2011•Aslib Journal of Information ManagementRequires access

A comparison of link and URL citation counting

Mike A Thelwall

Open publisher page 25 citations

Abstract

Purpose Link analysis is an established topic within webometrics. It normally uses counts of links between sets of web sites or to sets of web sites. These link counts are derived from web crawlers or commercial search engines with the latter being the only alternative for some investigations. This paper compares link counts with URL citation counts in order to assess whether the latter could be a replacement for the former if the major search engines withdraw their advanced hyperlink search facilities. Design/methodology/approach URL citation counts are compared with link counts for a variety of data sets used in previous webometric studies. Findings The results show a high degree of correlation between the two but with URL citations being much less numerous, at least outside academia and business. Research limitations/implications The results cover a small selection of 15 case studies and so the findings are only indicative. Significant differences between results indicate that the difference between link counts and URL citation counts will vary between webometric studies. Practical implications Should link searches be withdrawn, then link analyses of less well linked non‐academic, non‐commercial sites would be seriously weakened, although citations based on e‐mail addresses could help to make citations more numerous than links for some business and academic contexts. Originality/value This is the first systematic study of the difference between link counts and URL citation counts in a variety of contexts and it shows that there are significant differences between the two.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Purpose Link analysis is an established topic within webometrics. It normally uses counts of links between sets of web sites or to sets of web sites. These link counts are derived from web crawlers or commercial search engines with the latter being the only alternative for some investigations. This paper compares link counts with URL citation counts in order to assess whether the latter could be a replacement for the former if the major search engines withdraw their advanced hyperlink search facilities. Design/methodology/approach URL citation counts are compared with link counts for a variety of data sets used in previous webometric studies. Findings The results show a high degree of correlation between the two but with URL citations being much less numerous, at least outside academia and business. Research limitations/implications The results cover a small selection of 15 case studies and so the findings are only indicative. Significant differences between results indicate that the difference between link counts and URL citation counts will vary between webometric studies. Practical implications Should link searches be withdrawn, then link analyses of less well linked non‐academic, non‐commercial sites would be seriously weakened, although citations based on e‐mail addresses could help to make citations more numerous than links for some business and academic contexts. Originality/value This is the first systematic study of the difference between link counts and URL citation counts in a variety of contexts and it shows that there are significant differences between the two.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 25 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Purpose Link analysis is an established topic within webometrics. It normally uses counts of links between sets of web sites or to sets of web sites. These link counts are derived from web crawlers or commercial search engines with the latter being the only alternative for some investigations. This paper compares link counts with URL citation counts in order to assess whether the latter could be a replacement for the former if the major search engines withdraw their advanced hyperlink search facilities. Design/methodology/approach URL citation counts are compared with link counts for a variety of data sets used in previous webometric studies. Findings The results show a high degree of correlation between the two but with URL citations being much less numerous, at least outside academia and business. Research limitations/implications The results cover a small selection of 15 case studies and so the findings are only indicative. Significant differences between results indicate that the difference between link counts and URL citation counts will vary between webometric studies. Practical implications Should link searches be withdrawn, then link analyses of less well linked non‐academic, non‐commercial sites would be seriously weakened, although citations based on e‐mail addresses could help to make citations more numerous than links for some business and academic contexts. Originality/value This is the first systematic study of the difference between link counts and URL citation counts in a variety of contexts and it shows that there are significant differences between the two.

Key concepts: Webometrics, Hyperlink, Citation, Link (geometry), Link analysis, Information retrieval, Variety (cybernetics), Computer science

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
A comparison of link and URL citation counting — Research Paper | ScholarLens