↓ Skip to main content

PLOS

Identifying Audiences of E-Infrastructures - Tools for Measuring Impact

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, December 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
Title
Identifying Audiences of E-Infrastructures - Tools for Measuring Impact
Published in
PLOS ONE, December 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0050943
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daphne Duin, David King, Peter van den Besselaar

Abstract

Research evaluation should take into account the intended scholarly and non-scholarly audiences of the research output. This holds too for research infrastructures, which often aim at serving a large variety of audiences. With research and research infrastructures moving to the web, new possibilities are emerging for evaluation metrics. This paper proposes a feasible indicator for measuring the scope of audiences who use web-based e-infrastructures, as well as the frequency of use. In order to apply this indicator, a method is needed for classifying visitors to e-infrastructures into relevant user categories. The paper proposes such a method, based on an inductive logic program and a bayesian classifier. The method is tested, showing that the visitors are efficiently classified with 90% accuracy into the selected categories. Consequently, the method can be used to evaluate the use of the e-infrastructure within and outside academia.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 5%
Brazil 1 2%
India 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Mexico 1 2%
Belgium 1 2%
Nigeria 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Greece 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 42 75%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 32%
Librarian 9 16%
Student > Master 8 14%
Other 7 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 9%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 1 2%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 13 23%
Computer Science 12 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 13%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 5%
Other 11 20%
Unknown 3 5%