Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Usage pattern comparison of the same scholarly articles between Web of Science (WoS) and Springer

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 28 November 2019

This article has been updated

Abstract

Usage metrics have become increasingly popular in scientometric in recent years. While most current researches are limited to one single publisher or citation index database. In this study, the usage metrics are extended from one single platform to multiple platforms. We collect and analyze the usage counts of twenty journals in the field of biomedicine, computer, engineering and mathematics respectively from Springer and Web of Science (WoS). Statistics, correlation analysis, Jaccard similarity coefficient and overlay mapping are combined to explore differences and similarities between WoS usage counts and Springer usage counts. It is found that compared with the pay-for-access WoS, users prefer to visit publisher websites by the free, convenient and quick routes, such as bookmarks or general search engines. Then it depicts that Springer usage counts have better stratification in disciplines than WoS usage counts and Springer usage counts are less skewedly distributed than WoS usage counts in most disciplines. It also reveals that there are certain relationships between WoS usage counts and Springer usage counts. Finally, it demonstrates that WoS and Springer share a broad user interests in common and WoS and Springer also have their own unique user interests.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

  • 28 November 2019

    In the original publication of the article, the ���Acknowledgement��� was omitted. The ���Acknowledgement��� reads as follows.

Notes

  1. http://images.webofknowledge.com/WOKRS519B3/help/WOK/hp_usage_score.html.

  2. https://link.springer.com/.

  3. http://www.springer.com/about+springer/media/pressreleases?SGWID=0-11002-6-1046221-0.

  4. http://www.vosviewer.com/.

References

  • Adie, E., & Roe, W. (2013). Altmetric: Enriching scholarly content with article-level discussion and metrics. Learned Publishing, 26(2), 11–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barjak, F., Li, X., & Thelwall, M. (2007). Which factors explain the web impact of scientists’ personal homepages? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(2), 200–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, J., Luce, R., Vermulapalli, S. S., & Xu, W. (2003). Usage analysis for the identification of research trends in digital libraries. D-Lib Magazine, 9(5), 1082–9873.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, J., Sompel, H. V. D., Smith, J. A., & Luce, R. (2005). Toward alternative metrics of journal impact: A comparison of download and citation data. Information Processing and Management, 41(6), 1419–1440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • Chi, P. S., & Glänzel, W. (2017). An empirical investigation of the associations among usage, scientific collaboration and citation impact. Scientometrics, 112(1), 403–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, P. M., & Price, J. S. (2006). eJournal interface can influence usage statistics: Implications for libraries, publishers, and project COUNTER. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(9), 1243–1248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, P. M., & Solla, L. R. (2003). An IP-level analysis of usage statistics for electronic journals in chemistry: Making inferences about user-behavior. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(11), 1062–1068.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Sordi, J. O., Conejero, M. A., & Meireles, M. (2016). Bibliometric indicators in the context of regional repositories: Proposing the D-index. Scientometrics, 107(1), 235–258.

    Article  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 

  • Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: Vosviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gorraiz, J., Gumpenberger, C., & Schlögl, C. (2014). Usage versus citation behaviours in four subject areas. Scientometrics, 101(2), 1077–1095.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henneken, E. A., & Kurtz, M. J. (2017). Usage bibliometrics as a tool to measure research activity. arXiv:1706.02153.

  • Khan, M. S., & Younas, M. (2017). Analyzing readers behaviour in downloading articles from IEEE digital library: A study of two selected journals in the field of education. Scientometrics, 110(3), 1523–1537.

    Article  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 bibliometrics. 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. (2005a). Worldwide use and impact of the NASA Astrophysics Data System Digital Library. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 56(1), 36–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurtz, M. J., & Henneken, E. A. (2017). Measuring metrics-a 40-year longitudinal cross-validation of citations, downloads, and peer review in astrophysics. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68(3), 695–708.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lippi, G., & Favaloro, E. J. (2013). Article downloads and citations: Is there any relationship? Clinica Chimica Acta, 415, 195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, X., Fang, H., & Wang, M. (2011). Correlation between download and citation and download-citation deviation phenomenon for some papers in Chinese medical journals. Serials Review, 37(3), 157–161.

    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 

  • Moed, H. F., & Halevi, G. (2016). On full text download and citation distributions in scientific-scholarly journals. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(2), 412–431.

    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  Google Scholar 

  • Rowlands, I., & Nicholas, D. (2007). The missing link: Journal usage metrics. Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives, 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, 62(1), 161–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schloegl, C., Gorraiz, J., Gumpenberger, C., Jack, K., & Kraker, P. (2014). Comparison of downloads, citations, and readership data for two information systems journals. Scientometrics, 101(2), 1113–1128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Subotic, S., & Mukherjee, B. (2014). Short and amusing: The relationship between title characteristics, downloads, and citations in psychology articles. Journal of Information Science, 40(1), 115–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, M. (2013). Exploring the boundaries: How altmetrics can expand our vision of scholarly communication and social impact. Information Standards Quarterly, 25, 27–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, X., Fang, Z., & Guo, X. (2016a). Tracking the digital footprints to scholarly articles from social media. Scientometrics, 109(2), 1365–1376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, X., Fang, Z., & Sun, X. (2016b). Usage patterns of scholarly articles on web of science: A study on web of science usage count. Scientometrics, 109(2), 917–926.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, X., Liu, C., Mao, W., & Fang, Z. (2015). The open access advantage considering citation, article usage and social media attention. Scientometrics, 103(2), 555–564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, X., Mao, W., Xu, S., & Zhang, C. (2014a). Usage history of scientific literature: Nature metrics and metrics of Nature publications. Scientometrics, 98(3), 1923–1933.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, X., Peng, L., Zhang, C., Xu, S., Wang, Z., Wang, C., et al. (2013a). Exploring scientists’ working timetable: A global survey. Journal of Informetrics, 7(3), 665–675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, X., Wang, Z., Mao, W., & Liu, C. (2014b). How far does scientific community look back? Journal of Informetrics, 8(3), 562–568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, X., Wang, Z., & Xu, S. (2013b). Tracing scientist’s research trends realtimely. Scientometrics, 95(2), 717–729.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, X., Xu, S., & Fang, Z. (2016c). Tracing digital footprints to academic articles: An investigation of PeerJ publication referral data. arXiv:1601.05271.

  • Wang, X., Xu, S., Peng, L., Wang, Z., Wang, C., Zhang, C., et al. (2012). Exploring scientists’ working timetable: Do scientists often work overtime? Journal of Informetrics, 6(4), 655–660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, X. (2017). Exploring the features of usage data for academic literatures. Journal of Library Science in China, 43(3), 44–57 (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Economics and Management, Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Nanjing, 210094, China

    Bikun Chen

Authors
  1. Bikun Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bikun Chen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chen, B. Usage pattern comparison of the same scholarly articles between Web of Science (WoS) and Springer. Scientometrics 115, 519–537 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2616-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2616-3

Keywords

Mathematics Subject Classification

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation