Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

BitView: Using Blockchain Technology to Validate and Diffuse Global Usage Data for Academic Publications

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Maturity and Innovation in Digital Libraries (ICADL 2018)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 11279))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

We suggest that blockchain technology could be used to underpin a validated, reliable, and transparent usage metric for research outputs. Previous attempts to create online usage metrics have been unsuccessful largely because it has been difficult to co-ordinate agreement between all parties on the rules of data collection and the distribution of the workload of data synthesis and dissemination. Blockchain technology can be utilized to bypass this co-ordination problem. We propose the creation of a bibliometric blockchain (called BitView) which forms a decentralized ledger of the online usage of scholarly research outputs. By means of a worked example, we demonstrate how this blockchain could ensure that all parties adhere to the same rules of data collection, and that the workload of data synthesis is distributed equitably. Moreover, we outline how public-private key cryptography could ensure that users’ data remains private while librarians, academics, publishers, and research funders retain open access to all the data they require. It is concluded that a usage metric underpinned by blockchain technology may lead to a richer and healthier ecosystem in which publishers and academics are incentivized to widen access to their research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 74.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Some readers may be aware that Bitcoin is highly resource-intensive – according to some estimates consuming as much electricity as the country of New Zealand. This is because, being a public blockchain, “miners” are required to perform computationally expensive cryptographic calculations in order to provide “proof-of-work”. By using a consortium blockchain model, BitView has no miners nor the requirement to provide proof-of-work, and therefore its energy requirements will be very modest.

References

  1. Seglen, P.O.: Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. Br. Med. J. 314(7079), 498–502 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. The PLoS Medicine Editors. The impact factor game. PLoS Med. 3(6), e291 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Arnold, D.A., Fowler, K.K.: Nefarious numbers. Not. Am. Math. Soc. 58, 434–437 (2011)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Martin, B.R.: Editors’ JIF-boosting stratagems – which are appropriate and which not? Res. Policy 45(1), 1–7 (2016)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Vanclay, J.: Impact factor: outdated artefact or stepping-stone to journal certification? Scientometrics 32(2), 211–238 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bergstrom, C.T.: Eigenfactor: measuring the value and prestige of scholarly journals. College Res. Libr. News 68(5), 314–316 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Zijlstra, H., McCullough, R.: CiteScore: A New Metric to Help You Track Journal Performance and Make Decisions (2016). https://www.elsevier.com/editors-update/story/journal-metrics/citescore-a-new-metric-to-help-you-choose-the-right-journal

  8. Trueger, N.S., Thoma, B., Hsu, C.H., Sullivan, S., Peters, L., Lin, M.: The altmetric score: a new measure for article-level dissemination and impact. Ann. Emerg. Med. 66(5), 549–553 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Lindsey, D.: Using citation counts as a measure of quality in science: measuring what’s measurable rather than what’s valid. Scientometrics 15(3–4), 189–203 (1989)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bollen, J., Van de Sompel, H., Smith, J.A., Luce, R.: Toward alternative metrics of journal impact: a comparison of download and citation data. Inf. Process. Manag. 41(6), 1419–1440 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Kurtz, M.J., Bollen, J.: Usage bibliometrics. Annu. Rev. Inf. Sci. Technol. 44(1), 1–64 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Glänzel, W., Gorraiz, J.: Usage metrics versus altmetrics: confusing terminology? Scientometrics 102(3), 2161–2164 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Bollen, J., Van de Sompel, H.: Usage impact factor: the effects of sample characteristics on usage-based impact metrics. J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 59(1), 136–149 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Pesch, O.: Usage factor for journals: a new measure for scholarly impact. Ser. Libr. 63(3–4), 261–268 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Shepherd, P.: Altmetrics, PIRUS and usage factor. Insights 26(3), 305–310 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Fleming-May, R.A., Grogg, J.E.: Standards, tools, and other products. Libr. Technol. Rep. 46(6), 11–16 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Project COUNTER: The COUNTER Code of Practice for e-Resources: Release 4 (2012). https://www.projectcounter.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/COPR4.pdf

  18. Shepherd, P., Needham, P.: PIRUS2: Final Report (2011). http://www.cranfieldlibrary.cranfield.ac.uk/pirus2/

  19. MacIntyre, R., Alcock, J., Needham, P., Lambert, J.: Measuring the usage of repositories via a national standards-based aggregation service: IRUS-UK. In: Schmidt, B., Dobreva, M. (eds.) New Avenues for Electronic Publishing in the Age of Infinite Collections and Citizen Science: Scale, Openness and Trust: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Electronic Publishing, pp. 83–92. IOS Press, Amsterdam, Netherlands (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Needham, P., Stone, G.: IRUS-UK: making scholarly statistics count in UK repositories. Insights 25(3), 262–266 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Iansiti, M., Lakhani, K.R.: Truth about Blockchain. Harv. Bus. Rev. 95, 118–127 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Project COUNTER: Transition Timeline (2017). https://www.projectcounter.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/transition-timeline-005-1.pdf

  23. Davis, P.: The Journal Usage Factor—Think Locally, Act Locally (2011). http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2011/09/29/journal-usage-factor-think-locally-act-locally/

  24. Zeifman, I.: Bot Traffic Report 2016 (2016). https://www.incapsula.com/blog/bot-traffic-report-2016.html

  25. Foster, Z.: Academia.edu, personal communication (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Orcutt, M.: Who Will Build the Health-Care Blockchain? MIT Technology Review, September 2017. https://www.technologyreview.com/s/608821/who-will-build-the-health-care-blockchain/

  27. Heller, N.: Estonia, the Digital Republic, New Yorker, 18–25 December 2017. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/12/18/estonia-the-digital-republic

  28. Lerner, M.: Blockchain Technology Breaks Through. Business Insurance, 7 March 2017. http://www.businessinsurance.com/article/20170703/NEWS06/912314245/Blockchain-technology-breaks-through-to-the-insurance-industry

  29. Ayemoba, A.: Africa’s First Multinational Blockchain Land Registry to be Launched in Kenya and Ghana. Africa Business Communities, December 2017. https://africabusinesscommunities.com/news/africa%E2%80%99s-first-multinational-blockchain-land-registry-to-be-launched-in-kenya-and-ghana/

  30. Luther, L.: White paper on electronic journal usage statistics. Ser. Libr. 41(2), 119–148 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Peters, T.A.: What’s the use? The value of e-Resource usage statistics. New Libr. World 103(1–2), 39–47 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. McDowell, N., Gorman, G.E.: The relevance of vendors’ usage statistics in academic library e-resource management: a New Zealand study. Aust. Acad. Res. Libr. 35(4), 322–344 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Bohannon, J.: Who’s Downloading Pirated Papers? Everyone. Science, 28 April 2016. http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/04/whos-downloading-pirated-papers-everyone

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia

    Camillo Lamanna

  2. University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK

    Manfredi La Manna

Authors
  1. Camillo Lamanna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Manfredi La Manna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Camillo Lamanna .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University College London Qatar, Doha, Qatar

    Milena Dobreva

  2. University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand

    Annika Hinze

  3. University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia

    Maja Žumer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Lamanna, C., La Manna, M. (2018). BitView: Using Blockchain Technology to Validate and Diffuse Global Usage Data for Academic Publications. In: Dobreva, M., Hinze, A., Žumer, M. (eds) Maturity and Innovation in Digital Libraries. ICADL 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11279. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04257-8_28

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04257-8_28

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-04256-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-04257-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation