research data explored ii: the anatomy and reception of figshare
Post on 22-Jan-2018
939 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
1
b
b
www.know-center.at
Research Data Explored II: the Anatomy
and Reception of figshare20th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators
Lugano, 4 September 2015
Peter Kraker, Elisabeth Lex, Juan Gorraiz,
Christian Gumpenberger, Isabella Peters
2
Meet the Project Team
2Know-Center GmbH • Research Center for Data-Driven Business and Big Data Analytics
Isabella Peters
ZBW Leibniz Information Centre
for Economics
Elisabeth Lex
Graz University of Technology
Juan Gorraiz
University of Vienna
Christian Gumpenberger
University of Vienna
Peter Kraker
Know-Center
3
Series: Research Data Explored
Analysis of bibliometrics properties
of research data
Part I: “Citations vs. Altmetrics“
(ISSI 2015)
• Analysis of Data Citation Index (DCI)
• Basic analysis for all items published from 1960-2014 (n=3,966,019);
detailed analysis for all items with 2+ citations (n=10,934)
• Results
• Research data mostly uncited (~ 85%)
• Altmetrics “foot-prints” for cited research data is even lower (4-9%)
• Growing trend in citing data sets published since 2008
• None of the items from figshare has received more than one citation in
the DCI
3Know-Center GmbH • Research Center for Data-Driven Business and Big Data Analytics
10.1371/journal.pbio.1001779.g001
44Know-Center GmbH • Research Center for Data-Driven Business and Big Data Analytics
5
Basic Overview of figshare
5Know-Center GmbH • Research Center for Data-Driven Business and Big Data Analytics
Multidisciplinary repository for research materials
Free storage space for private use (limited) & free storage space
for publicly shared materials under an open license (unlimited)
Publicly shared materials get automatically allocated a DataCite
DOI
6
Research Questions
How are document types distributed in figshare? How
have different types developed over time? Who are the
main providers of items in figshare?
How are usage data distributed in figshare? How are
they correlated?
To what extent are figshare items visible on various
altmetrics channels? Do results from providers of
altmetric scores differ?
6Know-Center GmbH • Research Center for Data-Driven Business and Big Data Analytics
7
Data & Method
Basic metadata for all publicly available records up until
(excluding) December 2, 2014 (n=1,092,808 items)
Descriptive statistics on the following fields: defined_type,
published_date, DOI
Extended metadata for all datasets and filesets with a single DOI
(n=266,961 items)
• Descriptive statistics on the following fields: categories,
downloads, views
• Correlation analysis of downloads and views
Top 500 downloaded/top 500 viewed items analysed with PlumX
and ImpactStory (n=747 unique items)
• Descriptive statistics on coverage and altmetric scores
7Know-Center GmbH • Research Center for Data-Driven Business and Big Data Analytics
figshare datasets are available online:
10.6084/m9.figshare.1320834
8
ANALYSIS OF BASIC
METADATA
RESULTS
8
9
Results – DOI Providers
9Know-Center GmbH • Research Center for Data-Driven Business and Big Data Analytics
n=1,092,808 items
10
Results – Document Types per Year (2006-2013)
10Know-Center GmbH • Research Center for Data-Driven Business and Big Data Analytics
n=818,108 items
11
Results – Document Types per DOI Provider
11Know-Center GmbH • Research Center for Data-Driven Business and Big Data Analytics
n=1,092,667 items
12
ANALYSIS OF EXTENDED
METADATA FOR
DATASETS AND FILESETS
RESULTS
12
13
Results – Distribution of Disciplines among Datasets
and Filesets
13Know-Center GmbH • Research Center for Data-Driven Business and Big Data Analytics
n=266,874 items
14
Results – Distribution of Downloads/Views for
Datasets and Filesets
14Know-Center GmbH • Research Center for Data-Driven Business and Big Data Analytics
Of 266,961 entries, 102,148 (38.3%)
have 0 views and 0 downloads
Low correlation between downloads
and views – Spearman 0.28
n=266,961 items
95.8% of these are from PLOS
15
ANALYSIS OF ALTMETRICS
FOR MOST USED
DATASETS AND FILESETS
RESULTS
15
16
Results – ImpactStory
16Know-Center GmbH • Research Center for Data-Driven Business and Big Data Analytics
n=455 items
17
Results – PlumX
17Know-Center GmbH • Research Center for Data-Driven Business and Big Data Analytics
n=757 items
18
Results – PlumX
18Know-Center GmbH • Research Center for Data-Driven Business and Big Data Analytics
n=757 items
19
CONCLUSIONS
19
20
Study Conclusions
figshare has three different basic functions
1. Personal repository for yet unpublished materials
2. Platform for newly published research materials
3. Archive for PLOS
Different functions are important in the interpretation of results
• Top 3 disciplines overall (datasets & filesets): Biological
Sciences, Chemistry, Earth Sciences (88.9%)
• Top 3 disciplines discarding PLOS: Biological Sciences,
Engineering, Social Science (58.2%)
Most shared type of research material is “image”, not “dataset”
20Know-Center GmbH • Research Center for Data-Driven Business and Big Data Analytics
21
Study Conclusions
Altmetrics analysis
• Most social media mentions of popular research data on Twitter
• Upward trend in overall altmetrics scores (highest scores in
2014)
• PlumX detects more items and finds higher scores than
ImpactStory
21Know-Center GmbH • Research Center for Data-Driven Business and Big Data Analytics
22
Series Conclusions (so far…)
General trend towards sharing research data, but most
research data remain not only uncited but also
unviewed/not downloaded
Corresponding altmetrics scores for most cited,
downloaded and viewed research data are very low; overall
the numbers have been increasing within the last 3 years
The results of the comparison of PlumX and ImpactStory
are very similar; in general, comparison of altmetrics tools
is difficult due to the incoherence of tools
22Know-Center GmbH • Research Center for Data-Driven Business and Big Data Analytics
23
b
Thank you for your attention!
Peter Kraker
pkraker@know-center.at
Twitter: @PeterKraker
top related