Sosialisasi : Strategi Akademik Meningkatkan Sitasi Google Scholar
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.62951/solusibersama.v2i1.1180Keywords:
Citations, Google Scholar, Dissemination, Scholarly publication, Academic strategyAbstract
Citations in Google Scholar serve as a crucial indicator for assessing the impact and relevance of a scientific publication. However, many academics and researchers face challenges in increasing the citation count of their work. This article discusses strategies for enhancing citation numbers through effective dissemination. The methods employed include outreach and training programs, publication in reputable journals, optimization of Google Scholar profiles, and the utilization of academic social media platforms such as ResearchGate and Academia.edu. The findings indicate that a better understanding of publication techniques and scholarly promotion contributes to increased citations. Furthermore, research collaboration and active engagement in academic communities have been shown to expand the reach of scientific work. This article asserts that with the right strategies, academics can enhance the visibility of their research and strengthen their scholarly impact.
References
Abbasi, A., Altmann, J., & Hossain, L. (2011). Identifying the effects of co-authorship networks on the performance of scholars: A correlation and regression analysis of performance measures. Journal of Informetrics, 5(4), 594–607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2011.05.007
Antelman, K. (2004). Do open-access articles have a greater research impact? College & Research Libraries, 65(5), 372–382.
Baumgartner, H., & Pieters, R. (2003). The structural influence of marketing journals: A citation analysis of the discipline and its subareas over time. Journal of Marketing, 67(2), 123–139.
Beel, J., Gipp, B., Langer, S., & Breitinger, C. (2020). Academic search engine optimization (ASEO): Optimizing scholarly literature for Google Scholar and Co. Journal of Information Science, 46(5), 593–611. https://doi.org/10.1145/3383583.3398599
Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H. D. (2008). What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior. Journal of Documentation, 64(1), 45–80.
Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H. D. (2021). The citation performance of articles in journals with different levels of impact factor: A field-normalized analysis. Scientometrics, 125(3), 2145–2163.
Falagas, M. E., Pitsouni, E. I., Malietzis, G. A., & Pappas, G. (2008). Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: Strengths and weaknesses. The FASEB Journal, 22(2), 338–342. https://doi.org/10.1096/fj.07-9492LSF
Freeman, R. B., Ganguli, I., & Murciano-Goroff, R. (2022). Why and where is collaboration needed? The role of research collaboration in academic publishing. Research Policy, 51(2), 104403.
Gargouri, Y., Hajjem, C., Larivière, V., Gingras, Y., Carr, L., Brody, T., & Harnad, S. (2010). Self-selected or mandated, open access increases citation impact for higher quality research. PLOS ONE, 5(10), e13636. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0013636
Gazni, S., Thelwall, M., & Sugimoto, C. G. (2012). Investigating the difference between corresponding and first authors in terms of their scientific impact. Journal of Informetrics, 6(3), 731–739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2012.07.001
Gunn, W. (2013). Mendeley: Enabling and understanding scientific collaboration. Information Services & Use, 33(1), 97–100. https://doi.org/10.3233/ISU-130699
Guz, K., & Rushchitsky, J. (2022). Challenges in academic publishing: Strategies to improve research visibility and citations. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 54(1), 33–50.
Harzing, A. W., & Alakangas, S. (2016). Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: A longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison. Scientometrics, 106(2), 787–804.
Harzing, A. W., & Alakangas, S. (2021). Google Scholar, Scopus, and the Web of Science: A longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison. Scientometrics, 126(5), 4585–4606.
Mingers, J., & Leydesdorff, L. (2015). A review of theory and practice in scientometrics. European Journal of Operational Research, 246(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.04.002
Moed, H. F. (2005). Citation analysis in research evaluation. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3714-7
Norris, M., & Oppenheim, C. (2007). Comparing alternatives to the Web of Science for coverage of the social sciences' literature. Journal of Informetrics, 1(1), 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2006.12.001
Paiva, C. E., Pinheiro, J. Lima, S. N., & Paiva, B. S. (2012). Articles with short titles describing the results are cited more often. Clinics, 67(5), 509–513. https://doi.org/10.6061/clinics/2012(05)17
Piwowar, H., Priem, J., & Larivière, V. (2018). The future of scholarly publishing: Open access and the economics of digitization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1804.02479.
Piwowar, H., Priem, J., Larivière, V., Alperin, J. P., Matthias, L., Norlander, B., Farley, A., West, J., & Haustein, S. (2018). The state of OA: A large-scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of open access articles. PeerJ, 6, e4375.
Priem, J., Piwowar, H. A., & Hemminger, B. M. (2012). Altmetrics in the wild: Using social media to explore scholarly impact. arXiv preprint arXiv:1203.4745.
Singh, V. K., Swarna, S., & Basu, A. (2021). The role of academic social networking in research visibility and citation impact. Journal of Informetrics, 15(3), 101121.
Sugimoto, C. R., Larivière, V., Ni, C., & Cronin, B. (2017). Factors affecting citation rates in high-impact biomedical journals. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68(3), 724–734. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23606
Tahamtan, I., & Bornmann, L. (2019). What factors influence citation rates? A systematic review of the literature. Scientometrics, 119(2), 1255–1285.
Tahamtan, I., Afshar, A. S., & Ahamdzadeh, K. (2016). Factors affecting number of citations: A comprehensive review of the literature. Scientometrics, 107(3), 1195–1225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1889-2
Thelwall, M., & Kousha, K. (2015). ResearchGate: Disseminating, communicating, and measuring scholarship? Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(5), 876–889. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23236
Van-Leeuwen, T. N., Moed, H. F., Tijssen, R. J. W., Visser, M. S., & Van-Raan, A. F. J. (2001). Language biases in the coverage of the Science Citation Index and its consequences for international comparisons of national research performance. Scientometrics, 51(1), 335–346. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010549719484
Waltman, L., & van Eck, N. J. (2012). A new methodology for constructing a publication-level classification system of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(12), 2378–2392. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22748
Ware, M., & Mabe, M. (2015). The STM report: An overview of scientific and scholarly journal publishing (4th ed., pp. 1–180). International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers. https://www.stm-assoc.org/2015_02_20_STM_Report_2015.pdf
Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F., & Uzzi, B. (2007). The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science, 316(5827), 1036–1039. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1136099
Zhang, Y., Wang, X., & Luo, J. (2023). The language barrier in global research: Challenges and solutions. Journal of Research Impact, 2(1), 50–63.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Solusi Bersama : Jurnal Pengabdian dan Kesejahteraan Masyarakat
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
