Citations count in reference databases has been consolidated as
the traditional method of assessing the impact of a scientific
work. However, the recent developments around the diversity of
web communication channels triggered the scientific community
to start questioning the legitimacy of these metrics as the sole
indicators of impact. In this context, alternative metrics based on
web indicators have begun to emerge. This study attempts to
determine the existence of a correlation between traditional
citations and altmetric mentions, while also considering if the
type of access — open or restricted — has an influence in the
impact of a publication. The study is based on a mixed
methodology. The sample was composed by the most cited hot
papers extracted from the Web of Science, and the most
mentioned papers in Altmetrics, between 2016 and 2018,
according to type of access. Their numbers in altmetrics and in
reference databases (Web of Science and Scopus) was collected
and the data was analyzed using Spearman’s correlation
coefficient. It is concluded that there is not a significant
correlation between citations and altmetrics mentions, and that
the type of access is not relevant for a paper’s success.
|
