Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2018.35.4.107

Network Analysis of Readers' Countries of Korean Studies using Mendeley Co-readership Data  

Cho, Jane (인천대학교 문헌정보학과)
Park, Jong-Do (인천대학교 문헌정보학과)
Publication Information
Journal of the Korean Society for information Management / v.35, no.4, 2018 , pp. 107-124 More about this Journal
Abstract
Mendeley readership data could be used to understand how research outcome be spent outside of academia in multi way. So it could be utilized to understand unknown world which citation rate could not explain still now. This study, by conducting a country network analysis using Mendeley's co readership data about articles of Korea related research, clusters countries that share common academic interest. As a result, the US and other advanced countries in all fields showed high overall and regional centrality, indicating that they have overall cooperation and potential for exchange of Korea related studies. Some developing countries have shown high regional centrality and are linked to common academic interests. In the medical and social sciences, the OECD and developing countries have formed a separate group of readers, and the engineering sector has been characterized by emerging developing countries as a large community of readers. In addition, engineering science field has shown that network density is relatively high, so there might be high possibility of academic exchanges, knowledge dissemination and cooperation among countries.
Keywords
Mendeley; co-readership; network analysis; altmetrics;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Lee, Jae Yun (2006). A novel clustering method for examining and analyzing the intellectual structure of a scholarly field. Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management, 23(4), 215-231. https://doi.org/10.3743/kosim.2006.23.4.215   DOI
2 Lee, Jae Yun (2013). A comparison study on the weighted networkd centrality measures of tnet and WNET. Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management, 30(4), 241-264. https://doi.org/10.3743/kosim.2013.30.4.241   DOI
3 Jeong, Dae-hyun, Kwon, Young-il, Hong, Soon-ki, & Cho, Keuntae (2014). An analysis of the effect of density of the joint research network between countries on technology diffusion: Focusing on the case of secondary battery and the electric vehicle field. Journal of the Korea Contents Association, 14(9), 582-588. https://doi.org/10.5392/jkca.2014.14.09.582   DOI
4 Cho, Jane (2015). A study about scholarly impact measurement through altmetrics. Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society, 46(1), 65-81. https://doi.org/10.16981/kliss.46.1.201503.65   DOI
5 Cho, Jane (2017). Study on readers about library and information science fields' articles by analyzing mendeley. Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society, 48(1), 77-97. https://doi.org/10.16981/kliss.48.1.201703.77   DOI
6 Bornmann, L. (2015). Alternative metrics in scientometrics: A meta-analysis of research into three altmetrics. Scientometrics, 103(3), 1123-1144.   DOI
7 Cho, Jane. (2017). A comparative study of the impact of Korean research articles in four academic fields using altmetrics. Performance Measurement and Metrics, 18(1), 38-51.   DOI
8 Hammarfelt, B. (2014). Using altmetrics for assessing research impact in the humanities. Scientometrics, 101(2), 1419-1430.   DOI
9 Haunschild, R., & Bornmann, L. (2015). F1000Prime: An analysis of discipline-specific reader data from Mendeley [version 2; referees: 1 approved with reservations, 1 not approved]. F1000Research. http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.6062.2   DOI
10 Haunschild, R., Bornmann, L., & Leydesdorff, L. (2015). Networks of reader and country status: An analysis of Mendeley reader statistics. PeerJ Computer Science, 1, 32. https://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.32   DOI
11 Haustein, S., Costas, R., & Lariviere, V. (2015). Characterizing social media metrics of scholarly papers: The effect of document properties and collaboration patterns. PLOS ONE, 10(3). https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0120495
12 Kraker P., Schlogl C., Jack K., & Lindstaedt S. (2015). Visualization of co-readership patterns from an online reference management system. Journal of Informetrics, 9(1), 169-182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2014.12.003   DOI
13 Leydesdorff, L., Heimeriks, G., & Rotolo, D. (2016) Journal portfolio analysis for countries, cities, and organizations: Maps and comparisons. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 67(3), 741-748. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.23551   DOI
14 Zahedi, Z., Costas, R., & Wouters, P. (2014). How well developed are altmetrics? A cross-disciplinary analysis of the presence of 'alternative metrics' in scientific publications. Scientometrics, 101(2), 1491-1513. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1264-0   DOI
15 Li, X., & Thelwall, M. (2012). F1000, Mendeley and traditional bibliometric indicators. Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators, Montreal, 541-551.
16 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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.23071   DOI
17 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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.23071   DOI
18 Mohammadi, E., Thelwall, M., Haustein, S., & Lariviere, V. (2015). Who reads research articles? An altmetrics analysis of mendeley user categories. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 66(9), 1832-1846. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.23286   DOI
19 Sud, P., & Thelwall, M. (2015). Not all international collaboration is beneficial: The Mendeley readership and citation impact of biochemical research collaboration. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(8), 1849-1857. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.23515   DOI