Content Analysis of References: Adjunct or Alternative to Citation Counting?

TL;DR: A new framework for citation content analysis (CCA) is proposed, for syntactic and semantic analysis of citation content that can be used to better analyze the rich sociocultural context of research behavior.

TL;DR: Whether one such altmetric, Mendeley readership counts, correlates strongly with citation counts across all medical fields, whether the relationship is stronger if student readers are excluded, and whether they are distributed similarly to citation counts is assessed.

TL;DR: It is concluded that citations measure recognition of a piece of work by the international scientific community, but are also influenced by publication structures, citation conventions and social relations in the scientific community.

TL;DR: In this article, a distinction is made among scientific activity, scientific productivity, and scientific progress, and it is suggested that the above measures might depend on the particular field of science, on the speed whereby research front information becomes archival, the phenomena of wrong papers and of ‘also ran’ papers, on geographical differences in communication patterns, on whether we want to measure activity, productivity, or progress.

TL;DR: The connection between the organization of the informal communication system and the reward system may be seen by looking at data which shows which type of groups are, on the average, 'over' recognised for their scientific productivity and which are 'under' recognised as discussed by the authors.