This paper presents the results of a study in which we have analysed the topics of interest of Mendeley users (i.e. Students, PhDs, Post Docs, Researchers, Professors, Librarians, Lecturers &... Show moreThis paper presents the results of a study in which we have analysed the topics of interest of Mendeley users (i.e. Students, PhDs, Post Docs, Researchers, Professors, Librarians, Lecturers & other Professionals) using text mining and visualization techniques. Beside analyzing topics of interest of Mendeley users, we have also identified fields of science for which readership information can be an interesting source of information complementary to citation information. For this purpose, we have used WoS citation data and Mendeley readership data for a set of 980,698 WoS publications (articles and reviews) with a DOI from 20111.The VOSviewer software tool (Van Eck & Waltman, 2010) was used to create so-called overlay visualizations. These visualizations show additional information on top of a base map. Two types of base maps were used. A base map containing the 250 WoS subject categories was used to analyze differences in readership activity across research fields and to analyze differences in interest between types of users. Base maps containing terms extracted from titles and abstracts using the text mining functionality of VOSviewer (Van Eck & Waltman, 2011) were used to analyze differences in readership activity within research fields. Show less
The main focus of this paper is to investigate the impact of publications read (saved) by the different users in Mendeley in order to explore the extent to which their readership counts correlate... Show moreThe main focus of this paper is to investigate the impact of publications read (saved) by the different users in Mendeley in order to explore the extent to which their readership counts correlate with their citation indicators. The potential of filtering highly cited papers by Mendeley readerships and its different users have been also explored. For the analysis of the users, we have considered the information of the top three Mendeley ‘users’ reported by the Mendeley. Our results show that publications with Mendeley readerships tend to have higher citation and journal citation scores than publications without readerships. ‘Biomedical & health sciences’ and ‘Mathematics and computer science’ are the fields with respectively the most and the least readership activity in Mendeley. PhD students have the highest density of readerships per publication and Lecturers and Librarians have the lowest across all the different fields. Our precision-recall analysis indicates that in general, for publications with at least one reader in Mendeley, the capacity of readerships of filtering highly cited publications is better than (or at least as good as) Journal Citation Scores. We discuss the important limitation of Mendeley of only reporting the top three readers and not all of them in the potential development of indicators based on Mendeley and its users. Show less
