128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1365-9.
DOI
|
14 |
Scimago. (2021). Scimago Journal & Country Rank. https://www.scimagojr.com/countryrank.php?category=3309&min=0&min_type=ci.
|
15 |
Thelwall, M. (2017). Why do papers have many Mendeley readers but few Scopus-indexed citations and vice versa? Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 49(2), 144-151. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000615594867.
DOI
|
16 |
Thelwall, M. (2018). Early Mendeley readers correlate with later citation counts. Scientometrics, 115(3), 1231-1240. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2715-9.
DOI
|
17 |
Thelwall, M. (2019). Do Mendeley reader counts indicate the value of arts and humanities research? Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 51(3), 781-788. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000617732381.
DOI
|
18 |
Thelwall, M. (2020). Mendeley reader counts for US computer science conference papers and journal articles. Quantitative Science Studies, 1(1), 347-359. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00010.
DOI
|
19 |
Thelwall, M., & Sud, P. (2016). Mendeley readership counts: An investigation of temporal and disciplinary differences. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(12), 3036-3050. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23559.
DOI
|
20 |
Chi, P.-S., Gorraiz, J., & Glanzel, W. (2019). Comparing capture, usage and citation indicators: An altmetric analysis of journal papers in chemistry disciplines. Scientometrics, 120(3), 1461-1473. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03168-y.
DOI
|
21 |
Aksnes, D. W., Langfeldt, L., & Wouters, P. (2019). Citations, citation indicators, and research quality: An overview of basic concepts and theories. SAGE Open, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019829575.
DOI
|
22 |
Aung, H. H., Zheng, H., Erdt, M., Aw, A. S., Sin, S.-C. J., & Theng, Y.-L. (2019). Investigating familiarity and usage of traditional metrics and altmetrics. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 70(8), 872-887. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24162.
DOI
|
23 |
Bornmann, L. (2014). Validity of altmetrics data for measuring societal impact: A study using data from Altmetric and F1000Prime. Journal of Informetrics, 8(4), 935-950. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2014.09.007.
DOI
|
24 |
Chen, P.-Y., Hayes, E., Lariviere, V., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2018). Social reference managers and their users: A survey of demographics and ideologies. PLOS ONE, 13(7), e0198033. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0198033.
DOI
|
25 |
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Erlbaum Associates.
|
26 |
Costas, R., Zahedi, Z., & Wouters, P. (2015). The thematic orientation of publications mentioned on social media: Largescale disciplinary comparison of social media metrics with citations. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 67(3), 260-288. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-12-2014-0173.
DOI
|
27 |
D'Angelo, C. A., & Di Russo, S. (2019). Testing for universality of Mendeley readership distributions. Journal of Informetrics, 13(2), 726-737. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2019.03.011.
DOI
|
28 |
Eldakar, M. A. M. (2019). Who reads international Egyptian academic articles? An altmetrics analysis of Mendeley readership categories. Scientometrics, 121(1), 105-135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03189-7.
DOI
|
29 |
Haunschild, R., Bornmann, L., & Leydesdorff, L. (2015). Networks of reader and country status: An analysis of Mendeley reader statistics. PeerJ Computer Science. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.32.
DOI
|
30 |
Thelwall, M., & Wilson, P. (2016). Mendeley readership altmetrics for medical articles: An analysis of 45 fields. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(8), 1962-1972. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23501.
DOI
|