MaríaTudela_A4

A Comparison of Metrics

Introduction

I decided to investigate Dr. Chela Sandoval, professor of Chicana Studies at University of California at Santa Barbara and Dr. Ariana Vigil, Chair of the Women’s and Gender Studies Department at UNC. For comparison of two articles, I chose to examine "Transnational Feminist Crossings: On Neoliberalism and Radical Critique" by Chandra Talpade Mohanty and "A Phenomenology of Whiteness by Sara Ahmed.

Part 1

Chela Sandoval

Ariana E Vigil

Analysis

I was completely surprised at the results for both of my academics on Scopus and Web of Science. Based on the results from these two tools, it appeared that the academics I had chosen had minimal impact; this was surprising because I know that both are well respected in their field and have produced a significant amount of work. One of the major aspects that stood out to me was that for Dr. Sandoval, there was no mention of her book, Methodology of the Oppressed, in either Scopus or Web of Science. I know this is one of her most significant contributions. At first, I thought it was maybe because Scopus focuses more on journal articles rather than books or monographs, but then, I noticed that other books were taken into account; additionally, for the other academic I had investigated—Dr. Vigil, I saw that one of her books was mentioned in both tools. I am still perplexed as to why this was the case.

When I was investigating Dr. Sandoval’s impact on Google Scholar, I saw a significant amount of work that was cited. Google scholar seemed to reflect a bit better what I was expecting based on the amount I had engaged with her work beforehand. According to Google Scholar, she had 7,606 citations in total and 3,028 since 2016; she had an h-index of 21 in total and 14 since 2016. Based on Google Scholar, her impact is significantly greater than what is reported by Scopus and Web of Science.

Results for Dr. Vigil were similar in the sense that I was just as surprised for her results as I was for Dr. Sandoval’s. Dr. Vigil’s results for Scopus and Web of Science were only 4 publications and 6 publications respectively, for each tool. According to Web of Science, she had an h-index of 1. I did see how one of her well-known books were included in Scopus, where it was cited 8 different times, but not in Web of Science.

In regards to her results on Google Scholar, she had a total of 52 citations and 40 citations since 2016. Her h-index was 3. Similar to how results were indicative of higher impact on Google Scholar for Dr. Sandoval, it was the same for Dr. Vigil.

I appreciated comparing the results from my investigation on both of these academics for all three of the different tools as they each provide a lens from which to view impact and to a certain degree understand the influence each academic brings to their discipline.

Part 2

Transnational Feminist Crossings: On Neoliberalism and Radical Critique

By Chandra Talpade Mohanty (2013)

DOI: 10.1086/669576

A Phenomenology of Whiteness

By Sara Ahmed (2007)

DOI: https://doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.1177/1464700107078139

Analysis

I was intrigued by these results for each respective article and was surprised to see the differences in these metrics. Dr. Mohanty is very well known and established as a scholar of transnational feminism. One of her most significant contributions to the field is Feminism Without Borders: Decolonizing Theory, Practicing Solidarity. Based on the metrics in Scopus, her article, “Transnational Feminist Crossings: On Neoliberalism and Radical Critique,” has definitely had impact as she is in the 99^th percentile for citations. On Altmetrics, she has an attention score of 7. Based on her scores on Altmetrics, her article has had impact in this realm as well.

Dr. Ahmed’s, “A Phenomenology of Whiteness” also has had major impact on Scopus and Altmetrics. In fact, all the data on Scopus and Altmetrics are considerably higher than Dr. Mohanty. I do know that Dr. Ahmed is very active in social justice efforts and on social media. She also just recently published another book this past year—Complaint! through Duke University Press that has done well. I wonder if this is a contributing factor for her high impact score on Altmetrics.

I found this investigation to be fruitful in that it was easier for me to see the direct impact of one body of work as opposed to an overall view of all work. In other words, viewing the independent articles, even ones that were not totally recent—Dr. Mohanty’s was published in 2013 and Dr. Ahmed’s was published in 2007—I think it underscores the impact that each article has had not only when they were each respectively published, but how individuals engage with their work presently.

Conclusion

I found these exercises to be super helpful to further understand impact and how impact plays a significant role in a scholars career. Additionally, seeing the differences between Scopus and Web of Science to Google Scholar resulted in simultaneous understanding as well as intrigue in that even though I was looking at the same scholars the results on Google Scholar were substantially different than the results that came from the other two tools. I do question if this may happen when examining researchers from the Humanities, or that it was just a coincidental occurrence.

Furthermore, being able to see side-by-side results from Scopus and Altmetrics allowed me to see how social media has indeed influenced a researchers impact in their field.