The Workshop “Quantifying and Analysing Scholarly Communication on the Web (#ASCW15) – What can bibliometrics do for you? What can you do for bibliometrics?” has been accepted at the ACM Web Science Conference 2015 (#websci15). The conference will take place in Oxford, UK, from June 28th to July 1st, 2015.
Workshops at WebSci15 will be integrated into the main conference workshop programm and will last three hours each. Our workshop will be held on Tuesday, June 30, 2015 from 2-5 pm.
Note: As the workshop is structured as a round table with an emphasis on discussion, these times are not strictly enforced.
14:00-14:10 Introduction and welcome from the workshop organizers
Session 1: What can bibliometrics do for you?
14:10-14:25 Paper 1: Dix, A: Citations and Sub-Area Bias in the UK Research Assessment Process
14:25-14:35 Response: Jäschke, R: Response to the Submission “Citations and Sub-Area Bias in the UK Research Assessment Process” by Alan Dix
14:35-15:00 Discussion of Paper 1
15:00-15:15 Paper 2: Kraker, P. & Lex, E.: A Critical Look at the ResearchGate Score as a Measure of Scientific Reputation
15:15-15:25 Response: Jordan, K: Exploring the ResearchGate score as an academic metric: Reflections and implications for practice
15:25-15:50 Discussion of Paper 2
Session 2: What can you do for bibliometrics?
15:50-16:05 Paper 3: Whalen, R., Huang, Y., Sawant, A., Uzzi, B. & Contractor, N.: Natural Language Processing, Article Content & Bibliometrics: Predicting High Impact Science
16:05-16:15 Response: Buttliere, B: Identifying high impact scientific work using Natural Language Processing and Psychology
16:15-16:40 Discussion of Paper 3
16:40-17:00 Conclusions and wrap-up
The following papers have been accepted for presentation at the workshop. They have already undergone a post-publication peer review by the program committee and the Web Science community, but please feel free to comment on the papers by clicking on the links below:
- Dix, A: Citations and Sub-Area Bias in the UK Research Assessment Process
- Whalen, R., Huang, Y., Sawant, A., Uzzi, B. & Contractor, N.: Natural Language Processing, Article Content & Bibliometrics: Predicting High Impact Science
- Kraker, P. & Lex, E.: A Critical Look at the ResearchGate Score as a Measure of Scientific Reputation
Each paper has a dedicated discussant. Being a discussant includes (1) preparing a response to one of the accepted paper which will be published on this site, and (2) acting as a discussant of the same paper at the workshop (10 min). All discussant papers can be read and commented on by clicking on the links below:
- Jäschke, R: Response to the Submission “Citations and Sub-Area Bias in the UK Research Assessment Process” by Alan Dix
- Buttliere, B: Identifying high impact scientific work using Natural Language Processing and Psychology
- Jordan, K: Exploring the ResearchGate score as an academic metric: Reflections and implications for practice
Summary of key aspects of this workshop
This workshop’s core aim is to advance methodologies for studying and quantifying scholarly communication on the Web by exchanging expertise from bibliometrics on the one hand and all disciplines interested in this domain on the other hand (such as but not limited to computer science, science and technology studies, economics, philosophy, library and information science, sociology).
In order to bring together interested scholars and facilitate fruitful discussions, we apply a roundtable format based on:
- position papers that clearly outline how different disciplines or use cases could profit from selected established approaches and experiences,
- direct responses to each paper by selected discussants (preferably from other disciplines than the position paper’s background) which will also be published,
- and a review process that involves expert reviewers as well as community voting.
We are currently witnessing a transition in scholarly communication from an offline, paper-based mode to a digital and online mode. Due to the Web, new and complementary means of communication have arisen in the form of social networks and other online collaborative environments. There is a continued trend towards openness and a broadening understanding of what is considered to be a research output.
New forms of communicating online pose new challenges to the field of bibliometrics, the science of studying and measuring scholarly communication (mainly based on publication output) and scholarly reputation (mainly based on citations). Key concepts of bibliometrics (such as citation indexes, co-citation analysis, maps of science etc.) are being transferred to new Web environments and have also lead to the formation of the term altmetrics to describe the study of alternative indicators for scholarly communication, such as social media mentions (e.g. tweets) referring to scholarly articles or bookmarks in academic social bookmarking systems.
When studying Web-based scholarly communication, bibliometricians increasingly need skills from computer science, such as how to collect and process large amount of social, heterogeneous data. Yet, basic theories and models relevant for bibliometrics are developed in science and technology studies (STS). On the other hand, computer scientists may not be aware of the issues of citation-based analyses of scholarly communication and would benefit from the knowledge of information scientists. Currently, there is little exchange between the different communities interested in the domain of bibliometrics, which is exemplified by countless parallel research efforts when it comes to supporting and understanding scholarly communication on the Web.
We see the Web Science Conference as an outstanding place to bring together researchers and practitioners to discuss how the different disciplines and cultures could benefit from each other, to highlight the current barriers and to propose new ways of interdisciplinary research. For that, we especially target the topics “scholarly communication”, “research evaluation”, “impact measurement”, “search and discovery”, “science studies” and “bibliometrics” to provide a starting point and to set a common ground for discussion.
The workshop will deviate from the classic presentation mode as the workshop will be held in a special round table format. We invite researchers to provide position papers (2-3 pages, ACM-style) answering the central question of the workshop (Quantifying and analysing scholarly communication on the Web: What can bibliometrics do for you and/or what can you do for bibliometrics?). Each accepted paper (up to five, see below for details) will be published on the workshop website before the workshop takes place so that attendees have a chance to prepare for the round table. During the workshop, the authors of accepted papers present their main arguments in short lightning talks (10 minutes max.). Each paper and presentation will be reviewed and discussed during the workshop by a selected discussant (10 minutes max.) and the audience.
Each author of submitted papers accepts to serve as discussant on site during the workshop and prepare a response to an accepted paper, even if her own paper has not been chosen for presentation. Voluntary discussants may also contact the workshop organizers. We aim at pairing authors and discussants of different disciplines to propel interdisciplinary discussion about arguments, methods, data sets, studies, or use cases. The discussants’ responses will also be published on the conference website in advance. As such, the workshop values both types of contributions: position paper and a discussant’s response.
Besides distributing the papers and responses on the website, we aim at publishing both in a special issue in a yet to be identified publication outlet.
Call for submissions
We welcome submissions from all academic backgrounds that engage in the study of scholarly communication. We are particularly looking for contributions that help bridging the gap between bibliometrics and other disciplines. This may include:
- Papers demonstrating the use of traditional bibliometric approaches and metrics for other disciplines
- Papers solving classical challenges from bibliometrics with tools and methods available in other disciplines
Overall topics to be adressed include but are not limited to:
- theories and models of scholarly communication and their implications for bibliometrics
- network analysis of scholarly communication
- opportunities and challenges of altmetrics
- indicators to measure academic output
- communication and publication behaviour in different scholarly fields
- visualization of knowledge domains
- bibliometrics in the evaluation process
- retrieval and discovery of academic output
- openness and reproducibility of metrics
As input, we welcome position papers of up to three pages in the ACM SIG Proceedings format. Each accepted paper will be given a ten minute timeslot for a lightning talk. After each talk, there will be time for discussion for up to 20 minutes. Scribes will be capturing the content of these discussions.
Please submit your papers via Easychair: https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=ascw15.
Review/selection of papers
In order to select the (up to five) papers which will be presented as part of the roundtable discussion, we employ a two-fold post publication peer review process. Each paper that is submitted to the workshop will be published on the workshop website as long as it is satisfies the criteria set forth in the submission guidelines and follows the COPE International standards for authors.
Afterwards, the program committee will be asked to review each paper. At the same time, the Web Science community can vote for papers that they would like to discuss in the workshop. Finally, the three position papers with the highest score by the program committee and the two papers with the most votes will be invited to be presented at the workshop.
- Deadline for submissions – extended: 9 May 2015
- Notification of acceptance/invitations as discussant: 27 May 2015
- Discussant responses due: 19 June 2015
- Workshop date: 30 June 2015
- Conference dates (WebSci15): 28 June to 1 July 2015
- Peter Kraker, Know-Center (Mail: firstname.lastname@example.org, Twitter: @PeterKraker)
- Elisabeth Lex, Graz University of Technology (Mail: email@example.com, Twitter @elisab79)
- Isabella Peters, ZBW Leibniz Information Centre for Economics & Kiel University (Mail: firstname.lastname@example.org, Twitter @Isabella83)
- Katrin Weller, GESIS Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences (Mail: email@example.com, Twitter @kwelle)
- Graham Cormode (University of Warwick)
- Rodrigo Costas (CWTS/Leiden University)
- C. Lee Giles (Pennsylvania State University)
- René König (Karlsruhe Institute of Technology)
- Kun Lu (University of Oklahoma)
- Ehsan Mohammadi (University of Wolverhampton)
- Christian Schlögl (University of Graz)
- Wolfgang Stock (Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf)
- Mike Thelwall (University of Wolverhampton)
- Feng Xia (Dalian University of Technology)
- Dangzhi Zhao (University of Alberta)