Which papers cited which tweets? An exploratory analysis based on Scopus data |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Max Planck Institute for Solid State Research, Heisenbergstraße 1, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany;2. Science Policy and Strategy Department, Administrative Headquarters of the Max Planck Society, Hofgartenstr. 8, 80539 Munich, Germany;1. Department of Mathematics, National University of Singapore, Block S17, Level 4, 2 Science Drive 2, 117543, Singapore;3. Risk Management Institute, National University of Singapore, 21 Heng Mui Keng Terrace, 04-03, 119613, Singapore;4. Technische Universität Berlin, Chair of Software and Algorithms for Discrete Optimization, Straße des 17. Juni 135, Berlin 10623, Germany;5. Zuse Institute Berlin, Applied Algorithmic Intelligence Methods Department, Takustraße 7, Berlin 14195, Germany;6. National University of Singapore (Chongqing) Research Institute, Building 5B, Chongqing Internet Institute, No. 16 South Huashan Road, Chongqing Liang Jiang New Area, Chongqing, China;7. Department of Statistics and Data Science, National University of Singapore, Block S16, Level 7, 6 Science Drive 2, 117546, Singapore;8. The Institute of Statistical Science, Academia Sinica, 128 Academia Road, Section 2, Nankang, 11529 Taipei, Taiwan;9. Department of Global Management, Chuo University, 742-1 Higashinakano, Hachioji, 192–0393 Tokyo, Japan;10. Institute of Statistical Mathematics, 10-3 Midorichō, Tachikawa, 190-0014 Tokyo, Japan;1. Warsaw University of Technology, Faculty of Physics, ul. Koszykowa 75, Warsaw 00-662, Poland;2. Deakin University, School of IT, Geelong, VIC 3220, Australia;3. Systems Research Institute, Polish Academy of Sciences, ul. Newelska 6, Warsaw 01-447, Poland |
| |
| Abstract: | Many altmetric studies have analyzed which papers were mentioned how often on Twitter (one of the most important altmetrics sources). In order to study the potential relevance of tweets from another perspective, we investigate which tweets were cited in papers. If many tweets were cited in publications, this might demonstrate that tweets have substantial and useful content. Overall, a rather low number of citations to tweets (n=13,149) by less than 7,000 papers was found. Most tweets do not seem to be cited because of any cognitive influence they might have had on studies; they rather were study objects. Thus, this study does not support a high relevance of tweets (for research). Most of the papers that cited tweets are from the subject areas Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities, and Medicine. Most of the papers cited only one tweet. Up to 65 tweets cited in a single paper were found. An author keyword analysis revealed that the single largest topic seems to be the COVID-19/corona pandemic. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
