Comparison of the Social Impact of Review Articles with Original Re-search Articles Indexed in the Web of Science in Pharmacy, Biology, Psy-chology, and Agriculture fields

Authors
hashem atapour
Zahra shiravand
Rasoul Zavaraqi
university of tabriz
Abstract
Background and Aim: The last two decades have witnessed efforts to identify ways and tools of showing the value of science for society known as the social impact of science, the efforts that have been made under various titles such as social benefits, social quality, social utility, social relevance, and so on. Academic publications, especially academic articles, are objective representation of scientific activities. One question raised in this regard is which kind of academic articles can have much more social impact. Bornmann (2014) argues articles that review previous studies and provide evaluative reports are of greater potential for social impact. Accordingly, the purpose of this research is to compare the social impact of review articles with the original research articles indexed in the Web of science in four fields including psychology, pharmacy, biology, and agriculture.

Methods: Current research is an applied one and has applied altmetrics analysis. Research and review articles were retrieved from Web of Science database, and altmetric score of articles is collected using Bookmarklet tool of Altemetric.com. The population of this research is composed of review and research articles of abovementioned fields indexed in the Web of Science in 2015. Using a randomized stratified sampling method, a sample of the research population has been chosen for more investigation. SPSS software was used to analyze the data.

Results: The findings of this research shows that there is a significant difference between the altmetric score of review and research articles, in a way that the altmetric score of review articles is higher than research articles. Both review and research articles have been mentioned in Mendeley more than the other social media, but these articles have received the least mention from the Wikipedia.

Conclusion: It is concluded that review articles have more social impact than research articles. The fact that strengthens the position of review articles in the body of scientific publications more than before.
Keywords
Social Impact
Review articles
Research articles
Altmetrics
Ale Ebrahim, N., Salehi, H., Embi, M.A., Habibi Tanha, F., Gholizadeh, H., Motahar, S.M., Ordi, A. (2013). Effective strategies for increasing citation frequency. International Education Studies. 6(11): 93-99.
Asadi, H., Naghshineh, N., Nazari, M. (2015). Investigating Social Media as alternative or Complementary Tools for evaluation of Iranian Scholars. Journal of Scientometrics. 1(2): 71-84. (Persian)
Batooli, Z. (2017). The relationship between Web of Science and ResearchGATE Indicators of Iranian researchers' Top Papers. Iranian Journal of Information Processing Management. 33(1): 163-186. (Persian)
Batooli, Z., Janavi, E., & Ravandi, S.N. (2017). The impact of ResearchGate indicators on increasing citation counts of top Clinical Medicine articles in Web of Science: A Comparative study of Iranian and Turkish Researchers. QJ Knowledge Inf Manag. 3(2): 83-93. (Persian)
Bornmann, L., Marx, W. (2014). How should the societal impact of research be generated and measured? A proposal for a simple and practicable approach to allow interdisciplinary comparisons. Scientometrics. 98(1): 211-219.
Bornmann, L. (2013). Is there currently a scientific revolution in scientometrics? arXiv preprint arXiv:1307.6307
Costas, R., Zahedi, Z., Wouters, P. (2015). Do “altmetrics” correlate with citations? Extensive comparison of altmetric indicators with citations from a multidisciplinary perspective. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(10): 2003-2019.
Ebrahimy, S., Setareh, F. (2016). Research on alternative measures in the F1000 system with Google Scholar citation index. Iranian Journal of Information processing and Management, 31(4), 891-909. (Persian)
Elmore, S.A. (2018). The Altmetric Attention Score: What Does It Mean and Why Should I Care? SAGE Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA.
Erfanmanesh, M. (2017). The presence of Iranian Information science and library science articles in

social media: an altmetric study. Iranian Journal of Information processing and Management. 32(2): 349-373. (Persian)
Erfanmanesh, M, Hosseini, E. (2016). Dissemination of the Iran's International Scientific Output in Social Media. Human Information Interaction. 3(4): 1-16. (Persian)
Galligan, F., Dyas-Correia, S. (2013). Altmetrics: Rethinking the way we measure. Serials review. 39(1):56-61.

Ghazi Nori, S., Ghazi Nori, S. (2014). An introduction to science, technology and innovation. Tehran: Tarbiat Modares University. (Persian)
Goltaji, M; Jowkar, A. (2017). Presence of Scientific Outputs of Medical Informatics in Social Media: An Altmetric Study. Health Inf Manage. 14(2): 71-7. (Persian)
Jensen, M. (2007). The New Metrics of Scholarly Authority. Chron High Educ. ERIC; 53(41).
Koppen, L., Phillips, J., Papageorgiou, R. (2015). Analysis of reference sources used in drug-related Wikipedia articles. Journal of the Medical Library Association, JMLA. 103(3):140.‌
Li, X., Thelwall, M. (2012, September). F1000, Mendeley and traditional bibliometric indicators. In Proceedings of the 17th international conference on science and technology indicators (Vol. 2, pp. 451-551).
Maflahi, N., Thelwall, M. (2016). When are readership counts as useful as citation counts? Scopus versus Mendeley for LIS journals. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(1): 191-199.‌
Mahesh, G. (2017). Academia's recognition of Wikipedia. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(6): 1596-1596.‌
Mohammadi, E., Thelwall, M., Haustein, S., Larivière, V. (2015). Who reads research articles? An altmetrics analysis of M endeley user categories. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(9): 1832-1846.
Moral-Muno, J.A, Cobo, M.J. (2018). Measuring the online attention of the Rehabilitation Web of Science category: an Altmetrics-based analysis. International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators.
Priem, J., Hemminger, B.H. (2010). Scientometrics 2.0: New metrics of scholarly impact on the social Web. First Monday. 15(7).
Priem, J., Piwowar, H.A, Hemminger, B.M. (2012). Altmetrics in the wild: Using social media to explore scholarly impact. arXiv preprint arXiv:1203.4745.
Salajegheh, M., Diari, S. (2016). The Relationship between Altmetrics and SNIP, SJR, Eigenfactor and IF of Medical Science Journals. National Studies on

Librarianship and Information Organization. 27(2): 167-180. (Persian)
Sedighi, M. (2018). The Role of Social Media in Assessing the Impact of Research (Case Study: The Field of Scientometrics). Iranian Journal of Information processing and Management. 34(2): 765-792. (Persian)
Sharif Moghaddam, H., Zaiee, S., Salami, M., Alijani, R. (2015). A Review of Authorship Patterns and Citation Rates of Iranian Researchers’ Articles in the Field of Surgery According to the Data from the ISI Database. Iranian Journal of Surgery, 23(2), 66-74. (Persian)
Sotudeh, H., Mirzabeigi, M. (2015). The Relationship between Citation-based Indicators and CiteuLike Bookmarks in Information & Library Science Articles During 2004–2012. Iranian Journal of Information processing and Management. 30(4): 939-963. (Persian)
Mirzabegi, M. (2018). Comparing the Opportunities Provided by Altmetrics and Citation Analysis for Research Evaluation. Iranian Journal of Information processing and Management. 34 (1):113-138. (Persian)
Taraborelli, D. (2008). Soft peer review: Social software and distributed scientific evaluation. Institut d’Etudes Politiques d'Aix-en-Provence; 1-12.
Thelwall, M., Wilson, P. (2016). Mendeley readership altmetrics for medical articles: An analysis of 45 fields. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(8): 1962-1972.
Thelwal, M. (2018).‌ Why do papers have many Mendeley readers but few Scopus-indexed citations and vice versa?. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science. 49(2): 144–151.
Tohidinasab, F., Jamali, H. (2013). Why and where Wikipedia is cited in journal articles?. Journal of Scientometric Research. 2(3): 231-231.‌
Tomaszewski, R., MacDonald, K.I. (2016). A study of citations to Wikipedia in scholarly publications. Science & Technology Libraries. 35(3): 246-261.‌
Zahedi, Z. (2015). Analyzing readerships of International Iranian publications in Mendeley: an altmetrics study. arXiv preprint arXiv:1505.01342.‌
Human and Information Interaction
Volume 5, Issue 4
Winter 2019
Pages 14-27