Normalization of zero-inflated data: An empirical analysis of a new indicator family and its use with altmetrics data

TL;DR

This paper introduces a new indicator, MHq, for analyzing zero-inflated altmetrics data, demonstrating its effectiveness in distinguishing quality levels and comparing it to existing indicators and citation data.

Contribution

The study proposes the MHq indicator based on the Mantel-Haenszel analysis, showing its validity and superior ability to differentiate quality levels in zero-inflated altmetrics data.

Findings

MHq can distinguish between different quality levels in most cases.

MNPC and EMNPC are less effective in distinguishing quality levels.

Citations have a stronger correlation with peer assessments than altmetrics.

Abstract

Recently, two new indicators (Equalized Mean-based Normalized Proportion Cited, EMNPC; Mean-based Normalized Proportion Cited, MNPC) were proposed which are intended for sparse scientometrics data. The indicators compare the proportion of mentioned papers (e.g. on Facebook) of a unit (e.g., a researcher or institution) with the proportion of mentioned papers in the corresponding fields and publication years (the expected values). In this study, we propose a third indicator (Mantel-Haenszel quotient, MHq) belonging to the same indicator family. The MHq is based on the MH analysis - an established method in statistics for the comparison of proportions. We test (using citations and assessments by peers, i.e. F1000Prime recommendations) if the three indicators can distinguish between different quality levels as defined on the basis of the assessments by peers. Thus, we test their convergent validity. We find that the indicator MHq is able to distinguish between the quality levels in most cases while MNPC and EMNPC are not. Since the MHq is shown in this study to be a valid indicator, we apply it to six types of zero-inflated altmetrics data and test whether different altmetrics sources are related to quality. The results for the various altmetrics demonstrate that the relationship between altmetrics (Wikipedia, Facebook, blogs, and news data) and assessments by peers is not as strong as the relationship between citations and assessments by peers. Actually, the relationship between citations and peer assessments is about two to three times stronger than the association between altmetrics and assessments by peers.