IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v123y2020i1d10.1007_s11192-020-03370-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Digital multimedia tools, research impact, stated and revealed preferences: a rejoinder on the issue of video abstracts

Author

Listed:
  • Sergio Copiello

    (IUAV University of Venice)

Abstract

The journal Scientometrics recently featured a study on the citation impact of video abstracts and subsequent debate on the actual scope of the same impact. As things stand, the crucial issue of that debate lies in the motivations behind the authors’ choice to equip (some of) their articles with video abstracts. It can be easily understood that those motivations are hardly observable, and it is indeed agreed that observational limitations make them difficult to unravel. Nonetheless, the debate has seen the emergence of two different positions. The first may be summarized as follows: ask the authors to speak out about their motivations and rely on the elicited answers. The second bases itself on the opposite cornerstone: let the data tell the story about authors’ motivations. This recalls the distinction between stated preferences and revealed preferences. Here I develop some arguments in favor of the latter approach as far as the analysis of new media’s citation impact is concerned.

Suggested Citation

  • Sergio Copiello, 2020. "Digital multimedia tools, research impact, stated and revealed preferences: a rejoinder on the issue of video abstracts," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(1), pages 543-551, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:123:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-020-03370-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-020-03370-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-020-03370-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-020-03370-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Karen Blumenschein & Magnus Johannesson & Glenn C. Blomquist & Bengt Liljas & Richard M. O’Conor, 1998. "Experimental Results on Expressed Certainty and Hypothetical Bias in Contingent Valuation," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(1), pages 169-177, July.
    2. Michael W. Toffel, 2016. "Enhancing the Practical Relevance of Research," Harvard Business School Working Papers 16-082, Harvard Business School, revised Mar 2016.
    3. Jihyun Kim, 2010. "Faculty self-archiving: Motivations and barriers," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(9), pages 1909-1922, September.
    4. Qianjin Zong & Yafen Xie & Rongchan Tuo & Jingshi Huang & Yang Yang, 2019. "The impact of video abstract on citation counts: evidence from a retrospective cohort study of New Journal of Physics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(3), pages 1715-1727, June.
    5. Jongwook Lee & Sanghee Oh & Hang Dong & Fang Wang & Gary Burnett, 2019. "Motivations for self‐archiving on an academic social networking site: A study on researchgate," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 70(6), pages 563-574, June.
    6. Michael W. Toffel, 2016. "Enhancing the Practical Relevance of Research," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 25(9), pages 1493-1505, September.
    7. Magnus Johannesson & Bengt Liljas & Per-Olov Johansson, 1998. "An experimental comparison of dichotomous choice contingent valuation questions and real purchase decisions," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(5), pages 643-647.
    8. Jihyun Kim, 2010. "Faculty self‐archiving: Motivations and barriers," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(9), pages 1909-1922, September.
    9. Sergio Copiello, 2020. "The alleged citation advantage of video abstracts may be a matter of self-citations and self-selection bias. Comment on “The impact of video abstract on citation counts” by Zong et al," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(1), pages 751-757, January.
    10. Editorial Article, 0. "Abstracts," Economics of Contemporary Russia, Regional Public Organization for Assistance to the Development of Institutions of the Department of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, issue 3.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stüve, David & van der Meer, Robert & Lütke Entrup, Matthias & Agha, Mouhamad Shaker Ali, 2020. "Supply chain planning in the food industry," Chapters from the Proceedings of the Hamburg International Conference of Logistics (HICL), in: Kersten, Wolfgang & Blecker, Thorsten & Ringle, Christian M. (ed.), Data Science and Innovation in Supply Chain Management: How Data Transforms the Value Chain. Proceedings of the Hamburg International Conference of Lo, volume 29, pages 317-353, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute of Business Logistics and General Management.
    2. Mark Morrison & Thomas Brown, 2009. "Testing the Effectiveness of Certainty Scales, Cheap Talk, and Dissonance-Minimization in Reducing Hypothetical Bias in Contingent Valuation Studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 44(3), pages 307-326, November.
    3. Veisten, Knut, 2007. "Contingent valuation controversies: Philosophic debates about economic theory," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 204-232, April.
    4. Bodo Sturm & Joachim Weimann, 2006. "Experiments in Environmental Economics and Some Close Relatives," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 419-457, July.
    5. Watson, Verity & Ryan, Mandy, 2007. "Exploring preference anomalies in double bounded contingent valuation," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 463-482, May.
    6. Eva Camacho-Cuena & Aurora García-Gallego & Nikolaos Georgantzís & Gerardo Sabater-Grande, 2004. "An Experimental Validation of Hypothetical WTP for a Recyclable Product," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 27(3), pages 313-335, March.
    7. Laura Icela González-Pérez & María Soledad Ramírez-Montoya & Francisco José García-Peñalvo, 2021. "Improving Institutional Repositories through User-Centered Design: Indicators from a Focus Group," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-19, November.
    8. Wang, Zhiqi & Chen, Yue & Glänzel, Wolfgang, 2020. "Preprints as accelerator of scholarly communication: An empirical analysis in Mathematics," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(4).
    9. Mark A. Andor & Manuel Frondel & Colin Vance, 2014. "Diskussionspapier: Zahlungsbereitschaft für grünen Strom – Die Kluft zwischen Wunsch und Wirklichkeit," RWI Materialien, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, pages 27, 05.
    10. repec:zbw:rwimat:079 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Newell, Laurienne Whinstanley & Swallow, Stephen K., 2002. "Are Stated Preferences Invariant To The Prospect Of Real-Money Choice?," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19623, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    12. Christian A. Vossler & Robert G. Ethier & Gregory L. Poe & Michael P. Welsh, 2003. "Payment Certainty in Discrete Choice Contingent Valuation Responses: Results from a Field Validity Test," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 69(4), pages 886-902, April.
    13. Mark A. Andor & Manuel Frondel & Colin Vance, 2017. "Mitigating Hypothetical Bias: Evidence on the Effects of Correctives from a Large Field Study," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(3), pages 777-796, November.
    14. Lars Hultkrantz & Gunnar Lindberg & Camilla Andersson, 2006. "The value of improved road safety," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 151-170, March.
    15. Christian A. Vossler & Robert G. Ethier & Gregory L. Poe & Michael P. Welsh, 2003. "Payment Certainty in Discrete Choice Contingent Valuation Responses: Results from a Field Validity Test," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 69(4), pages 886-902, April.
    16. Nikita Lyssenko & Roberto Mart󹑺-Espiñeira, 2012. "Respondent uncertainty in contingent valuation: the case of whale conservation in Newfoundland and Labrador," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(15), pages 1911-1930, May.
    17. Mark A. Andor, Manuel Frondel, and Colin Vance, 2017. "Germanys Energiewende: A Tale of Increasing Costs and Decreasing Willingness-To-Pay," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(KAPSARC S).
    18. Schwartz-Landsman, V., 2020. "A Chasm to Cross: From Research to Practice and Back," ERIM Inaugural Address Series Research in Management EIA 2020-081-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam..
    19. Jacopo Bonan & Philippe LeMay-Boucher & Michel Tenikue, 2014. "Households' Willingness to Pay for Health Microinsurance and its Impact on Actual Take-up: Results from a Field Experiment in Senegal," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(10), pages 1445-1462, November.
    20. Christian A. Vossler & Robert G. Ethier & Gregory L. Poe & Michael P. Welsh, 2003. "Payment Certainty in Discrete Choice Contingent Valuation Responses: Results from a Field Validity Test," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 69(4), pages 886-902, April.
    21. Kovacs, Gyöngyi & Moshtari, Mohammad, 2019. "A roadmap for higher research quality in humanitarian operations: A methodological perspective," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 276(2), pages 395-408.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:123:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-020-03370-3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.