Short answer
Incorporate webometric analysis into the evaluation of scientific software to understand its multifaceted impact beyond traditional academic citations.
- Field
- Innovation & Design
- Source
- Scientometrics (2021)
- Method
- Webometric analysis
- Sample
- Google Scholar: 988 publications, Majestic: 1,330 websites, Twitter: 267 tweets
- Evidence
- Moderate effect
Analyzing online mentions of scientific software across academic literature, webpages, and social media provides a comprehensive understanding of its impact and usage. This innovation & design research insight is drawn from a 2021 study published in Scientometrics. Using Webometric analysis with Google Scholar: 988 publications, Majestic: 1,330 websites, Twitter: 267 tweets, researchers explored how this design variable affects real-world outcomes. The key design takeaway: Incorporate webometric analysis into the evaluation of scientific software to understand its multifaceted impact beyond traditional academic citations.
Tracking Scientific Software Impact Through Online Mentions
Analyzing online mentions of scientific software across academic literature, webpages, and social media provides a comprehensive understanding of its impact and usage.
Scientometrics · 2021
Key Findings
- 01Mentions in academic literature (Google Scholar) indicate the software's use as a research resource.
- 02Mentions on general webpages (Majestic) and social media (Twitter) reflect informational interest and conversational engagement with the software's website.
Application
Design takeaway
Incorporate webometric analysis into the evaluation of scientific software to understand its multifaceted impact beyond traditional academic citations.
How to apply
For a new scientific tool, track its mentions on academic databases, relevant forums, and social media to build a comprehensive impact profile.
Project actions
- 01When researching existing software for a design project, consider searching for online mentions to understand its current standing.
- 02Use this approach to justify the need for a new tool or to highlight the success of an existing one.
Method & Evidence
Variables
Strengths & Limitations
Strengths
- +Provides a novel, multi-dimensional approach to assessing software impact.
- +Utilizes readily available online data sources.
Limitations
It can be hard to tell if a link means someone is actually using the software or just knows about it. Also, different platforms might count links differently.
Reliability & validity
Reliability could be improved by using consistent search terms and date ranges. Validity is supported by the triangulation of data from different online sources, but the interpretation of 'mention' impact remains a potential limitation.
Think critically
How might the 'conversational' aspect of social media mentions differ in its value compared to academic literature mentions when assessing software utility?
Design Principles
"Assess the digital footprint of designed tools to understand their real-world influence and user engagement."
Understanding how scientific software is discussed and referenced online is crucial for developers and researchers to gauge its adoption, identify areas of interest, and inform future development. This approach offers a novel way to assess the broader influence of digital tools beyond traditional citation metrics.
What This Means for Your Design
This research shows that you can learn how much people are using and talking about scientific software by looking at where its website is linked online – in research papers, on other websites, and on social media.
How to use in your project
- 1.Reference this study when discussing how you evaluated the impact or usage of existing software solutions in your design project.
Add to My Project
Quick Cite
Paragraph starter
The study by Orduña‐Malea and Costas (2021) highlights the utility of webometric analysis in understanding the impact of scientific software. By examining online mentions across academic literature, general webpages, and social media, it's possible to gain a more comprehensive view of a tool's adoption and influence, moving beyond traditional citation metrics.
Source
Scientometrics
Link-based approach to study scientific software usage: the case of VOSviewer
journal · 2021
View sourceQuestions About This Research
- What does the research say about tracking scientific software impact through online mentions?
- Incorporate webometric analysis into the evaluation of scientific software to understand its multifaceted impact beyond traditional academic citations. Evidence: Scientometrics (2021).
- Why does "Tracking Scientific Software Impact Through Online Mentions" matter for design?
- Understanding how scientific software is discussed and referenced online is crucial for developers and researchers to gauge its adoption, identify areas of interest, and inform future development. This approach offers a novel way to assess the broader influence of digital tools beyond traditional citation metrics.
- How can designers apply this research?
- Incorporate webometric analysis into the evaluation of scientific software to understand its multifaceted impact beyond traditional academic citations.
- What were the main findings?
- Mentions in academic literature (Google Scholar) indicate the software's use as a research resource.. Mentions on general webpages (Majestic) and social media (Twitter) reflect informational interest and conversational engagement with the software's website.
- What research method was used?
- Webometric analysis with Google Scholar: 988 publications, Majestic: 1,330 websites, Twitter: 267 tweets.
- How strong is the evidence?
- Evidence strength is rated Moderate effect, based on a 2021 journal from Scientometrics.
- What should I do differently in my next project?
- For a new scientific tool, track its mentions on academic databases, relevant forums, and social media to build a comprehensive impact profile.
- What are the limitations?
- The study's findings are specific to the VOSviewer software and the chosen analytical frameworks; generalizability to all scientific software may vary. The interpretation of 'mentions' can be subjective and may not always directly correlate with deep usage or impact.