BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Mike Thelwall

Mike Thelwall contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Digital LibrariesSocial and Information Networkscs.CYphysics.soc-phComputation and LanguageHuman-Computer InteractionInformation Retrieval

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
16works
0followers
7topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

16 published item(s)

preprint2021arXiv

Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations' COCI: a multidisciplinary comparison of coverage via citations

New sources of citation data have recently become available, such as Microsoft Academic, Dimensions, and the OpenCitations Index of CrossRef open DOI-to-DOI citations (COCI). Although these have been compared to the Web of Science (WoS), Scopus, or Google Scholar, there is no systematic evidence of their differences across subject categories. In response, this paper investigates 3,073,351 citations found by these six data sources to 2,515 English-language highly-cited documents published in 2006 from 252 subject categories, expanding and updating the largest previous study. Google Scholar found 88% of all citations, many of which were not found by the other sources, and nearly all citations found by the remaining sources (89%-94%). A similar pattern held within most subject categories. Microsoft Academic is the second largest overall (60% of all citations), including 82% of Scopus citations and 86% of Web of Science citations. In most categories, Microsoft Academic found more citations than Scopus and WoS (182 and 223 subject categories, respectively), but had coverage gaps in some areas, such as Physics and some Humanities categories. After Scopus, Dimensions is fourth largest (54% of all citations), including 84% of Scopus citations and 88% of WoS citations. It found more citations than Scopus in 36 categories, more than WoS in 185, and displays some coverage gaps, especially in the Humanities. Following WoS, COCI is the smallest, with 28% of all citations. Google Scholar is still the most comprehensive source. In many subject categories Microsoft Academic and Dimensions are good alternatives to Scopus and WoS in terms of coverage.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

A gender equality paradox in academic publishing: Countries with a higher proportion of female first-authored journal articles have larger first author gender disparities between fields

Current attempts to address the shortfall of female researchers in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) have not yet succeeded despite other academic subjects having female majorities. This article investigates the extent to which gender disparities are subject-wide or nation-specific by a first author gender comparison of 30 million articles from all 27 Scopus broad fields within the 31 countries with the most Scopus-indexed articles 2014-18. The results show overall and geocultural patterns as well as individual national differences. Almost half of the subjects were always more male (7; e.g., Mathematics) or always more female (6; e.g., Immunology & Microbiology) than the national average. A strong overall trend (Spearman correlation 0.546) is for countries with a higher proportion of female first-authored research to also have larger differences in gender disparities between fields (correlation 0.314 for gender ratios). This confirms the international gender equality paradox previously found for degree subject choices: increased gender equality overall associates with moderately greater gender differentiation between subjects. This is consistent with previous USA-based claims that gender differences in academic careers are partly due to (socially constrained) gender differences in personal preferences. Radical solutions may therefore be needed for some STEM subjects to overcome gender disparities.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

All downhill from the PhD? The typical impact trajectory of US academic careers

Within academia, mature researchers tend to be more senior, but do they also tend to write higher impact articles? This article assesses long-term publishing (16+ years) United States (US) researchers, contrasting them with shorter-term publishing researchers (1, 6 or 10 years). A long-term US researcher is operationalised as having a first Scopus-indexed journal article in exactly 2001 and one in 2016-2019, with US main affiliations in their first and last articles. Researchers publishing in large teams (11+ authors) were excluded. The average field and year normalised citation impact of long- and shorter-term US researchers' journal articles decreases over time relative to the national average, with especially large falls to the last articles published that may be at least partly due to a decline in self-citations. In many cases researchers start by publishing above US average citation impact research and end by publishing below US average citation impact research. Thus, research managers should not assume that senior researchers will usually write the highest impact papers.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Coronavirus research before 2020 is more relevant than ever, especially when interpreted for COVID-19

The speed with which biomedical researchers were able to identify and characterise COVID-19 was clearly due to prior research with other coronaviruses. Early epidemiological comparisons with two previous coronaviruses, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), also made it easier to predict COVID-19's likely spread and lethality. This article assesses whether academic interest in prior coronavirus research has translated into interest in the primary source material, using Mendeley reader counts for early academic impact evidence. The results confirm that SARS and MERS research 2008-2017 experienced anomalously high increases in Mendeley readers in April-May 2020. Nevertheless, studies learning COVID-19 lessons from SARS and MERS or using them as a benchmark for COVID-19 have generated much more academic interest than primary studies of SARS or MERS. Thus, research that interprets prior relevant research for new diseases when they are discovered seems to be particularly important to help researchers to understand its implications in the new context.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

COVID-19 publications: Database coverage, citations, readers, tweets, news, Facebook walls, Reddit posts

The COVID-19 pandemic requires a fast response from researchers to help address biological, medical and public health issues to minimize its impact. In this rapidly evolving context, scholars, professionals and the public may need to quickly identify important new studies. In response, this paper assesses the coverage of scholarly databases and impact indicators during 21 March to 18 April 2020. The results confirm a rapid increase in the volume of research, which particularly accessible through Google Scholar and Dimensions, and less through Scopus, the Web of Science, PubMed. A few COVID-19 papers from the 21,395 in Dimensions were already highly cited, with substantial news and social media attention. For this topic, in contrast to previous studies, there seems to be a high degree of convergence between articles shared in the social web and citation counts, at least in the short term. In particular, articles that are extensively tweeted on the day first indexed are likely to be highly read and relatively highly cited three weeks later. Researchers needing wide scope literature searches (rather than health focused PubMed or medRxiv searches) should start with Google Scholar or Dimensions and can use tweet and Mendeley reader counts as indicators of likely importance.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Covid-19 Tweeting in English: Gender Differences

At the start of 2020, COVID-19 became the most urgent threat to global public health. Uniquely in recent times, governments have imposed partly voluntary, partly compulsory restrictions on the population to slow the spread of the virus. In this context, public attitudes and behaviors are vitally important for reducing the death rate. Analyzing tweets about the disease may therefore give insights into public reactions that may help guide public information campaigns. This article analyses 3,038,026 English tweets about COVID-19 from March 10 to 23, 2020. It focuses on one relevant aspect of public reaction: gender differences. The results show that females are more likely to tweet about the virus in the context of family, social distancing and healthcare whereas males are more likely to tweet about sports cancellations, the global spread of the virus and political reactions. Thus, women seem to be taking a disproportionate share of the responsibility for directly keeping the population safe. The detailed results may be useful to inform public information announcements and to help understand the spread of the virus. For example, failure to impose a sporting bans whilst encouraging social distancing may send mixed messages to males.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Pot, kettle: Nonliteral titles aren't (natural) science

Researchers may be tempted to attract attention through poetic titles for their publications, but would this be mistaken in some fields? Whilst poetic titles are known to be common in medicine, it is not clear whether the practice is widespread elsewhere. This article investigates the prevalence of poetic expressions in journal article titles 1996-2019 in 3.3 million articles from all 27 Scopus broad fields. Expressions were identified by manually checking all phrases with at least 5 words that occurred at least 25 times, finding 149 stock phrases, idioms, sayings, literary allusions, film names and song titles or lyrics. The expressions found are most common in the social sciences and the humanities. They are also relatively common in medicine, but almost absent from engineering and the natural and formal sciences. The differences may reflect the less hierarchical and more varied nature of the social sciences and humanities, where interesting titles may attract an audience. In engineering, natural science and formal science fields, authors should take extra care with poetic expressions, in case their choice is judged inappropriate. This includes interdisciplinary research overlapping these areas. Conversely, reviewers of interdisciplinary research involving the social sciences should be more tolerant of poetic license.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2019arXiv

Should Citations be Counted Separately from Each Originating Section

Articles are cited for different purposes and differentiating between reasons when counting citations may therefore give finer-grained citation count information. Although identifying and aggregating the individual reasons for each citation may be impractical, recording the number of citations that originate from different article sections might illuminate the general reasons behind a citation count (e.g., 110 citations = 10 Introduction citations + 100 Methods citations). To help investigate whether this could be a practical and universal solution, this article compares 19 million citations with DOIs from six different standard sections in 799,055 PubMed Central open access articles across 21 out of 22 fields. There are apparently non-systematic differences between fields in the most citing sections and the extent to which citations from one section overlap with citations from another, with some degree of overlap in most cases. Thus, at a science-wide level, section headings are partly unreliable indicators of citation context, even if they are more standard within individual fields. They may still be used within fields to help identify individual highly cited articles that have had one type of impact, especially methodological (Methods) or context setting (Introduction), but expert judgement is needed to validate the results.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2019arXiv

The rhetorical structure of science? A multidisciplinary analysis of article headings

An effective structure helps an article to convey its core message. The optimal structure depends on the information to be conveyed and the expectations of the audience. In the current increasingly interdisciplinary era, structural norms can be confusing to the authors, reviewers and audiences of scientific articles. Despite this, no prior study has attempted to assess variations in the structure of academic papers across all disciplines. This article reports on the headings commonly used by over 1 million research articles from the PubMed Central Open Access collection, spanning 22 broad categories covering all academia and 172 out of 176 narrow categories. The results suggest that no headings are close to ubiquitous in any broad field and that there are substantial differences in the extent to which most headings are used. In the humanities, headings may be avoided altogether. Researchers should therefore be aware of unfamiliar structures that are nevertheless legitimate when reading, writing and reviewing articles.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

The role of handbooks in knowledge creation and diffusion: A case of science and technology studies

Genre is considered to be an important element in scholarly communication and in the practice of scientific disciplines. However, scientometric studies have typically focused on a single genre, the journal article. The goal of this study is to understand the role that handbooks play in knowledge creation and diffusion and their relationship with the genre of journal articles, particularly in highly interdisciplinary and emergent social science and humanities disciplines. To shed light on these questions we focused on handbooks and journal articles published over the last four decades belonging to the research area of Science and Technology Studies (STS), broadly defined. To get a detailed picture we used the full-text of five handbooks (500,000 words) and a well-defined set of 11,700 STS articles. We confirmed the methodological split of STS into qualitative and quantitative (scientometric) approaches. Even when the two traditions explore similar topics (e.g., science and gender) they approach them from different starting points. The change in cognitive foci in both handbooks and articles partially reflects the changing trends in STS research, often driven by technology. Using text similarity measures we found that, in the case of STS, handbooks play no special role in either focusing the research efforts or marking their decline. In general, they do not represent the summaries of research directions that have emerged since the previous edition of the handbook.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Mapping the network structure of science parks: An exploratory study of cross-sectoral interactions reflected on the web

This study introduces a method based on link analysis to investigate the structure of the R&D support infrastructure associated with science parks in order to determine whether this webometric approach gives plausible results. Three science parks from Yorkshire and the Humber in the UK were analysed with webometric and social network analysis techniques. Interlinking networks were generated through the combination of two different data sets extracted from three sources (Yahoo!, Bing, SocSciBot). These networks suggest that institutional sectors, representing business, universities and public bodies, are primarily tied together by a core formed by research institutions, support structure organisations and business developers. The comparison of the findings with traditional indicators suggests that the web-based networks reflect the offline conditions and policy measures adopted in the region, giving some evidence that the webometric approach is plausible to investigating science park networks. This is the first study that applies a web-based approach to investigate to what extent the science parks facilitate a closer interaction between the heterogeneous organisations that converge in R&D networks. This indicates that link analysis may help to get a first insight into the organisation of the R&D support infrastructure provided by science parks.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Motivation for hyperlink creation using inter-page relationships

Using raw hyperlink counts for webometrics research has been shown to be unreliable and researchers have looked for alternatives. One alternative is classifying hyperlinks in a website based on the motivation behind the hyperlink creation. The method used for this type of classification involves manually visiting a webpage and then classifying individual links on the webpage. This is time consuming, making it infeasible for large scale studies. This paper speeds up the classification of hyperlinks in UK academic websites by using a machine learning technique, decision tree induction, to group web pages found in UK academic websites into one of eight categories and then infer the motivation for the creation of a hyperlink in a webpage based on the linking pattern of the category the webpage belongs to.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

The entrepreneurial role of the University: a link analysis of York Science Park

This study introduces a structured analysis of science parks as arenas designed to stimulate institutional collaboration and the commercialization of academic knowledge and technology, and the promotion of social welfare. A framework for key actors and their potential behaviour in this context is introduced based on the Triple Helix (TH) model and related literature. A link analysis was conducted to build an inter-linking network that may map the infrastructure support network through the online interactions of the organisations involved in York Science Park. A comparison between the framework and the diagram shows that the framework can be used to identify most of the actors and assess their interconnections. The web patterns found correspond to previous evaluations based on traditional indicators and suggest that the network, which is developed to foster and support innovation, arises from the functional cooperation between the University of York and regional authorities, which both serve as the major driving forces in the trilateral linkages and the development of an innovation infrastructure.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Tweeting biomedicine: an analysis of tweets and citations in the biomedical literature

Data collected by social media platforms have recently been introduced as a new source for indicators to help measure the impact of scholarly research in ways that are complementary to traditional citation-based indicators. Data generated from social media activities related to scholarly content can be used to reflect broad types of impact. This paper aims to provide systematic evidence regarding how often Twitter is used to diffuse journal articles in the biomedical and life sciences. The analysis is based on a set of 1.4 million documents covered by both PubMed and Web of Science (WoS) and published between 2010 and 2012. The number of tweets containing links to these documents was analyzed to evaluate the degree to which certain journals, disciplines, and specialties were represented on Twitter. It is shown that, with less than 10% of PubMed articles mentioned on Twitter, its uptake is low in general. The relationship between tweets and WoS citations was examined for each document at the level of journals and specialties. The results show that tweeting behavior varies between journals and specialties and correlations between tweets and citations are low, implying that impact metrics based on tweets are different from those based on citations. A framework utilizing the coverage of articles and the correlation between Twitter mentions and citations is proposed to facilitate the evaluation of novel social-media based metrics and to shed light on the question in how far the number of tweets is a valid metric to measure research impact.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2011arXiv

Collective emotions online and their influence on community life

E-communities, social groups interacting online, have recently become an object of interdisciplinary research. As with face-to-face meetings, Internet exchanges may not only include factual information but also emotional information - how participants feel about the subject discussed or other group members. Emotions are known to be important in affecting interaction partners in offline communication in many ways. Could emotions in Internet exchanges affect others and systematically influence quantitative and qualitative aspects of the trajectory of e-communities? The development of automatic sentiment analysis has made large scale emotion detection and analysis possible using text messages collected from the web. It is not clear if emotions in e-communities primarily derive from individual group members' personalities or if they result from intra-group interactions, and whether they influence group activities. We show the collective character of affective phenomena on a large scale as observed in 4 million posts downloaded from Blogs, Digg and BBC forums. To test whether the emotions of a community member may influence the emotions of others, posts were grouped into clusters of messages with similar emotional valences. The frequency of long clusters was much higher than it would be if emotions occurred at random. Distributions for cluster lengths can be explained by preferential processes because conditional probabilities for consecutive messages grow as a power law with cluster length. For BBC forum threads, average discussion lengths were higher for larger values of absolute average emotional valence in the first ten comments and the average amount of emotion in messages fell during discussions. Our results prove that collective emotional states can be created and modulated via Internet communication and that emotional expressiveness is the fuel that sustains some e-communities.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2011arXiv

Negative emotions boost users activity at BBC Forum

We present an empirical study of user activity in online BBC discussion forums, measured by the number of posts written by individual debaters and the average sentiment of these posts. Nearly 2.5 million posts from over 18 thousand users were investigated. Scale free distributions were observed for activity in individual discussion threads as well as for overall activity. The number of unique users in a thread normalized by the thread length decays with thread length, suggesting that thread life is sustained by mutual discussions rather than by independent comments. Automatic sentiment analysis shows that most posts contain negative emotions and the most active users in individual threads express predominantly negative sentiments. It follows that the average emotion of longer threads is more negative and that threads can be sustained by negative comments. An agent based computer simulation model has been used to reproduce several essential characteristics of the analyzed system. The model stresses the role of discussions between users, especially emotionally laden quarrels between supporters of opposite opinions, and represents many observed statistics of the forum.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access