CONTENTS

1.1. World Wide Web ......................................................................... 1

1.2. Growth of Websites ................................................................... 2

1.3. Evolution of Metrics .................................................................. 2

1.3.1. Librametry ........................................................................................................................... 3

1.3.2. Bibliometrics ....................................................................................................................... 4

1.3.3. Scientometrics..................................................................................................................... 6

1.3.4. Webometrics ....................................................................................................................... 7

1.3.5. Altmetrics ............................................................................................................................ 9

1.4. Need for the Study .................................................................. 10

1.5. Statement of the Problem ....................................................... 11

1.6. Objective of the study ............................................................. 11

1.7. Scope and Limitations of the Study ......................................... 12

1.8. Methodology: .......................................................................... 12

1.9. Chapterization ........................................................................ 13

1.10. Analysis and Interpretation of Data ......................................... 14

1.11. Conclusion .............................................................................. 20

1

Chapter I

Introduction

1.1. World Wide Web

Internet and World Wide Web (WWW) have brought fundamental

changes in the way information is communicated. WWW is a global network

of internet servers providing access to information communication in the

world wide area (Jayashankar & Babu, 2009). “The web as a way of life”

states that Internet users have come to rely on the vast amount of research

and information content available, and often consult the Web before making

dramatic life changing decision(Thanuskodi, 2012).

WWW is an information space which is a highly complex corporation

of all types of information carriers produced by all kinds of users. It is a

system of interlinked hypertext documents accessed via internet with a web

browser. A system of internet servers that support specially formatted

documents.

The documents are formatted in a markup language that supports

links to other documents, as well as graphics, audio and video files. Not all

internet servers are part of the World Wide Web. Web servers are computers

that deliver web pages. Every web server has an IP address and possibly a

domain name. Any computer can be turned into a web server by installing

server software and connecting the machine to the internet. There is much

web server software in World Wide Web(Maria Sujitha, 2015).

2

1.2. Growth of Websites

Website is one of the important tools to access information and

transact with the WWW. There are more than 162 million websites on the

Internet today. This is the first baby step of the World Wide Web. In 1996

there were about 100,000 websites, and in the mid-1993 there were only a

total of 130 websites(“How we got from 1 to 162 million websites on the

internet,” 2008).This is a clear indication that the number of websites is

growing exponentially and there is more dependence on websites than ever

for doing everyday transactions.

1.3. Evolution of Metrics

The metric was originated from the Latin word metricus and French

word metrique, which means a measure for something or any mean of

deriving quantitative measurement or approximation. This world was first

used in 1864.

Metrics studies in library and information science such as

librametrics, bibliometrics, scientometrics and webometric are well known

and a number of studies have been carried out in these areas. The metric

studies are used to measures scholarly communication; identify research

tends and growth of knowledge; identify users of different subjects.

Webometric covers research of all network based communication using

informatics or other quantitative measure. Webometric, in future may

become one of the most interesting research areas for the publicly indexable

web(Maria Sujitha, 2015).

3

1.3.1. Librametry

The term ‘Librametry’ was proposed by Ranganathan in 1948 as the

application of mathematical and statistical techniques to library

problems(Hood & Wilson, 2001). The word ‘Librametry’ or ‘Librametrics’ is

the couple of two separate words, library and metrics, which indicates

application of mathematical models and statistical techniques to evaluate

library systems and services(Dutta, 2014).

Ranganathan suggested that it was necessary for librarians to develop

“Librametry and psychometric, because many issues in library work

involved large numbers”. However, the concept of librametry did not develop

until the 1970’s. Ranganathan once again discussed it in 1969 in a paper

presented at the seminar of the Documentation Research and Training

Centre (DRTC), where he illustrated it as an example of statistics applicable

to library work service(Sitienei, 2009). He himself initiated and applied

techniques of statistics and mathematics involuntarily, to organize a more

flexible library system and also to develop various library techniques in

order to solve day-to-day library problems as far back as in 1925(Sengupta,

1992).

Later, in 1965, at the annual seminar of the DRTC, Bangalore,

Ranganathan elaborately discussed how he applied librametric techniques

in organizing various library activities and services of the Madras University

as its librarian. In the same seminar, Neelameghan also presented a paper

outlining the investigation conducted in 1969 by the research cell of the

DRTC on applicability of librametric techniques. He noted that both

4

bibliometrics and librametry examined the statistical distribution of

processes that related to the utilization of documents, library staff, and

users the aim being aspect of libraries(Sitienei, 2009).

1.3.2. Bibliometrics

The word bibliometrics is a combination of two words: biblio and

metrics. The term biblio is derived from the combination of a Latin and Greek

word “biblion” equivalent to Bybl(os) meaning book. Paper was derived from

the word Byblos, a city of Phoenicia noted for export trade in paper. The

word “metrics”, on the other hand, indicates the science of meter, i.e.

measurement, and is derived either from the Latin or Greek word “metricus”

or “metrikos” respectively, each meaning measurement (Sengupta, 1992).

The term bibliometrics was coined by Pritchard in 1969, and its

practice can be traced back to the second decade of the 20th century.

Bibliometric study was a “Statistical analysis of the literature” of

comparative anatomy from 1543 to 1860, which counted books and journal

articles titles and grouped than by countries of origin within periods.

According to Prichard “Bibliometrics means the application of mathematics

and statistical methods to books and other communication media”

(Dattatraya, 2014).

Bibliometrics has been known by other names, including “Statistical

analysis of the literature”, statistical bibliography in 1923. In 1948, the

great library scientist S.R. Ranganathan coined the term “librametry”, which

referred to measurement used to streamline library services. “Bibliometrics”

5

is analogous to Ranganathan’s librametrics, the Russian concept

scientometrics, FID’s informetrics, and to some other well established sub-

discipline such as econometrics, psychometrics, sociometrics, biometrics,

technometrics, chemometrics and climetrics, where mathematics and

statistics have been systematically applied to study and solve the problems

in a given field.

Bibliometric techniques include frequency of word analysis, citation

analysis and document measurement, such as number of publication by

particular author or research group in particular country. Bibliometrics use

is applied to science related document(Dattatraya, 2014).

Bibliometrics encompasses the measurement of “properties of

document-related processes”. The range of bibliometric techniques includes

word frequency analysis, citation analysis, co-word analysis and simple

document counting, such as the number of publication by an author,

research group or country(Thelwall, 2007).

Bibliometrics is the application of mathematical and statistical

methods to books and other printed media, process of written

communication and of the nature and course of discipline (Maria Sujitha,

2015).

Bibliometrics literally means “book measurement” but the term is

used about all kinds of documents. What are measured are not the physical

properties of documents but statistical patterns in variables such as

authorship, source, subjects, geographical origins, and citations.

6

1.3.3. Scientometrics

Scientometrics is a branch of library and information science. Scientometric

tools can be used to measure and compare the scientific activities at various

levels of aggregation including institution, sectors, provinces and countries.

They can also be used to measure research collaboration of scientific

field(Jayalakshmi, 2013).

In 1969, Vassily V.Nalinov and Z.M.Mulchanko coined the Russian

equivalent of the term ‘scientometric’. As the name would imply, this term is

mainly used for study of all aspects of the literature of science and

technology. Scientometrics includes all quantitative aspects of the science of

science, communication in science and science policy(Hood & Wilson, 2001).

Scientometrics is considered as the study of quantitative aspects of

science as a discipline or economic activity. Scientometrics deals with

scientific measurement of the work of scientists, especially by the way of

analyzing their publications and citations. Scientometrics is typically defined

as the quantitative study of science and technology.

Scientometrics is the study of the quantitative aspects of science as a

discipline or economic activity. It is part of the sociology of science and has

applications to science policy making. It involves quantitative studies of

scientific activities, including among others publications, and so overlap

bibliometrics to some extent. It is the measurement of science not the use

of measurement in science. The quantitative study of scientific

communications using the bibliometric method(Jalal, 2016).

7

1.3.4. Webometrics

Webometrics is the quantitative analysis of web-related phenomena,

drawing upon informetric methods, and typically addressing problems

related to bibliometrics (Maria Sujitha, 2015).

The term Webometrics is a coinage from two modern English language

words, “web” and “metric”. The word Web is a short term of World Wide

Web. Web is a hypermedia system that allows users to view and retrieve

information from documents containing links. On the other hand, metrics

has to do with counting or measurement. Webster’s comprehensive

Dictionary of English language defined metrics as “the mathematical theory

of measurement” (Avemaria Utulu, 2007).Webometrics can be defined as a

quantitative study of web related phenomena- the quantitative aspects of the

construction and use of information resources and technologies on internet

(Nissom & Kulathuramaiyer, 2012). Webometrics is concerned with

quantitative aspects of how various types of knowledge and information are

created, organized and used by various types of users in various contexts.

Bjorneborn and Ingwersen described the webometrics as a quantitative

measure that concerns four major areas of analysis:

1. Web page content analysis.

2. Web usage analysis.

3. Web technology analysis.

4. Web link structure analysis (Dattatraya, 2014)

8

The origin of Webometrics can be found in the field of information

science. The term webometrics was first coined in 1997 by Tomas Almind

and Peter Ingwersen and seems to be widely accepted by the research

community together with the term cybermetrics(Thelwall, 2012).

The information science field of Webometrics is “the study of the

quantitative aspects of the construction and use of information resources,

structures and technologies on the web drawing on bibliometric and

informetric approaches” or, more generally, “the study of web-based content

with primarily quantitative methods for social science research goals using

techniques that are not specific to one field of study”.

While the former definition emphasizes the informetric heritage of

many bibliometric methods, the latter focuses on the value that webometrics

could provide to the wider social sciences, reflecting a shift in webometrics

over time from more theoretical studies to more applied studies, though

retaining an emphasis on methods development.

Webometrics currently provides a range of methods and software for

various kinds of quantitative analyses of the web, and, despite initial

concerns that web data would always be easily manipulated because they

are not quality-controlled, the advocates of webometrics claim that it is

useful both for studies of aspects of the web itself, such as hyper linking

among academic websites, and studies of offline phenomena that might be

reflected online, such as political attitudes reflected in blogs.

9

The field of Webometrics really took off, however, with the introduction

of the Web Impact Factor (WIF) metric to assess the impact of a website or

other area of the web based upon the number of hyperlinks pointing to it.

WIFs seemed to make sense because more useful or important areas of the

web would presumably attract more hyperlinks than average.

The logic of this metric was derived from the importance of citations in

journal impact factors, but WIFs had the advantage that they could be easily

calculated using the new advanced search queries introduced by AltaVista,

a leading commercial search engine at the time. Webometrics subsequently

rose to become a large coherent field within information science, at least

from a bibliometric perspective, encompassing link analysis, web citation

analysis and a range of other web-based quantitative techniques.

WWW has now become one of the main sources of information on

academic and research activities and therefore is an excellent platform to

test new methods of evaluating webometric activities(Babu, Jeyshankar, &

Rao, 2010).

In addition, Webometrics has become useful in various applied

contexts, such as to construct the world Webometrics ranking of universities

and for scientometric evaluations or investigations of bodies of research or

research areas (Thelwall, 2012).

1.3.5. Altmetrics

Altmetrics is the new method for the citation indexing. Altmetrics are

new metric proposed as an alternative to the widely used journal impact

10

factor and personal citation like h-index, g-index or i-index. The term

Altmetrics was coined by Jason Prime in 2010, as a generalization of article

level metrics, and rooted in the twitter #altmetrics hash tag. Altmetrics

about articles, they can be applied to people, journals, books, data sets,

presentations, video, source code repositories, web pages etc. Altmetrics

covers not only citation counts, but also impact of a work, such as how

many data and knowledge bases refer to it, article views, download, or

mentions in social media and news media. Altmetrics is a very broad group

metrics, capturing various parts of impact a paper or work can have (Dutta,

2014).

1.4. Need for the Study

From the review of literature presented above, it is evident that the

number of websites is growing exponentially. This is coupled with

increasing dependence on websites for doing everyday transactions. The

websites of higher education institutions are the primary sources of

authentic information available for access at any place and at any time. The

academic community of any university viz. teachers, research scholars,

students, as well as the general public use the website to get information.

Modern websites are more interactive and responsive providing for doing

transactions such as online admissions, payment of fees and online

grievance redressal. Accessibility and visibility are the key concerns for any

website. In order to improve them, websites have to be designed intuitively.

The review of literature presented above shows that several studies

have been carried out to assess the webometric ranks of higher education

11

institutions including universities. However, no systematic study to explore

the web visibility and impact of universities in the State of Karnataka was

found by the researcher. Hence, there is a research gap. This study aims to

fill the research gap by systematically investigating the web visibility and

impact of universities in the State of Karnataka.

1.5. Statement of the Problem

The statement of the problem is “Webometric Analysis of

Universities in Karnataka”.

1.6. Objective of the study

The primary objective of the study is to assess the impact and visibility of

websites of universities in the State of Karnataka. The other objectives

which complement the primary objective are:

1. To identify the relationship between the size and visibility of websites

of universities in Karnataka.

2. To assess the impact of rich files on the ranking of university websites

in Karnataka.

3. To rank the websites of universities in Karnataka using Web Impact

Factor and Webometric ranking indicators.

4. To identify the relationship between the Web Impact Factor ranks and

Webometric ranks.

12

1.7. Scope and Limitations of the Study

The present study is a webometric analysis of websites of universities

in the state of Karnataka. It covers all types of universities viz., central

university, state universities, private universities and institutions with

“deemed university” status.

The study is covers the websites of only those universities in the State

of Karnataka which are listed on the UGC website www.ugc.ac.in. The

analysis and ranking of universities made under the study is confined to

webometric methods and techniques only. The data collected for the study

is from Google search engine only. A modified version of Webometric

ranking indicators prescribed on the website www.webometrics.info has

been used for Webometric ranking of university websites.

1.8. Methodology:

Following is an outline of the methodology adopted for collection and

analysis of data required for the study.

1.8.1. Link Analysis

The first stage in the collection of data was to carry out a hyperlink

analysis of the university websites through search engine query method.

The search options provided by several search engines were explored.

However, Google (www.google.com) search engine was considered for

collecting data since it offered extensive coverage and user-friendliness in

searching. Google also had options to formulate the queries directly using

search statements, instead of visiting the Advanced Search page every time.

13

The data required to compute the Web Impact Factor (WIF) as well as for

Webometric analysis was collected using Google search engine queries.

1.8.2. Data Normalization and Ranking

The data collected was normalized using log-normalization method.

The websites were ranked on the basis of WIF and Webometric ranking

indicators.

1.8.3. Determination of Correlation

Since the study involved ranking of university websites, Spearman’s

rank order correlation (rho) test was selected for determining the correlation

between WIF ranks and Webometric ranks. Appropriate inferences were

drawn.

The methodology adopted for the study has been elaborately explained

under Chapter III.

1.9. Chapterization

The study has been organized into the following chapters:

Chapter I: Introduction

This chapter introduces the study. The background of the study is

presented. Further, it elucidates the need for the study, objectives, scope

and methodology.

Chapter II: Review of Literature

14

The Chapter gives a systematic review of some of the studies carried

out in the area of Webometrics. The review has been organized into two

sections: general webometric studies, and studies on websites of

universities.

Chapter III: Webometric Analysis

Chapter three explains in detail the methodology adopted in

Webometric analysis. It also presents the criteria applied in the Webometric

ranking of universities.

Chapter IV: Analysis and Interpretation of Data

The Chapter includes analysis, tabular and graphical presentation

and interpretation of data.

Chapter V: Findings, Suggestions & Conclusion

This chapter presents the salient findings, recommendations and

conclusion.

1.10. Analysis and Interpretation of Data

1.10.1. Webometric Ranking Indicators

Table 1.University Websites and Webometric ranking indicators

University Websites

Total No. of

WebPages indexed

by Google

Total No. of External In-links(V)

Rich files (R)

Scholar(Sc)

alliance.edu.in 58500 61400 618 2

azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in 19500 9920 54 10

bangaloreuniversity.ac.in 1550 159000 2443 0

bldeuniversity.org 91 7100 671 11

15

christuniversity.in 42700 1230000 5 276

cmr.edu.in 684 879 41815 3

cuk.ac.in 560 232000 289 2

davangereuniversity.ac.in 151 12900 162 3

dsu.edu.in 375 728 2290 0

gulbargauniversity.kar.nic.in 3420 14400 3 0

iiitb.ac.in 1520 14200 30 0

iisc.ernet.in 1430000 379000 1237 0

jainuniversity.ac.in 3200 19900 1061 2

janapadauni.in 229 158 7116 5

jncasr.ac.in 203000 20700 1953 979

jssuni.edu.in 604 28300 38282 2

kannadauniversity.org 2980 8830 3 0

karnatakastateopenuniversity.in 3400 204000 3 428

kletech.ac.in 83 302 1417 0

kleuniversity.edu.in 1450 26400 2 4

kslu.ac.in 1550 21100 3682 0

ksu.ac.in 5000 11800000 809 2

kswu.ac.in 641 21200 5215 0

kud.ac.in 85400 3990000 1030 10

kuvempu.ac.in 1940 77900 148 2

kvafsu.kar.nic.in 625 4490 779 0

mangaloreuniversity.ac.in 2790 38200 93 0

manipal.edu 97000 451 83 0

msruas.ac.in 3140 2630 18 0

musicuniversity.ac.in 58 52000 24 0

nimhans.kar.nic.in 1 12700 1833 0

nitte.edu.in 4120 42 3134 56

nls.ac.in 11100 6240000 965 10

pes.edu 6200 8430 70 3

presidencyuniversity.in 207 1160000 1 0

raitechuniversity.in 133 633 0 1

rcub.ac.in 1570 60400 0 0

reva.edu.in 530 1350 67739 0

rguhs.ac.in 81300 40700 0 5300

sahetumkur.ac.in 1 129 370 0

sduu.ac.in 144 3330 1095 22

srinivasuniversity.ac.in 1 442 2275 3

svyasa.edu.in 775 11700 872 130

tdu.edu.in 166 3040 1238 1

tumkuruniversity.ac.in 2340 21500 60 141

uasbangalore.edu.in 5600 17000 0 0

uasd.edu 182 266000 199 0

uhsbagalkot.edu.in 182 5950 578 4

16

uni-mysore.ac.in 44900 176000 1670 0

vskub.ac.in 2190 17900 11307 1

vtu.ac.in 16800 2750000 3 3090

yenepoya.edu.in 3520 52300 0 0

The summarized data on the various Webometric ranking indicators has

been presented in Table 4.15. Webometric Ranking indicators include the Total

Number of Web Pages indexed by Google (Size – S), Number of External In-links

indexed by Google (Visibility – V), Total Number of Rich Files indexed by Google

(Rich Files – R), and Number of items indexed by Google Scholar (Scholar – Sc).

17

1.10.2. Webometric Ranking of University Websites

Table 2. Webometric Ranking of University Websites

University Website URL LNS LNV LNR LNSc WSV WVV WRV WScV Webometric Index Value

Webometric rank

kud.ac.in 4.93 6.60 3.01 1.00 0.82 3.00 0.50 0.17 4.79 1

nls.ac.in 4.05 6.80 2.98 1.00 0.67 3.00 0.50 0.17 4.74 2

ksu.ac.in 3.70 7.07 2.91 0.30 0.62 4.00 0.48 0.05 4.69 3

christuniversity.in 4.63 6.58 3.26 0.00 0.77 3.00 0.54 0.00 4.61 4

vtu.ac.in 4.23 6.44 0.48 3.49 0.70 3.00 0.08 0.58 4.59 5

iisc.ernet.in 6.16 5.58 3.09 0.00 1.03 3.00 0.52 0.00 4.33 6

jncasr.ac.in 5.31 4.32 3.29 2.99 0.88 2.00 0.55 0.50 4.09 7

uni-mysore.ac.in 4.65 5.25 3.22 0.00 0.78 3.00 0.54 0.00 3.94 8

karnatakastateopenuniversity.in 3.53 5.31 0.48 2.63 0.59 3.00 0.08 0.44 3.76 9

rguhs.ac.in 4.91 4.61 0.00 3.72 0.82 2.00 0.00 0.62 3.74 10

presidencyuniversity.ac.in 6.06 4.61 1.60 0.78 1.01 2.00 0.27 0.13 3.71 11

alliance.edu.in 4.77 4.79 2.79 0.30 0.79 2.00 0.47 0.05 3.70 12

bangaloreuniversity.ac.in 3.19 5.20 3.39 0.00 0.53 3.00 0.56 0.00 3.70 13

cuk.ac.in 2.75 5.37 2.46 0.30 0.46 3.00 0.41 0.05 3.60 14

uasd.edu 2.26 5.42 2.30 0.00 0.38 3.00 0.38 0.00 3.47 15

kuvempu.ac.in 3.29 4.89 2.17 0.30 0.55 2.00 0.36 0.05 3.41 16

tumkuruniversity.ac.in 3.37 4.33 1.78 2.15 0.56 2.00 0.30 0.36 3.38 17

kannadauniversity.org 3.47 3.95 4.58 0.30 0.58 2.00 0.76 0.05 3.37 18

vskub.ac.in 3.34 4.25 4.05 0.00 0.56 2.00 0.68 0.00 3.36 19

svyasa.edu.in 2.89 4.07 2.94 2.11 0.48 2.00 0.49 0.35 3.36 20

kslu.ac.in 3.19 4.32 3.57 0.00 0.53 2.00 0.59 0.00 3.29 21

jainuniversity.ac.in 3.51 4.30 3.03 0.30 0.58 2.00 0.50 0.05 3.29 22

18

kswu.ac.in 2.81 4.33 3.72 0.00 0.47 2.00 0.62 0.00 3.25 23

mangaloreuniversity.ac.in 3.45 4.58 1.97 0.00 0.57 2.00 0.33 0.00 3.19 24

azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in 4.29 4.00 1.73 1.00 0.72 2.00 0.29 0.17 3.17 25

pes.edu 3.79 3.93 1.85 0.48 0.63 2.00 0.31 0.08 2.98 26

yenepoya.edu.in 3.55 4.72 0.00 0.00 0.59 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.95 27

rcub.ac.in 3.20 4.78 0.00 0.00 0.53 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.92 28

bldeuniversity.org 1.96 3.85 2.83 1.04 0.33 2.00 0.47 0.17 2.90 29

kleuniversity.edu.in 3.16 4.42 0.30 0.60 0.53 2.00 0.05 0.10 2.89 30

musicuniversity.ac.in 1.76 4.72 1.38 0.00 0.29 2.00 0.23 0.00 2.88 31

davangereuniversity.ac.in 2.18 4.11 2.21 0.48 0.36 2.00 0.37 0.08 2.87 32

iiitb.ac.in 3.18 4.15 1.48 0.00 0.53 2.00 0.25 0.00 2.85 33

sduu.ac.in 2.16 3.52 3.04 1.34 0.36 2.00 0.51 0.22 2.85 34

uhsbagalkot.edu.in 2.26 3.77 2.76 0.60 0.38 2.00 0.46 0.10 2.82 35

reva.edu.in 2.72 3.13 4.83 0.00 0.45 2.00 0.81 0.00 2.82 36

cmr.edu.in 2.84 2.94 4.62 0.48 0.47 1.00 0.77 0.08 2.79 37

kvafsu.kar.nic.in 2.80 3.65 2.89 0.00 0.47 2.00 0.48 0.00 2.77 38

jssuni.edu.in 2.78 4.45 0.48 0.00 0.46 2.00 0.08 0.00 2.77 39

gulbargauniversity.kar.nic.in 3.53 4.16 0.48 0.00 0.59 2.00 0.08 0.00 2.75 40

uasbangalore.edu.in 3.75 4.23 0.00 0.00 0.62 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.74 41

tdu.edu.in 2.22 3.48 3.09 0.00 0.37 2.00 0.52 0.00 2.63 42

nimhans.kar.nic.in 0.00 4.10 3.26 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.54 0.00 2.60 43

msruas.ac.in 3.50 3.42 1.26 0.00 0.58 2.00 0.21 0.00 2.50 44

manipal.edu 4.99 2.65 1.92 0.00 0.83 1.00 0.32 0.00 2.48 45

dsu.edu.in 2.57 2.86 3.36 0.00 0.43 1.00 0.56 0.00 2.42 46

nitte.edu.in 3.61 1.62 3.50 1.75 0.60 1.00 0.58 0.29 2.29 47

janapadauni.in 2.36 2.20 3.85 0.70 0.39 1.00 0.64 0.12 2.25 48

kletech.ac.in 1.92 2.48 3.15 0.00 0.32 1.00 0.53 0.00 2.09 49

srinivasuniversity.ac.in 0.00 2.65 3.36 0.48 0.00 1.00 0.56 0.08 1.96 50

raitechuniversity.in 2.12 2.80 0.00 0.00 0.35 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.75 51

sahetumkur.ac.in 0.00 2.11 2.57 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.43 0.00 1.48 52

19

LNS: Log-normalized Size Value LNV: Log-normalized Visibility Value LNR: Log-normalized Rich files Value

LNSc:Log-normalized Google scholar value WSV: weighted size value WVV: weighted visibility value

WRV: weighted rich file value WScV: weighted Google scholar value

The log-normalized and weighted values of Webometric data of university websites has been presented in Table

4.16. Webometric Index Value is the sum of weighted values of the four webometric ranking indicators. Webometric

Index Value serves as the basis for the Webometric ranking of university websites. Karnatak University, Dharwad

(KUD) scores the highest webometric index value, i.e., 4.79 and hence placed first. This is followed by National Law

School of India University (NLS) with a webometric index value of 4.74. Sri Siddhartha Academy of Higher Education

(SAHE) scores the 52nd rank with the lowest webometric index value 1.48.

20

1.11. Conclusion

The present study is exploratory in nature. Webometrics, with all its

limitations, gives a fair picture of the visibility and impact of websites by

providing for quantification of Web data. Webometrics may give hints on the

extent of search engine optimization required for websites. The findings of the

present study help the Web masters to use search engine optimization techniques

to make websites more visible and impactful.

21

References

Alireza Isfandyari-Moghaddam, Farshid Danesh, & Nadia Hadji-Azizi. (2015).

Webometrics as a method for identifying the most accredited free

electronic journals: The case of medical sciences. The Electronic

Library, 33(1), 75–87. http://doi.org/10.1108/EL-10-2012-0141

Amgad Elgohary. (2008). Arab universities on the web: a webometric study.

The Electronic Library, 26(3), 374–386.

http://doi.org/10.1108/02640470810879518

Aminpour, F., Kabiri, P., Otroj, Z., & Keshtkar, A. A. (2009). Webometric

analysis of Iranian universities of medical sciences. Scientometrics,

80(1), 253–264. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-2059-y

Avemaria Utulu, S. C. (2007). Webometric Ranking and Nigerian Private

Universities: A Case Study of Bells University of Technology, Ota.

Retrieved from eprints.rclis.org/9128/1/F0927C9D.pdf

Babu, B. R., Jeyshankar, R., & Rao, P. N. (2010). Websites of Central

Universities in India: A Webometric Analysis. DESIDOC Journal of

Library & Information Technology, 30(4), 33–43.

Dariush Alimohammadi. (2006). Webliometrics: a new horizon in

information research. Library Review, 55(6), 344–348.

http://doi.org/10.1108/00242530610674758

Dattatraya, T. S. (2014). Bibliometrics and webometrics analysis of open

access electronics journals of library and information science.

University. Retrieved from

http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in:8080/jspui/handle/10603/21326

22

Dutta, B. (2001). The journey from Librametry to Altmetrics: a look back.

Retrieved from http://eprints.rclis.org/23665/2/B-Dutta-JU-Golden-

Jubilee-Paper.pdf

Dutta, B. (2014). The journey from librametry to altmetrics: a look back. In

G. Maity (Ed.). Department of Library and Information Science,

Jadavpur University; Retrieved from http://eprints.rclis.org/23665/

Elhouri, W., Elkabani, I., & Hamandi, L. (2014). A Webometric Analysis of

Some Universities in Lebanon, 2(1). Retrieved from

https://www.academia.edu/11604731/A_Webometric_Analysis_of_So

me_Universities_in_Lebanon

Fahimeh Ahmadian Yazdi, & N.J. Deshpande. (2013). Evaluation of selected

library associations’ web sites. Aslib Proceedings, 65(2), 92–108.

http://doi.org/10.1108/00012531311313952

Hood, W. ., & Wilson, C. S. (2001). The Literature of Bibliometrics,

Scientometrics and Informetrics, 52(2), 291–314.

How we got from 1 to 162 million websites on the internet. (2008, April 4).

Retrieved from http://royal.pingdom.com/2008/04/04/how-we-got-

from-1-to-162-million-websites-on-the-internet/

Islam, M. A., & Alam, M. S. (2011). Webometric study of private universities

in Bangladesh, 16(2), 115–126.

Islam, M. anwaru. (2011). Webometrics study of universities in Bangaldesh,

58, 307–318.

Jalal, S. K. (2016). Indian universities on the web analysis of hyperlinks

through the application of webometric tools and techniques.

University, 351.

23

Jalal, S. K., Biswas, S. chandra, & Mukhopadhyay, P. (2010). Web impact

factor and link analysis of indian universities, 57, 109–121.

Jati, H. (2012). Comparison of University Webometrics Ranking Using

Multicriteria Decision Analysis: TOPSIS and VIKOR Method, (71).

Retrieved from

http://staff.uny.ac.id/sites/default/files/penelitian/Handaru%20Jati

,%20ST.,M.M,%20M.T,%20Ph.D/Comparison%20of%20University%20

Webometrics.pdf

Jayalakshmi, M. (2013). A bibliometric study of statistical analysis of the

literature of comparative anatomy. Retrieved from

http://14.139.186.108/jspui/bitstream/123456789/10364/2/jayala

kshmi%20project.pdf

Jayashankar, R., & Babu, B. rames. (2009). Websites of universities in

Tamil Nadu  : A webometric study, 56, 69–79.

Jayasundari, A., & Jeyshankar, R. (2014). Web Credibility of Indian Institute

of Management (IIMs) Web Sites: A Study, 3(3), 222–232.

Jeyashree, S., & Ravichandran, R. (2013). Perspectives of Webometric Tools

for Web Impact Assessment Studies: A Review, 2(2), 43–48.

http://doi.org/DOI: 10.5923/j.library.20130202.03

Jeyshankar, R., Sujitha, M., & Valarmathi, A. (2012). Web Pages of ICMR

Institutes Websites: A Webometric Analysis, 1(1), 006–018.

Kothainayaki, S., & Gopalakrishnan, S. (2011). Webometric Analysis of

Agricultural Universities in India. Indian Journal of Science and

Technology, 4(3), 207–214.

Kousha, K. (1997). Webometrics and Scholarly Communication: An

24

Overview. Retrieved from

nastinfo.nlai.ir/article_668_3b2b600fcc0db0124769579547c457ad.pd

f

Mandal, T. K., & Chkrabarti, B. (2013). Webometric Analysis of Management

Institutes: A Case Study in West Bengal, 18–19. Retrieved from

http://eprints.rclis.org/23996/3/Journal%20Vol%2018-19.pdf

Maria Sujitha, I. (2015). Websites of universities in South India. University.

Retrieved from

http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in:8080/jspui/handle/10603/54321

Maria Sujitha, I. (2015). Websites of universities in South India. University.

Retrieved from

http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in:8080/jspui/handle/10603/54321

Maria Sujitha, I. (2015). Websites of universities in South India. University.

Retrieved from

http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in:8080/jspui/handle/10603/54321

Nissom, S., & Kulathuramaiyer, N. (2012). The study of Webometrics

Ranking of World Universities. Retrieved from

http://www.archive.unimas.my/faculties/fcsit/images/technical_seri

es_report/Webometrics%20Study%20in%20UNIMAS.pdf

Osunade, O., & Ogundele, C. . (2012). Evaluation of the university of Ibadan

website using Webometric ranking Parameters, 2(3). Retrieved from

tjournal.org/tjst_april_2012/c5.pdf

Sengupta, I. . (1992). Bibliometrics, Informetrics, Scientometrics and

Librametrics. An Overview., 42(2), 75–98.

25

Sitienei, G. C. (2009). A Comparison of Research and Publication Patterns

and Output among Academic Librarians in Eastern and Southern

Africa between 1990 to 2006. Zululand, South African. Retrieved from

http://www.lis.uzulu.ac.za/etds/gcsitienei/gcsitienei.pdf

Sujithai, M. (2013). Web Page analysis of Indian Institute of Technologies’

(IITs) websites: A Webometric study, 3(1). Retrieved from

www.ijodls.in/uploads/3/6/0/3/3603729/55-65.pdf

Tafaroji, R., Tahamtan, I., Roudbari, M., & Sedghi, S. (2014). Webometric

analysis of Iranian medical universities according to visibility, size and

rich files, 11(1). Retrieved from

www.webology.org/2014/v11n1/a119.pdf

Thanuskodi, S. (2012). A Webometric Analysis of selected Institutes of

National Importance Websites in India, 1(1), 13–18.

http://doi.org/10.5923/j.library.20120101.03

Thelwall, M. (2007). Bibliometrics to Webometrics. Journal of Information

Science, 34(4), 1–18. http://doi.org/10.1177/0165551506nnnnnn

Thelwall, M. (2012). A History of Webometrics. ASISST. Retrieved from

https://www.asis.org/Bulletin/Aug-12/AugSep12_Thelwall.html

Vijayakumar, M. (2012). Webometric Analysis of University Websites in Sri

Lanka, 2(3), 155–159.

Vijayakumar, M., Kannappanavar, B. U., & Santosh Kumar, K. T. (2012).

Webometric Analysis of Web Presence and Links of SAARC Countries.

DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, 32(1).

Retrieved from

26

http://publications.drdo.gov.in/ojs/index.php/djlit/article/view/140

9