Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Usage versus citation behaviours in four subject areas

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study puts an emphasis on the disciplinary differences observed for the behaviour of citations and downloads. This was exemplified by studying citations over the last 10 years in four selected fields, namely, arts and humanities, computer science, economics, econometrics, and finance, and oncology. Differences in obsolescence characteristics were studied using synchronic as well as diachronic counts. Furthermore, differences between document types were taken into consideration and correlations between journal impact and journal usage measures were calculated. The number of downloads per document remains almost constant for all four observed areas within the last four years, varying from approximately 180 (oncology) to 300 (economics). The percentage of downloaded documents is higher than 90 % for all areas. The number of citations per document ranges from one (arts and humanities) to three (oncology). The percentages of cited documents range from 40 to 56 %. According to our study, 50–140 downloads correspond to one citation. A differentiation according to document type reveals further download- and citation-specific characteristics for the observed subject areas. This study points to the fact that citations can only measure the impact in the ‘publish or perish’ community; however, this approach is neither applicable to the whole scientific community nor to society in general. Downloads may not be a perfect proxy to estimate the overall usage. Nevertheless, they measure at least the intention to use the downloaded material, which is invaluable information in order to better understand publication and communication processes. Usage metrics should consider the unique nature of downloads and ought to reflect their intrinsic differences from citations.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Besides the four subject categories already mentioned, we were also provided with the data for eight psychology journals which were included in this analysis. However, due to their small number, we did not consider them as their own subject category.

References

  • Bollen, J., & Van de Sompel, H. (2008). Usage impact factor: The effects of sample characteristics on usage-based impact metrics. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(1), 136–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, J., Van de Sompel, H., Smith, J. A., & Luce, R. (2005). Toward alternative metrics of journal impact: A comparison of download and citation data. Information Processing and Management, 41, 1419–1440. http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/papers/ipm05jb-final.pdf. Accessed 26 Nov 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brody, T., Harnad, S., & Carr, L. (2006). Earlier web usage statistics as predictors of later citation impact. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(8), 1060–1072.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chu, H., & Krichel, T. (2007). Downloads vs. citations in economics: Relationships, contributing factors and beyond. In D. Torres-Salinas & H.F. Moed (Eds.), Proceedings of the 11th International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics Conference (pp. 207–215). Madrid, Spain.

  • Coats, A. J. S. (2008). The top papers by download and citations from the International Journal of Cardiology in 2007. International Journal of Cardiology, 131, e1–e3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coombs, K. A. (2005). Lessons learned from analyzing library database usage data. Library Hi Tech, 23(4), 598–609.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Darmoni, S. J., Roussel, F., Benichou, J., Thirion, B., & Pinhas, N. (2002). Reading factor: A new bibliometric criterion for managing digital libraries. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 90(3), 323–327.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duy, J., & Vaughan, L. (2006). Can electronic journal usage data replace citation data as a measure of journal use? An empirical examination. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 32(5), 512–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gorraiz, J., & Gumpenberger, C. (2010). Going beyond citations: SERUM—a new tool provided by a network of libraries. Liber Quarterly, 20, 80–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorraiz, J., Gumpenberger, C., & Schlögl, C. (2013). Difference and similarities in usage versus citation behaviours observed for five subject areas. In J. Gorraiz, E. Schiebel, C. Gumpenberger, M. Hörlesberger, & H. Moed (Eds.), Proceedings of the 14th International Society of Scientometrics and Informetrics Conference, Vienna, 15th-18th July (Vol. 1, pp. 519–535). Austria: Vienna.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guerrero-Bote, V. P., & Moya-Anegón, F. (2013). Relationship between downloads and citation and the influence of language. In J. Gorraiz, E. Schiebel, C. Gumpenberger, M. Hörlesberger, & H. Moed (Eds.), Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, 15th-18th Jul (Vol. 2, pp. 1469–1484). Austria: Vienna.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haustein, S. (2011). Taking a multidimensional approach toward journal evaluation. In Proceedings of the 13th ISSI Conference, Durban, South Africa, 4th–7th July, Vol. 1 (pp. 280–291); Durban, South Africa.

  • Haustein, S. (2012). Using social bookmarks and tags as alternative indicators of journal content description. First Monday, 17- 5 November 2012; http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/4110; Accessed 25 Feb 2014.

  • Haustein, S., & Siebenlist, T. (2011). Applying social bookmarking data to evaluate journal usage. Journal of Informetrics, 5(3), 446–457.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kraemer, A. (2006). Ensuring consistent usage statistics, part 2: working with use data for electronic journals. The Serials Librarian, 50(1/2), 163–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurtz, M. J., & Bollen, J. (2010). Usage biliometrics. Annual review of information science and technology, 44, 3–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurtz, M. J., Eichhorn, G., Accomazzi, A., Grant, C., Demleitner, M., Murray, S. S., et al. (2005). The bibliometric properties of article readership information. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 56(2), 111–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mcdonald, J. D. (2007). Understanding journal usage: A statistical analysis of citation and use. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(1), 39–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moed, H. F. (2005). Statistical relationships between downloads and citations at the level of individual documents within a single journal. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 56(10), 1088–1097.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Leary, D. E. (2008). The relationship between citations and number of downloads in Decision Support Systems. Decision Support Systems, 45(4), 972–980.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Rowlands, I., & Nicholas, D. (2007). The missing link: Journal usage metrics. Aslib Proceedings, 59(3), 222–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schloegl, C., & Gorraiz, J. (2010). Comparison of citation and usage indicators: The case of oncology journals. Scientometrics, 82(3), 567–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schloegl, C., & Gorraiz, J. (2011). Global usage versus global citation metrics: The case of pharmacology journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(1), 161–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wan, J. K., Hua, P. H., Rousseau, R., & Sun, X. K. (2010). The download immediacy index (DII): Experiences using the CNKI full-text database. Scientometrics, 82(3), 555–566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, A. B. (2009). Comparing citations and downloads for individual articles. Journal of Vision, 9(4), 1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This paper is partly based on anonymised ScienceDirect usage data and/or Scopus citation data kindly provided by Elsevier within the framework of the EBRP.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Vienna University Library, Bibliometrics Department, University of Vienna, Boltzmanngasse 5, 1090, Vienna, Austria

    Juan Gorraiz & Christian Gumpenberger

  2. Institute of Information Science and Information Systems, University of Graz, Universitätsstr. 15, 8010, Graz, Austria

    Christian Schlögl

Authors
  1. Juan Gorraiz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christian Gumpenberger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Christian Schlögl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Juan Gorraiz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gorraiz, J., Gumpenberger, C. & Schlögl, C. Usage versus citation behaviours in four subject areas. Scientometrics 101, 1077–1095 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1271-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1271-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation