Understanding the Twitter Usage of Science Citation Index (SCI) Journals

September 25, 2019 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› International Conference on Asian Digital Libraries

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Aravind Sesagiri Raamkumar, Mojisola Erdt, Harsha Vijayakumar, Aarthy Nagarajan, Yin-Leng Theng arXiv ID 1909.11340 Category cs.DL: Digital Libraries Cross-listed cs.SI Citations 1 Venue International Conference on Asian Digital Libraries Last Checked 3 months ago
Abstract
This paper investigates the Twitter interaction patterns of journals from the Science Citation Index (SCI) of Master Journal List (MJL). A total of 953,253 tweets extracted from 857 journal accounts, were analyzed in this study. Findings indicate that SCI journals interacted more with each other but much less with journals from other citation indices. The network structure of the communication graph resembled a tight crowd network, with Nature journals playing a major part. Information sources such as news portals and scientific organizations were mentioned more in tweets, than academic journal Twitter accounts. Journals with high journal impact factors (JIFs) were found to be prominent hubs in the communication graph. Differences were found between the Twitter usage of SCI journals with Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS) journals.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Digital Libraries

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted