No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Problems of Citation Analysis: A Critical Review
Abstract
We review the problems of citation analysis. Most of them have either not been studied or have received only cursory attention. Since major error results when these problems are not taken into account, users of citation-based literature should proceed cautiously. © 1989 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
... The key contributions of this study are (1) an algorithm capable of capturing associations other than those based on apparent similarity of content, and (2) a method for selecting relevant co-occurring instances. MacRoberts and Barbara [35] discussed the discussed the issues with using the number of times a paper is cited to judge how good it is. The authors say that just counting citations is not a good way to measure the quality. ...
... To establish a network of papers, the system treats each document as a node and each citation as a link. Numerous studies (10,13,14,16,17,29,35) describe the DAG (Directed Acyclic Graph) as representing the citation network for a scientific network. In this case, we disregard the direction of the graph and consider the original graph to be an undirected graph, with each edge representing a bi-directional relationship between a specific pair of documents. ...
... The limitations of citation metrics and the ambiguity of citation behaviour have been discussed since citation analysis became widespread in the 1960s after the development of the Institute of Scientific Information (ISI, now owned by Clarivate Analytics) (cf.Bornmann and Hans-Dieter, 2008). Although numerous criticisms have been made against using citation-based measures to study and evaluate research, the limitations of citation analysis methods depend on the analytical purpose and the way one conceptualises citing behaviour(MacRoberts and MacRoberts, 1989). For example, for those who assume that citations signify informational influence, the variety of motives scholars have named that can motivate citations -such as citing research to confirms one's results; to dispute aspects of cited work; citing persuasive, well known texts; ...
... For example, the origin of earlier results may or may not be accurately cited. Secondly, references only indicate 'formal influence', and leave tacit skills -developed over time, and in a range of situations, often collaborating with others -as well as the day to day discussions, negotiations with fellow researchers, laboratory technicians ('shop talk') out of the picture(MacRoberts and MacRoberts, 1989). Science studies have repeatedly demonstrated that the narratives presented in published literature bear little resemblance to scientists' daily practices (e.g. ...
This thesis explores the development of academic research with geotagged social media data (geosocial research) - an emerging computational, digital social research field - using 19 semi-structured interviews with scholars from diverse disciplines, participant observation at a geosocial research summer school and scientometrics. It asks: 'how can we study the development of geosocial research approaches through combining STS and scientometrics?' for five main reasons: to explore the diversity of computational social research; reflect on the ESRC's (2013) call to 'close the gap' between quantitative and qualitative human geography; contribute to methodological discussions in academic literature which call for combining STS and scientometrics; co-compose knowledge with distinct ways of knowing through mixing methods; and inform research methods curriculum development in the social sciences. Using new forms of digital data (like social media posts) is core to contemporary social science. Scholars from diverse disciplines conduct geosocial research. It thus provides rich opportunities to study how diverse approaches to computational social research develop. I combine STS and diverse scientometric methods as part of a single case study iteratively to explore how they can co-compose knowledge. The thesis contributes to literature which explores the STS - scientometrics interface. Most existing studies either reflect on diverse mixed methods approaches from theoretical or methodological perspectives, or provide worked examples using specific mixed methods designs. Conceptually, this thesis contributes by highlighting the need to develop and evaluate the affordances of computational methods for STS in light of the interpretative context - including research questions, characteristics of the studied research practice, theories and prior findings. I developed computational methods iteratively, in light of my theoretical and empirical knowledge about geosocial research. Empirically, the thesis first contributes by showing how diverse combinations of STS and scientometrics – including statistical and visual network analyses as well as descriptive statistics - can inform a single case study. Second, it offers three ways STS and scientometrics can co-compose knowledge by aligning their units of analyses, reflecting on how calculation acts inform qualitative analysis even when analytical units are not aligned, and using each method inductively. I combined STS and scientometrics to study practices through which geosocial research approaches develop - including collaboration, developing (sub)-disciplinary communities and methods' mediation of geosocial research. I also identified geosocial research approaches and compared them using mixed methods. Finally, I combined insights from STS and scientometrics to highlight the construction of my own analyses. Using mixed methods, the thesis argues that geosocial research is a collection of approaches rather than a coordinated community. I highlight fourteen practices that enable scholars to develop their approaches, including interdisciplinary collaboration; setting up distinct geosocial laboratories to experiment with geosocial data; reflecting on the data analysis process; and using local knowledge about spaces. I differentiate `social', `technical' and 'geographic' approaches, which differ in terms of the methods they use and spatial units they study. Finally, I illustrate approaches' heterogeneity - including their diverse computational approaches - and similarities, such as their urban studies focus.
... Another possible limitation is the inability of scientometric analysis to comparatively evaluate each included study's results and synthesize the available data into clear conclusions, as systematic reviews do. This type of study emphasizes papers' citation scores, authors, and affiliations and often ignores or fails to discover self-citation strategies or "the obliteration by incorporation" effect [51,52]. In this way, through scientometric analysis, research work of great quality and significance may not gain as much attention as it deserves. ...
... Citation can be considered as a quality indicator. It reflects the significance, influence, and reach of a document (MacRoberts & MacRoberts, 1989). Therefore, this citation analysis was aimed at establishing the frequency of citation, use of VAA information; the nature of the reference to VAA information including a description of the major documents, governmental or non-governmental organizations that have used VAA information; the main categories of users of VAA information; as well as decisions and actions informed by VAA information between 2017 to 2022. ...
Background: Vulnerability assessment and analysis have gained increasing significance as they provide essential data to guide governments on food insecurity issues. Aims: This review was aimed at establishing the use and influence of food and nutrition security vulnerability assessment and analysis data and reports in Zimbabwe. Methods: A total of 18 databases and search engines were explored. The inclusion criteria were English articles published after 31 December 2016 to 15 February 2022. Results: A final list of 65 scientific publications and 32 grey literature documents was found from the literature search. From the academic publications citing the Zimbabwe Vulnerability Assessment Committee (ZimVAC) reports or products, the most popular thematic areas were food and nutrition security (36%, 24/67), climate change 18% (12/65), Nutrition 9% (6/65), Resilience 9% (6/65) and Livelihoods 9% (6/65). Regarding grey literature documents citing ZimVAC products, most were humanitarian response appeals by the United Nations Representative Office in Zimbabwe and the Government of Zimbabwe. In scientific literature there was use of ZimVAC information for both conceptual and symbolic purposes and in grey literature it was used mainly for instrumental and symbolic purposes. The results also revealed that several food and nutrition security programs in Zimbabwe have been informed by VAA information presented in the ZimVAC products. Conclusion: The findings in this paper show that VAA data and products are well-cited in both scientific and grey literature. However, as food and nutrition security appear to be the most important theme informed by ZimVAC data, ZimVAC needs to speak to a wider spectrum of policymakers and programmers by illuminating other themes, such as risk reduction and resilience. VAA tools must be adaptable and take into consideration topical issues such as pandemics with evidence generated for policy and programming in real-time. Keywords: Food security; livelihood assessment; vulnerability assessment; Zimbabwe
... Citation analysis measures the impact and influence of publications or authors based on the number of times they have been cited. Authors and researchers are crucial in scientific endeavors as they are responsible for conducting research, analyzing data, and writing manuscripts (MacRoberts and MacRoberts, 1989;Wager and Kleinert, 2013). They bear accountability for the direct and indirect impact of their findings, contributing to the advancement of knowledge and the dissemination of clear, accurate, and balanced research outcomes (Wager and Kleinert, 2010). ...
The migration patterns of farmers, rural women, and youth within agricultural households have a significant impact on rural communities and the agricultural sector. To gain a deeper understanding of research trends in migration behavior, a study was conducted using comprehensive bibliometric analysis and text mining. René Descartes’ Discourse framework was employed to analyze 504 research articles retrieved from the Dimension.ai database followed by further analysis with Microsoft Excel, R software and VOS viewer. The study revealed a growing interest of various stakeholders in this field, with an increasing number of publications focusing on various aspects from 1934 to 2023. In terms of the publication’s performance analysis, the study identified human society and the second Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) as the most significant research areas. These areas aim to address hunger and improve food security for migrants. Regarding migration studies, three influential journals—Sustainability, World Development, and Journal of Rural Studies—were identified, with the most influential author being J. Vernon Henderson from the United Kingdom. Citation analysis was conducted to determine the highest number of citations for the influential author (J. V. Hernderon), journal (World Development), organization (World Bank), and country (United States) based on scientific attribution. Additionally, a co-word analysis was performed to research article’s abstracts to map into key thematic clusters that include climate change, food insecurity, and the COVID-19 crisis. The study visualized the social network of authors, organizations, and countries involved in co-authorship analysis within the research field. Furthermore, a journal co-citation analysis was undertaken to reveal the intellectual structure of migration studies in the agricultural context. Text mining of the research documents uncovered both anticipated and unanticipated effects of migration on households. Consequently, these findings provide valuable insights into future research directions and evidence-based policy framing which will contribute to shielding agricultural households from unforeseen consequences of migration, benefiting researchers, policymakers, and practitioners in this arena.
... In writing articles, scholars are expected to cite sources that are most important and relevant to the topic, and ones that influenced the author, but studies show substantial deviations from the ideal (MacRoberts & MacRoberts, 1989). Various forms of bias in citation practices occur, including excessive self-citation, omitting citations to authors who are enemies or otherwise out of favour, and giving unwarranted citations to allies, sources recommended by editors or reviewers, and articles published in the same journal. ...
Scholarly abuse takes many forms, including fraud, plagiarism, exploitation, exaggeration of credentials, and blocking others’ submissions and appointments. To better understand how such abuses continue, it is useful to look at tactics used by perpetrators to hide or legitimise their behaviours. For actions that are widely stigmatised, such as plagiarism, the most common tactic is cover-up. To challenge these forms of abuse, the tactic of exposure is often effective, and most effective when done by those with higher status. A different dynamic occurs with problematic behaviours that have become institutionalised, such as gift authorship and exaggerated claims in grant applications. Several additional techniques are commonly involved. One is positive framing, so that the actions are seen as normal and complaining about them deviant. Another is to set up official channels that give only an appearance of ensuring proper behaviour. A tactics analysis offers insight into how abuses are carried out and defended, points to ways to challenge them, and shows how certain questionable behaviours can become so normalised that they are seldom even called abuses.
... H. Prozesky and H.E. Prozesky would be treated as two different authors. On the other hand, WoS does not distinguish between different authors with identically spelled names (Glänzel & Thijs, 2004;MacRoberts & MacRoberts, 1989). Author disambiguation is a significant challenge for citation indexes. ...
http://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/105966
Advocates for open access (OA) practices proclaim it to have several benefits, for researchers, for science and for society at large. One of the proposed benefits is that the increased visibility provided by gratis access to research leads to OA publications receiving more citations than those publications of which no OA versions are available. This study investigated the veracity of this claim, by determining whether OA journal articles (defined in this study as gold OA articles) experience a citation advantage when compared to non-OA journal articles. To do so, an analysis was conducted of all articles and reviews published from 2005 to 2014 and indexed in the Clarivate Analytics Web of ScienceTM (WoS). This study included a description of the presence of OA journal articles in comparison to non-OA journal articles to provide context for the citation analysis. Three different measures of citation advantage were applied, as formulated in the following research questions: 1)Do OA journal articles attain a higher mean normalised citation score (MNCS) than non-OAjournal articles? 2)Do a higher percentage of OA journal articles than non-OA journal articles receive at least onecitation within two years after publication? 3)Is there a higher percentage of OA journal articles than non-OA journal articles among themost frequently cited 1%, 5%, and 10% of articles? These questions were explored firstly for all the articles, and then for articles published in each of the years separately. Secondly, the data were disaggregated by subject area and analysed for all the articles, and then only for those published in 2014. In addition, the percentage of articles that were published in OA journals was ascertained. Whether OA journal articles experienced a citation advantage was determined through a three-fold process. Firstly, it was determined whether OA or non-OA journal articles had a higher score or percentage in terms of the measure of the citation advantage in question. Following that, the statistical significance of the difference was tested, and, lastly, the effect size was determined as an expression of the variability in the measure that access status accounts for. This study found that the percentage of articles published in OA journals had increased considerably, from 3.3% in 2005 to 13.1% in 2014. This is likely due to the launch of new OA journals, considering the retroactive assignment of the OA tag in WoS. While the vast majority of subject areas exhibited an increase in the percentage of articles published in OA journals, seven displayed a decrease. By 2014, the majority of articles, in all but three subject areas (of 274), had been published in non-OA journals. This study determined that there is no general OA or non-OA journal citation advantage, as access status accounts for little of the variability in the number of citations articles receive. This was the case for the majority of subject areas as well. OA journal articles experienced a definite citation advantage in only a few subject areas. It is therefore misleading to claim that publishing in an OA journal will necessarily lead to a citation advantage. It is likely that other factors, such as whether the journal is established and the practices of OA journals, have a stronger effect on the number of citations articles receive.
... Citations of research articles are increasingly used to judge the quality and status of academic journals (Judge et al., 2007). There are some debates about legitimacy of citations as evaluation tool, which started in the early days of scientometrics and are still ongoing (e.g., Ewing, 1966;Garfield, 1979;Lindsey, 1989;MacRoberts & MacRoberts, 1989;Onodera & Yoshikane, 2015). While there are some objections to using citations as measures of quality, the alternatives are rather limited (e.g., Phelan, 1999;Jarwal et al., 2009). ...
In this paper, we examine the contribution of Network Science journal to the network science discipline. We do so from two perspectives. First, expanding the existing taxonomy of article contribution, we examine trends in theory testing, theory building, and new method development within the journal’s articles. We find that the journal demands a high level of theoretical contribution and methodological rigor. High levels of theoretical and methodological contribution become significant predictors of article citation rates. Second, we look at the composition of the studies in Network Science and determine that the journal has already established a solid “hard core” for the new discipline.
... "Zitierte Publikationen haben nicht nur den kleinen Kreis der Gutachter(innen) im Peer-Review-Verfahren, sondern auch den (in der Regel) größeren Kreis der zitierenden Fachkolleg(inn)en überzeugen können." (Lutz Bornmann et al., 2012, S. 235) Dass der Konnex zwischen der Anzahl der Zitationen und wissenschaftlicher Qualität nicht unmittelbar herstellen lässt wie es allgemein angenommen wird, ist seit Jahrzehnten Teil von Diskussionen um die Gründe für (hohe) Zitationsraten (MacRoberts & MacRoberts, 1989;Seglen, 1991). Hier kann es vielfältige Einflussfaktoren wie Alter, Geschlecht oder Zugehörigkeit zu einer bestimmten Einrichtung sowie Manipulationsmomente wie Selbstzitationen oder Zitationskartelle geben, die einen Rückschluss von den Zitationsraten auf die wissenschaftliche Güte zumindest fragwürdig erscheinen lassen (Dries et al., 2008;Slyder et al., 2011). ...
Forschungsdaten sind wesentlicher Bestandteil des Wissenschaftskreislaufes. Sie sind eine der wesentlichsten Grundlagen von Forschung und damit auch Ausgangspunkt neuer Erkenntnisse, von Innovationen und dadurch nicht zuletzt auch eine Basis wirtschaftlichen Fortschritts. Gleichermaßen können Forschungsdaten durch ihre Einzigartigkeit (bspw. Observationsdaten) Schaufenster in die Vergangenheit sein und dabei helfen, die Zukunft zu antizipieren. Daten werden mithin als einer der Rohstoffe des 21. Jahrhunderts bezeichnet und geraten vermehrt in den Fokus verschiedener Stakeholder. Insbesondere im Rahmen öffentlich finanzierter Wissenschaft und Forschung werden die Anforderungen an Forschende immer größer, die aus der geförderten Tätigkeit entstandenen Forschungsdaten unter dem Paradigma der Open Science offen zur Verfügung zu stellen. Daraus erwachsen große Herausforderungen für Datenproduzent:innen. Denn die qualitative Aufbereitung von Forschungsdaten zum Zwecke der Publikation, um die Auffindbarkeit und sinnvolle Nachnutzung durch Dritte zu ermöglichen, stellt eine Aufgabe mit teils erheblichen Zusatzaufwand bei stark begrenzten zeitlichen Ressourcen dar. Die Anerkennung dieser Zusatzleistung in der Bewertung wissenschaftlicher Leistungen könnte einen wichtigen Anreiz für das Erbringen dieses zusätzlichen Aufwandes bieten. Die vorliegende Arbeit geht der Frage nach, wie ein Bewertungssystem für Forschungsdatenpublikationen aussehen könnte und nimmt dabei auch aktuell genutzte publikationsbezogene Metriken und Indikatoren kritisch in den Blick. Insbesondere wird diskutiert, ob die FAIR-Prinzipien bei der Erarbeitung eines Rahmenwerkes für die Qualität von Datenpublikationen operationalisiert werden können. Abschließend wird die Idee eines „Data Score" vorgestellt. Die Arbeit fokussiert auf Datenpublikationen in den Geowissenschaften und bezieht dementsprechend die Expertise eines Ausschnitts der deutschen geowissenschaftlichen Fachgemeinschaft in Form einer Befragung ein.
... To reduce the dependency on explicit ratings, implicit ratings can be inferred through user actions (Pennock et al., 2000) such as browsing, downloading (Guo et al., 2017b), adding paper to his/her collection (Alotaibi and Vassileva, 2013), commenting (Guo et al., 2017b), purchasing, citing a paper (Sakib et al., 2020;Haruna et al., 2017), number of pages read by the users (Yang et al., 2009), based on interest areas (Cazella and Alvares, 2005a) and trust relationships (Alotaibi and Vassileva, 2013). However these assumptions were criticized by some authors, they argue that implicit ratings may not be able to model the real-world requirements (MacRoberts and MacRoberts, 1989;Liu, 1993). Apart from these, various issues such as gray sheep, ramp-up problem, shilling attacks etc. have been associated with a collaborative-filtering based system (Ricci et al., 2011;Sharma et al., 2017a). ...
The purpose of this study is to present an exhaustive analysis on research paper recommender systems which have become very popular and gained a lot of research attention. Though the major focus is on developing new recommendation algorithms, other research dimensions are left untouched. Renown recommendation classes include content-based approaches, collaborative filtering, link-based algorithms, co-occurrence based approaches, global relevance and hybrid methods. These approaches mainly differ in background knowledge and modes of user behavior analysis. For instance, content-based filtering uses paper descriptions which are mostly word-based features. Collaborative filtering makes predictions based on peers’ interests. Link-based algorithms utilize academic associations that exist between different entities in academia. Co-occurrence based techniques incorporate event occurrences to locate related papers. Global relevance adopts a ‘one-for-all’ policy for recommending popular articles. Hybrid methods combine the above approaches to design efficient algorithms. We have reviewed articles implementing several versions of these classes, however minor customizations make it difficult to categorize the new methods to one of the base classes. We have defined the concept of ‘background knowledge and operating principle’ for proper classification and to make a clear distinction among the recommendation approaches. We have used a combination of systematic literature review, critical review, and conceptual review to conduct this survey which presents current advancements in the field and discusses popular recommendation approaches. This paper reveals the factors affecting users’ behavior and introduces a taxonomy of knowledge acquisition sources. Moreover, various evaluation methods and important performance criteria are explored. Finally, this paper examines the research trends and reports major loopholes in current research to foster the development of efficacious recommender systems.
... MacRoberts & MacRoberts (1988) pekar på brister i citeringsdata. ...
The report describes in detail the most important components of an evaluation of a research program. Evaluation should meet the following conditions: • Distinguishes between different types of R&D • Includes different outputs from the research • Includes different network and collaboration effects. The purpose of the report is to propose a minimum model model for evaluation of major research projects or research programs financed by a research council or any other authority.
... Partly these discussions regarding a theory of citations could be seen as a response to a critique from neighboring fields such as science and technology studies, which questioned citation analysis based on its lack of theoretical underpinnings. An influential contribution to this discussion was an article written by MacRoberts and MacRoberts (1989) in which several criticisms against citation analysis and its use in research and policy were raised. A key problem according to these authors was the lack of theory for explaining citations. ...
Introduction: Patent citations are an important indicator for studying science and technology interaction. Yet, empirical and conceptual studies of referencing practices in patents are largely lacking, which has resulted in an under-theorised understanding of patent citations.
Theoretical approach: This study analyses previous research on patent citations and discusses these in relation to citation theories developed within science studies and bibliometrics. The ambition is, however, to advance beyond a comparative approach by adding an additional layer of analysis in which the overarching rhetorical function of references in patents and papers is considered.
Conceptual Analysis: The analysis shows how referencing in patents have distinguishing characteristics in terms of who cites, the temporality of referencing, national and international context, quantity of references, and incentives for citing. These characteristics are discussed using the concept of fencing and stacking. Fencing illustrates how references in patents are used to demarcate claims, while the stacking of references in scientific papers is an act of cumulative persuasion.
Conclusions: Substantial rhetorical and epistemological differences exist in how references are used in patents and papers, and these differences have implications for how citations patterns can be interpreted. The conceptualisation of referencing as fencing and stacking is suggested as a possible framework for interpreting empirical studies of patent citations. Overall, it is argued that a further theoretical, and empirical, understanding of referencing practices in patents are need in order to contextualise and problematise patent citations, and their current use in research and policy.
.
... Numerous strategies for filtering scholarly work and assessing the impact of research have been developed . Peer review (Bornmann, 2011), citation analysis (Moed, 2005;Azoulay et al., 2018), and article-level assessment (McKeown et al., 2016) can all provide useful information about the impact of scientific research in this area, but these established methods have limitations and drawbacks (MacRoberts andMacRoberts, 1989, 1996;Seglen, 1997Seglen, , 1992Lima et al., 2013). They are time-consuming and self-limiting in that they exclude a large number of other channels for research attention and do not account for the holistic impact of scholarly outcomes (Piwowar, 2013;Priem and Hemminger, 2010;Bornmann, 2014). ...
Research articles are being shared in increasing numbers on multiple online platforms. Although the scholarly impact of these articles has been widely studied, the online interest determined by how long the research articles are shared online remains unclear. Being cognizant of how long a research article is mentioned online could be valuable information to the researchers. In this paper, we analyzed multiple social media platforms on which users share and/or discuss scholarly articles. We built three clusters for papers, based on the number of yearly online mentions having publication dates ranging from the year 1920 to 2016. Using the online social media metrics for each of these three clusters, we built machine learning models to predict the long-term online interest in research articles. We addressed the prediction task with two different approaches: regression and classification. For the regression approach, the Multi-Layer Perceptron model performed best, and for the classification approach, the tree-based models performed better than other models. We found that old articles are most evident in the contexts of economics and industry (i.e., patents). In contrast, recently published articles are most evident in research platforms (i.e., Mendeley) followed by social media platforms (i.e., Twitter).
... Being cited means that the article is seen and used in other research works but the reasons behind citations are yet a matter of debate and vary between researchers and between cited documents (MacRoberts & MacRoberts, 1989). While normative theory of citations holds the view that citations reflect the intrinsic quality of research, social constructivist view casts doubt on this hypothesis as the main motivation for citations and emphasizes on extrinsic factors affecting citation counts of research articles. ...
Citations are used for research evaluation, and it is therefore important to know which factors influence or associate with citation impact of articles. Several citation factors have been studied in the literature. In this study we propose a new factor, topic growth, that no previous study has studied empirically. The growth rate of topics may influence future citation counts because a high growth in a topic means there are more publications citing previous publications in that topic. We construct topics using community detection in a citation network and use a two-part regression model to study the association between topic growth and citation counts in eight broad disciplines. The first part of the model uses quantile regression to estimate the effect of growth ratio on citation counts for publications with more than three citations. The second part of the model uses logistic regression to model the influence of the explanatory variables on the probability of being lowly cited versus being modestly or highly cited. Both models control for three variables that may distort the association between the topic growth and citations: journal impact, number of references, and number of authors. The regression model clearly shows that publications in fast-growing topics have a citation advantage compared to publications in slow-growing or declining topics in all of the eight disciplines. Using citation indicators for research evaluation may give incentives for researchers to publish in fast-growing topics, but they may cause research to be less diversified. The results have also some implications for citation normalization.
... Some of the researchers present citation analysis as a method for research assessment (Moed ,2009). Whereas some researchers focus on the critical assessment of major problems in citation analysis techniques (MacRoberts & MacRoberts, 1989). Recent years have seen a growing interest in citation analysis to help address research, management, or information service issues such as research evaluation or knowledge domain visualization. ...
AI Applications has led to changes in social as well as economic structure of the world and caused worldwide policy changes. AI research and applications have not only increased in volume but has also expanded across various disciplines. Newer themes of research have emerged while attention on several topics has gradually faded. Therefore, there is a need to analyse and understand the patterns of growth and thematic evolution of AI research during the last decade. Motivated by the need, Bibliometric methodologies of Bradford’s law and Path analysis are employed to develop a framework for a detailed analysis. Publication and citation data of AI for the period 2010 to 2020 obtained from Web of Science when analysed using this framework, showed an exponential growth between 2016 and 2020. An increased adoption of AI in novel domains is indicated by an increase in both concentration and dispersion of the literature. Through the analysis of evolutionary trajectories contributing to growth of AI, it was observed that applications of AI are becoming common in previously unrelated areas such as water resource management, environment management, building technology, healthcare etc. These are areas which directly relate with sustainable development and the researchers have used multiple single as well as hybrid AI tools to address their problems. The article presents useful insight along these lines which can be useful for practitioners in the field of AI.
... For example, Teplitskiy et al. (2020) finds that highlycited publications are actually more likely to have an intellectual influence on the work in which they are cited. Another category of problems mentioned by MacRoberts and MacRoberts (1989) is more technical and relates to coverage issues (Visser, van Eck, and Waltman, 2021), problems of reference matching (Olensky, Schmidt, and van Eck, 2016) and problems of author disambiguation (Caron and van Eck, 2014). ...
Citations in science are being studied from several perspectives. On the one hand, there are approaches such as scientometrics and the science of science, which take a more quantitative perspective. In this chapter I briefly review some of the literature on citations, citation distributions and models of citations. These citations feature prominently in another part of the literature which is dealing with research evaluation and the role of metrics and indicators in that process. Here I briefly review part of the discussion in research evaluation. This also touches on the subject of how citations relate to peer review. Finally, I try to integrate the two literatures with the aim of clarifying what I believe the two can learn from each other. The fundamental problem in research evaluation is that research quality is unobservable. This has consequences for conclusions that we can draw from quantitative studies of citations and citation models. The term "indicators" is a relevant concept in this context, which I try to clarify. Causality is important for properly understanding indicators, especially when indicators are used in practice: when we act on indicators, we enter causal territory. Even when an indicator might have been valid, through its very use, the consequences of its use may invalidate it. By combining citation models with proper causal reasoning and acknowledging the fundamental problem about unobservable research quality, we may hope to make progress.
... Citations have traditionally been used to measure scholarly impact (Cronin, 1984). Citations, however, are typically generated some time after publication, and they reflect only the academic impact among researchers in the same field (Aung et al., 2019;MacRoberts & MacRoberts, 1989;1996). Unlike traditional metrics, altmetrics measure research attention in real-time, encompass a broader range of research sources, and include nonacademic audiences as well as academics (Wouters & Costas, 2012). ...
The present study is aimed toward examining the attention received by research papers through social and electronic media in business research. In recent years, altmetrics has emerged as a complementary measure of the impact of research works besides citation analysis and bibliometrics. Using the altmetric attention score (AAS) the paper is the first research of its kind to shed light on the characteristics of 100 papers receiving the highest online attention. Various predictors of online engagement with articles in business research journals having an impact factor greater than 6 are discussed. Data was collected from the Dimensions.ai database and analyzed using R statistical software. It is found that the Journal of Business Ethics contributed maximum papers with the highest AAS followed by the Journal of Business Research. Using the Kruskal-Wallis rank-sum test it was determined that AAS in business research is dependent upon article type, topics, and journal of publication. Most of the papers in high impact factor business journals have been contributed by the authors of USA, UK and China.
... Thus, including other search engines would pay dividends. Third, like its equivalents, the bibliometric studies rely on "subjective risk," which may occur because of the researchers' judgment during the research process (MacRoberts and MacRoberts, 1989). A possible subjective risk would arise from keyword selection (i.e. ...
Purpose
This study aims to investigate the intellectual structure of leadership research in the hospitality industry through citation, co-citation and heat map analysis.
Design/methodology/approach
Systematic bibliometric mapping was done using citation and co-citation analysis. This study covered journals from 1985 to 2020.
Findings
After reviewing 172 published articles with 10,276 citations, results identified five main clusters.
Practical implications
Hospitality managers can choose certain qualities (i.e. charisma, individualized consideration) or use servant leadership characteristics (i.e. selflessness) to direct employees toward more discretionary behavior.
Originality/value
Former holistic studies on leadership applied different approaches, such as review studies (i.e. systematic review and meta-analysis) or evaluative studies (e.g. productivity measures). It mainly focused on extending the understanding of different leadership types in tourism and hospitality. Nevertheless, relational studies (e.g. citation analysis, bibliographic analysis) remained untouched.
... However, measuring the degree of interdisciplinarity of a given work is still a challenge as the measurement highly depends on the classification scheme and disciplinary relationships considered (Zhang et al., 2016). Although several approaches have been applied to measure the degree of interdisciplinarity at different levels (e.g., published works, journals, researchers, institutes or fields), all measurement results depend on the classification and data sources used (e.g., Web of Science and Scopus) (Chen et al., 2015;Lariviere & Gingras, 2010;Larivière et al., 2015;Levitt & Thelwall, 2008;MacRoberts & MacRoberts, 1989;Morillo et al., 2001;Porter & Chubin, 1985;Rinia et al., 2002;Shu et al., 2019;Steele & Stier, 2000;Uzzi et al., 2013;Wang et al., 2015). In particular, results will be affected by the contents of such databases, which exclude important scientific outputs like books and monographs (e.g. ...
Examining the relationships among scientific disciplines is important today, but existing methods are limited by the contents and structure of their bibliographic databases. We therefore demonstrate a novel approach that measures disparity by examining the organization of published scientific books and monographs into Library of Congress Subject Headings. After outlining the method and analyses conducted, we compare our results with those produced by prior works, note potential implications of the demonstrated method for use by bibliometric practitioners, and suggest directions for further research.
... Moreover, current methods like pathfinder are used to better show the chronological development of scientific fields. The citation counts are directionless and not able to show the conceptual transformations because more citations do not indicate that the cited document is more important, let alone resolve the problems of biased citations (MacRoberts and MacRoberts 1989) In this paper, we use the Pathfinder Network Scaling (PNS) as this is, in our view, a superior methodology for our purpose over the widely used minimal spanning trees (MST) method. ...
We analyse the growing literature on technological catch-up since the 1980s to identify its intellectual bases and evolution. The analysis uses co-occurrence and co-citation techniques to explore trends in keywords, journals, documents, and authors. In the 1980s, the area was characterised by two unrelated streams of work on macroeconomic growth and the building of technological capabilities at the micro-level in developing economies. During the 1990s, when the technological catch-up literature began to take off, these two streams of literature
evolved further and came closer to each other. During the 2000s, firm-level studies rooted in resource-based and
knowledge-based views proliferated. From 2010 they were followed by an increased number of studies of
latecomer firm internationalisation. The field’s qualitative evolution has been characterised by the convergence
between the economic growth and technology capabilities literature, a change of focus from the macro issues of
growth and convergence to firm (latecomer firm) and sectoral level issues, and a dominant concern about the
relationship between globalisation and technology upgrading at the sectoral or mezzo level. There are four
streams that currently underpin research on technology catch up: economic growth, systems of innovation,
knowledge management, and industrial dynamics cum global value chains and latecomer firm.
... The current rapid access to digital publications can greatly accelerate research, but the information overload also challenges researchers, especially junior researchers, in finding appropriate citations for their research projects. In previous papers, to deal with this problem, bibliometric methods have focused on ranking publications by citation analysis [7] along with graph mining [8] A common and easy method based on citation frequency or citation counts has been studied for a long time. Nevertheless, there is a basic assumption in previous methods, which is easy and straightforward: if paper1 cites paper2, then paper1 and paper2 are related. ...
Scientific papers published in journals or conferences, also considered academic publications, are the manifestation of scientific research achievements. Lots of scientific papers published in digital form bring new challenges for academic evaluation and information retrieval. Therefore, research on the ranking method of scientific papers is significant for the management and evaluation of academic resources. In this paper, we first identify internal and external factors for evaluating scientific papers and propose a publication ranking method based on an analysis of a heterogeneous academic network. We use four types of metadata (i.e., author, venue (journal or conference), topic, and title) as vertexes for creating the network; in there, the topics are trained by the SentenceLDA algorithm with the metadata of the abstract. We then use the Gibbs sampling method to create a heterogeneous academic network and apply the ConNetClus algorithm to calculate the probability value of publication ranking. To evaluate the significance of the method proposed in this paper, we compare the ranking results with BM25, PageRank, etc., and homogeneous networks in MAP and NDCG. As shown in our evaluation results, the performance of the method we propose in this paper is better than other baselines for ranking publications.
... Citations are explicit links to earlier documents and constitute a paper trail that provides empirical evidence of the direction of knowledge transfer (Van Leeuwen & Tijssen, 2000). Due to the many motivations and reasons to cite a paper (Bornmann & Daniel, 2008;MacRoberts & MacRoberts, 1989;Moravcsik & Murugesan, 1975), citations can indicate knowledge transfer only to a certain extent. Moreover, citation linkages are not capable of indicating the specific knowledge transferred. ...
This paper explores the knowledge transfer of internationally mobile scientists. It builds upon previous work on the development of methods for detecting the knowledge transfer of German scientists. Using abstract terms of publications covered in Scopus, this paper proposes a lexical‐based approach to identify knowledge transmitters. These scientists are characterized by acquiring knowledge from their co‐workers during their international stay and transferring it upon return to German co‐workers. Knowledge is operationalized as the co‐occurrence of rarely used abstract terms. Knowledge transfer is expressed as the diffusion of these term combinations in co‐authorship networks. The method developed was validated by contacting the bibliometrically identified knowledge transmitters and asking them what they believe they learned during their stay abroad. A control group of internationally mobile scientists without traceable knowledge transfer was similarly asked to report on their knowledge acquisition. The findings suggest that bibliometric data are capable of detecting knowledge transmitters among German scientists who were internationally mobile. The juxtaposition of the responses on their perceived knowledge acquisition and the bibliometrically identified lexical terms shows that the method proposed is well suited to studying the knowledge transfer of internationally mobile scientists. The strength of the method is its simplicity and high precision.
... Self-citation, language bias, journal bias and in-house bias (among others) were not controlled for in this study. 27 There are several phenomena that can influence the results of a bibliometric analysis. Obliteration by incorporation is one of these. ...
The Ilizarov method has become a widely recognised technique. A bibliometric analysis of the 50 most-cited publications relating to the Ilizarov method was carried out. Cumulative number of citations was 4,918. Mean number of citations was 98. Hindex was 50. Impact factor of these journals ranged from 0.5-5.082. Our study suggests that a highly cited and influential paper likely originated from an American journal with a high impact factor and was published in the 1990s/2000s. Our compilation of the 50 most influential papers on the Ilizarov method will prove invaluable to those in training and those involved its further advancement.
... As we have seen, however, the journal cannot in any way be taken as representative of the article. Even if it could, the journal IF would still be far from being a quality indicator: citation impact is primarily a measure of scientific utility rather than of scientific quality, and authors' selection of references is subject to strong biases unrelated to quality (Macroberts & Macroberts, 1989;Seglen, 1995). For evaluation of scientific quality, there seems to be no alternative to qualified experts reading the publications. ...
Background
Increasing pressure on researchers and academicians to publish in high impact factor (IF) journals necessitates selecting useful quality journals in academia.
Objectives
To review IF’s role and the factors that influence the IF of dental journals, including the journals’ quartile distribution.
Methods
The Editorial board size of the journal, age of the journal, status (print or electronic) of publication, frequency of publication, quartile, and 5-year IF of all Clarivate Analytics’ oral-dental journals (Dentistry, Oral Surgery, and Medicine) were investigated. Descriptive and inferential statistics were utilized. The information was obtained from individual websites of the journals and Web of Science databases.
Results
The result shows that all four variables (Editorial board size, frequency of publication, status, and age of journals) were not correlated with the IF, and there was no statistically significant difference found on the IF based on all four factors.
Discussion
Studies on all four factors contribute to the current IF of individual journals. Five-year and yearly progress trends of journals with quartile rankings are helping to make learning choices for journal selection. The selection of high IF dental journals is a current need for oral health care professionals from academia. Irrespective of the impact factors, publish and flourish policy may be adopted by academic institutions to promote a writing culture. Incentives should be offered to faculty of academic institutions, and adequate time should be allocated to promote publishing culture. Novice authors should be encouraged to start writing and not initially only focus on high IF journals, as with time, quality should follow. If articles are published in medical journals, the keywords should include dental/or dentistry, so it could be classified in the dental literature as well, wherever it is applicable.
... Three primary tools deliver the citation-based analysis: citation analysis, bibliographic coupling, and co-citation analysis [16,19]. Some researchers have questioned the accuracy of direct citation and bibliometric coupling [20]. Nevertheless, co-citation analysis is accurate and thus widely used [21]. ...
The Covid-19 pandemic impact on people’s lives has been devastating. Around the world, people have been forced to stay home, resorting to the use of digital technologies in an effort to continue their life and work as best they can. Covid-19 has thus accelerated society’s digital transformation towards Industry 4.0 (the fourth industrial revolution). Using scientometric analysis, this study presents a systematic literature review of the themes within Industry 4.0. Thematic analysis reveals that the Internet of Things (IoT), Artificial Intelligence (AI), Cloud computing, Machine learning, Security, Big Data, Blockchain, Deep learning, Digitalization, and Cyber-physical system (CPS) to be the key technologies associated with Industry 4.0. Subsequently, a case study using Industry 4.0 technologies to manage the Covid-19 pandemic is discussed. In conclusion, Covid-19,is clearly shown to be an accelerant in the progression towards Industry 4.0. Moreover, the technologies of this digital transformation can be expected to be invoked in the management of future pandemics.
... 8 Although the future, post-Covid19 world, is yet to stabilize. 9 For citation gaming, negative citation, and so forth, see MacRoberts and MacRoberts (1989). 10 The oldest example of bibliometric analysis and citation database date back to the 19th century. ...
In this introductory paper to the special issue on Scientometric Analysis in Business and Economics, we consider four related issues. First, we outline why we believe it is time to produce a special issue of the Journal of Economic Surveys dedicated to the scientometric analysis and its growing use in the fields of business and economics. Second, we focus on the topic of “evaluative scientometrics,” which revolves around the central, basic, original question: how much is a publication worth? The question then is: how do we measure scholarly impact? In answering the question, many pitfalls exist and we identify some of them. Third, we present a brief overview of the seven papers, authored by twelve scientometricians, that constitute the special issue. The manuscripts show the potential of scientometrics in terms of the wide range of fields of application. Finally, we present a set of Guidelines which, if prospective authors in business and economics follow them, we hope will increase readability, impact and the potential for their scientometric-based research to be published.
В контексте ограничений доступа к заслуженно популярным ведущим наукометрическим базам данных рассматриваются возможности целесообразного использования трудов узкоспециализированных международных научных конференций как источника библиографических ссылок для наукометрического анализа, выполняемого de visu. Научных областей, по которым проводятся конференции с изданием действительно репрезентативных трудов, анализ которых позволяет судить о состоянии научной области в целом, немного, но они существуют; более того, они не обязательно имеют хотя бы один специализированный научный журнал. При этом речь идёт о действительно важных научных областях: так, в 90-е годы прошлого века, когда автор занимался подобными исследованиями, такими важными областями, не имевшими целиком посвящённых им специализированных журналов, были, например, магнитные жидкости и очистка и обработка костного мозга. / In the context of restrictions to access to deservedly popular leading scientometric databases, the possibilities of reasonable use of the proceedings of highly specialized international scientific conferences as a source of bibliographic citations for scientometric analysis performed de visu are considered. Though there are not so many areas of science on which conferences are resulted with the publication of truly representative proceedings, the analysis of which makes it possible to assess the state of the scientific area as a whole, but they do exist; moreover, they do not necessarily have even at least one specialized scientific journal. We emphasize that really important scientific areas are meant: thus, in the nineties of the last century, when the author was engaged in such research, the important areas under his study that did not have specialized journals devoted entirely to them were magnetic fluids and bone marrow purification and processing.
The book traces the main stages of third mission and social impact assessment, in the context of the (recent) history of higher education and research assessment in Italy, starting with a review of the transformation of the relationship between the University and the society.
Several social drives are leading the university to a series of transformations, at the national, European and international level. The requirement to use transparency criteria and the associated returns of research spending (in accountability) has become a fundamental issue in informing government, business, citizens and society on the achieved results. The introduction of social impact assessment frameworks is also advancing research agendas towards socially relevant domains, to provide solutions in international competitiveness, social welfare, sustainability and other grand challenges.
A terminological and conceptual shift is occurring from a traditional concept of technology transfer and third mission towards a broader meaning of knowledge exchange and co-creation between universities and extra-academic actors and the impact generated. However, this shift towards a transdisciplinary, trans-epistemic and inclusive evaluation framework poses new challenges to capture this complexity, requiring the adoption of new methods and tools presented in this book. The international literature and debate on practices are vital combined with trial-and-error approaches, community involvement, and targeted pilot studies. Beyond controversies, resistances, and easily contrived enthusiasms, this is what this volume tries to investigate.
Background:
Bruxism is an umbrella term that encompass a multidimensional spectrum of masticatory muscle activities.
Objective:
The purpose of this study was to do a bibliometric analysis including citation-performance in the research topic of bruxism, by using an innovative method including details of article title, author keyword, KeyWords Plus, and abstracts.
Methods:
The data was retrieved 2022-12-19 from the Clarivate Analytics Web of Science Core Collection, and the online version of the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED) for studies published 1992 to 2021. To evaluate research trends, the distribution of keywords in the article title and author-selected keywords were used.
Results:
The search yielded 3,233 documents in SCI-EXPANDED, of which 2,598 were of the document-type "articles" published in 676 journals. The analysis of the articles revealed that "bruxism/sleep bruxism", "electromyography", "temporomandibular disorders", and "masticatory muscles" are the most used keywords by the authors. Further, the most frequently cited study was published 9 years ago and handles the present definition of bruxism.
Conclusion:
The most productive authors and those with the highest performance have some common features, they have several national and international collaborations, and they have published articles about the definition, etiology/pathophysiology and prevalence of bruxism, all senior researchers in the field of TMD. Hopefully, based on this study, researchers and clinicians will have information to be stimulated to outline future research projects on bruxism related aspects, and to initiate new international or multinational collaborations.
Purpose
The purpose of the study is to analyze a sample of 528 published papers over the past 11 years by conducting a bibliometric analysis. The study also aims to provide a consolidated overview of the existing literature on “gaming addiction” and presents the status of research with future directions for researchers who wish to explore and contribute to this rapidly evolving field. The descriptive statistics have been conducted through citation and co-citation analysis.
Design/methodology/approach
For the bibliometric analysis, the documents were retrieved from the Scopus database with the help of the Scopus analyzer while the VOS viewer1.6.16 software was used to analyze citations, co-authorship, etc. The literature search strategy was applied across various databases and the articles published between 2010 and December 2021 giving a total of 1,219 articles across all disciplines. Finally, 528 articles were shortlisted through the query restricted to subject areas, namely, business management, psychology, social science and multidisciplinary areas.
Findings
IGA has also been recognized by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders , Fifth Edition, as one of the disorders; hence, this certainly calls for focussed efforts to understand the same and control further damage. The number of articles devoted to the study of “gaming addiction” has increased rapidly in recent years. Moreover, this study identifies some of the most influential articles in this area. Finally, this paper highlights the new trends and discusses the future research associated with gaming addiction.
Research limitations/implications
This study focusses on gaming addiction and its trends, related to researchers and country-wise contributions. This is one of the few studies to review the literature on gaming addiction by using citation and co-citation analysis. The main findings of this paper will help academicians and practitioners to improve the body of knowledge on the topic and provide an overview of promising future research avenues.
Originality/value
Internet gaming is a newly emerging area and studies related to gaming addiction are very recent. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is a unique and comprehensive overview of the leading works done in this area.
Citation-based indicators of scholarly impact are controversial in the sciences. Although they are often used in rankings of institutions, scholarly works, and scholars themselves, they have been criticized for their failure to capture a wider spectrum of “scholarly impact.” Much like the “five tools” that baseball players can use to influence the outcome of a baseball game, there are a lot of different ways that scholars can have an impact with their work. Accordingly, this article discusses multiple dimensions of impact—research (publications and citations), student mentorship, institutional and programmatic development, community engagement, and the discipline at large—where scholars can make a difference in people’s lives. In the end, the broader message is that, while there will inevitably be few players like Roberto Clemente or Willie Mays in the sciences, there are still several important ways that scholars can make an impact.
Purpose
This paper aims to define a hierarchical and multi-criteria framework based on pillars of the Modernization of Higher Education to evaluate European Accounting Doctoral Programmes (EADE-Model).
Design/methodology/approach
The authors applied a quali-quantitative methodology based on the analytic hierarchy process and the survey approach. The authors conducted an extensive literature and regulation review to identify the dimensions affecting the quality of Doctoral Programmes, choosing accounting as the relevant and pivotal field. The authors also used the survey to select the most critical quality dimensions and derive their weight to build EADE Model. The validity of the proposed model has been tested through the application to the Italian scenario.
Findings
The findings provide a critical extension of accounting ranking studies constructing a multi-criteria, hierarchical and updated evaluation model recognizing the role of doctoral training in the knowledge-based society. The results shed new light on weak areas apt to be improved and propose potential amendments to enhance the quality standard of ADE.
Practical implications
Theoretical and practical implications of this paper are directed to academics, policymakers and PhD programmes administrators.
Originality/value
The research is original in drafting a hierarchical multi-criteria framework for evaluating ADE in the Higher Education System. This model may be extended to other fields.
[ 目的 / 意义 ] 同行评议在科学发展中扮演着关键角色，探讨同行评议的有效性对同行评议制度的发展和运行有着重要意义。[ 研究设计 / 方法 ] 旨在对两种不同的研究取向进行回顾与阐述：即同行评议何以有效与为何无效。并从尚未得到充分关注的同行评议与文献计量间的内在联系这一视角切入，借鉴有效市场假说，从更加系统性的维度重新架构同行评议有效性的评判路径。[结论/发现]同行评议的有效性是同行评议功能得以发挥的基准，而引文量作为最核心的文献计量指标与同行评议结果之间存在紧密且复杂的内在联系，并在此基础上提出了以三种同行评议有效性形式（弱有效、半强有效、强有效）为主的有效同行评议假说。[ 创新 / 价值 ] 从更为多元和异质性的视角，提出了新的关于同行评议有效性的解释路径，在一定程度上呈现了同行评议机制的内在复杂性，搭建了同行评议与文献计量指标之间的内在联系。
Citation analysis is used extensively in the bibliometrics literature to assess the impact of individual works, researchers, institutions, and even entire fields of study. In this article, we analyze citations in one large and influential field within computer science, namely computer systems. Using citation data from a cross-sectional sample of 2,088 papers in 50 systems conferences from 2017, we examine four research areas of investigation: overall distribution of systems citations; their evolution over time; the differences between databases (Google Scholar and Scopus), and; the characteristics of self-citations in the field. On citation distribution, we find that overall, systems papers were well cited, with the most cited subfields and conference areas within systems being security, databases, and computer architecture. Only 1.5% of papers remain uncited after five years, while 12.8% accrued at least 100 citations. For the second area, we find that most papers achieved their first citation within a year from publication, and the median citation count continued to grow at an almost linear rate over five years, with only a few papers peaking before that. We also find that early citations could be linked to papers with a freely available preprint, or may be primarily composed of self-citations. For the third area, it appears that the choice of citation database makes little difference in relative citation comparisons, despite marked differences in absolute counts. On the fourth area, we find that the ratio of self-citations to total citations starts relatively high for most papers but appears to stabilize by 12–18 months, at which point highly cited papers revert to predominately external citations. Past self-citation count (taken from each paper’s reference list) appears to bear little if any relationship with the future self-citation count of each paper. The primary practical implication of these results is that the impact of systems papers, as measured in citations, tends to be high relative to comparable studies of other fields and that it takes at least five years to stabilize. A secondary implication is that at least for this field, Google Scholar appears to be a reliable source of citation data for relative comparisons.
What conditions enable novel intellectual contributions to diffuse and become integrated into later scientific work? Prior work tends to focus on whole cultural products, such as patents and articles, and emphasizes external social factors as important. This article focuses on concepts as reflections of ideas, and we identify the combined influence that social factors and internal intellectual structures have on ideational diffusion. To develop this perspective, we use computational techniques to identify nearly 60,000 new ideas introduced over two decades (1993 to 2016) in the Web of Science and follow their diffusion across 38 million later publications. We find new ideas diffuse more widely when they socially and intellectually resonate. New ideas become core concepts of science when they reach expansive networks of unrelated authors, achieve consistent intellectual usage, are associated with other prominent ideas, and fit with extant research traditions. These ecological conditions play an increasingly decisive role later in an idea’s career, after their relations with the environment are established. This work advances the systematic study of scientific ideas by moving beyond products to focus on the content of ideas themselves and applies a relational perspective that takes seriously the contingency of their success.
This study was carried out to evaluate the journals chosen by academicians working in industrial engineering and operations research fields to publish their scientific publications. In the study, in which a total of 133 journals were evaluated, the publication times of the journals and their publication quality were considered under various criteria. The primary purpose of this article is to provide a ranking for all covered academic journals in the relevant field. While similar studies evaluate publications according to a single criterion, this study provides a ranking by considering multiple main criteria and their sub-criteria. It is also suggested to consider some new factors that were not considered before but are valuable to the authors, such as the acceptance rate of the journals, review and publication times, citation score, and quartile information. The data of this study were obtained from reliable, open-source institutional sources such as the web pages of journals, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science. Results indicate that considering different criteria directly affects the ranking of journals. Also, sharing different metrics such as acceptance rate and review time by journals affects the rank of journals. This study will help academics, students, and all academic scientists understand how journals perform according to the determined criteria and choose journals when submitting their publications.
Forfatterens interesse i dansk psykologis historie er knyttet sammen med en videnssociologisk interesse for domænestudier, der kan belyse hvordan et fags vidensressourcer kan studeres og formidles. Artiklen beskriver forhold omkring psykologiens geografi og vækst, dens forskellige retninger, og spørgsmål om evaluering af fagets vidensproduktion, herunder ved bibliometriske analyser.
Michael H. MacRoberts (28 September 1941–18 December 2021). Michael H. MacRoberts was born in Shreveport, Louisiana. Readers will be most familiar with the extensive botanical and ecological work he carried out in the West Gulf Coastal Plain over the last 30 years with his wife Barbara.
Purpose
This study aims to analyze the International Journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern Finance and Management (IMEFM) publication structure based on broad criteria including citations, authors, institutions, countries, papers and keywords using the Scopus database over a period of 12 years.
Design/methodology/approach
In this paper, the bibliometric technique is used to analyze the advancement of IMEFM. Bibliometrics is a research field of library and information science that studies bibliographic material with quantitative methods.
Findings
The results show a steady increase in the citation and publication structure of the IMEFM. That reflects its developing stature as a key academic outlet. The journal is advancing knowledge in Islamic finance and management research.
Practical implications
This study presents a macro view of the journey of IMEFM over the past 12 years. That presents the audience with an opportunity to understand the trend and focus of the journal.
Originality/value
Bibliometric analysis contributed to the theoretical development of the IMEFM journal in the following ways. First, it describes the evolution and intellectual structure by identifying and classifying the most common themes in the journal. More specifically, this analysis underscores two important milestones: IMEFM has emerged as a robust academic outlet, and its comprehensive focus on Islamic finance and other related areas. Furthermore, the bibliometric analysis of IMEFM’s citations and knowledge stock pattern summarizes the scientific community contributing to its evolution and development. Finally, this study’s results offer future research directions.
Research on the evaluation of the quality of academic papers is attracting more attention from scholars in scientometrics. However, most previous researches have assessed paper quality based on external indicators, such as citations, which failed to account for the content of the research. To that end, this paper proposed a new method for measuring a paper's originality. The method was based on knowledge units in semantic networks, focusing on the relationship and semantic similarity of different knowledge units. Connectivity and path similarity between different content elements were used in particular networks as indicators of originality. This study used papers published between 2014 and 2018 in three categories (i.e. Library & Information Science, Educational Psychology, and Carbon Nanotubes) and divided their content into three parts (i.e. research topics, research methods and research results). It was found that the originality in all categories increase each year. Furthermore, a comparison of our new method with previous models of citation network analysis and knowledge combination analysis showed that our new method is better than those previous methods when used in measuring originality.
The aim of this study was to identify e-citation terms by analyzing scientific studies carried out over the past few years and to reveal the similarities and differences of the trends between printed citation and impact of web based citation; current trends research practice, published resource, open source and impact of E-citation for modern era research work. Research communications in these days are people with manifestations of web citation, many article presented tourism, hospitality journals are electronically, and open access mode for the public as a result which resources and authors across the disciplines have stirred their research work research productivity by restoring to voluminous e-citation mainly from internet resources. This paper provides clear sense of web citation, Citation database and possible merits of e-citation and its impact on effective and authentic research work. The research data comprised of 4473 studies published between 2008-2018 in the top-five journals of tourism field according to the Journal Citation Reports and 213 India-originated studies published in 19 tourism and hospitality journals. The journals were examined in terms of number and types ofPublications, author-institution-country productivity, citation analysis, conceptual orientations and citation burst. In order to reveal the links between key words and the leading studies, social network analysis was utilized (Anckar & Walden, 2001). Social network analysis facilitates mapping the links in a research community and specifying the key actors for the field development. According to research findings, experimental researches were observed to have an important place in both India originated and other international publications.
Bibliometriikka ja julkaisujen mittaaminen ovat viime vuosina herättäneet keskustelua tiedetyhteisöissä ja kirjastoissa. Myös media on niistä kiinnostunut, onhan kyse myös kilpailusta ja paremmuudesta. Mutta mitä se bibliometriikka oikein on? Kuka keksi bibliometriikan? Tieteelliset julkaisut ovat tutkimustyön näkyvää tulosta. Kun arvioidaan tutkijan onnistumista ja tutkimuslaitoksen menestymistä, lasketaan tuotettujen julkaisujen määrää ja vertaillaan niiden saamien viittausten muutoksia. Bibliometrisiä analyysejä on käytetty tutkijanpaikkoja jaettaessa, tutkimusrahoitusta suunnattaessa ja yliopistojen keskinäistä paremmuutta tarkastelevia ranking-listoja laadittaessa. Mutta voidaanko tiedettä mitata? Mitä julkaisujen määrät ja niiden saamat viittaukset kertovat? Löytyvätkö kaikki viittaukset jostain? Onko tieteenalojen välillä jotain eroja julkaisemisessa? Bibkiometriikan juuret ulottuvat viime vuosisadan alkupuolelle, jolloin sen teoreettisia perusteita luotiin. Nyt tähyillään tulevaan ja etsitään altmetriikan avulla uusia vaihtoehtoja. Tieteelliset julkaisut edustavat usein jo taaksejäänyttä tutkimusta. Sen rinnalla ollaan kiinnostuneita siitä, mitä tieteessä tapahtuu juuri nyt. Mitä sosiaalinen media kertoo tieteen näkyvyydestä. kenen tutkimusta peukutetaan? Millainen tutkimus saa eniten huomiota tutkijoiden keskuudessa? Entä kansalaisten? VTT Maria Forsmanin teos Julkaisut ja tieteen mittaamien etsii vastauksi näihin kysymyksiin. Se tarjoaa vankkaa asiantuntijatietoa ja monipuolisia näkemyksiä sekä bibliometriikan parissa työskenteleville että aiheesta kiinnostuneille.
Research articles are being shared in increasing numbers on multiple online platforms. Although the scholarly impact of these articles has been widely studied, the online interest determined by how long the research articles are shared online remains unclear. Being cognizant of how long a research article is mentioned online could be valuable information to the researchers. In this paper, we analyzed multiple social media platforms on which users share and/or discuss scholarly articles. We built three clusters for papers, based on the number of yearly online mentions having publication dates ranging from the year 1920 to 2016. Using the online social media metrics for each of these three clusters, we built machine learning models to predict the long-term online interest in research articles. We addressed the prediction task with two different approaches: regression and classification. For the regression approach, the Multi-Layer Perceptron model performed best, and for the classification approach, the tree-based models performed better than other models. We found that old articles are most evident in the contexts of economics and industry (i.e., patents). In contrast, recently published articles are most evident in research platforms (i.e., Mendeley) followed by social media platforms (i.e., Twitter).
Although citations are widely used to measure the influence of scientific works, research shows that many citations serve rhetorical functions and reflect little-to-no influence on the citing authors. If highly cited papers disproportionately attract rhetorical citations then their citation counts may reflect rhetorical usefulness more than influence. Alternatively, researchers may perceive highly cited papers to be of higher quality and invest more effort into reading them, leading to disproportionately substantive citations. We test these arguments using data on 17,154 randomly sampled citations collected via surveys from 9,380 corresponding authors in 15 fields. We find that most citations (54%) had little-to-no influence on the citing authors. However, citations to the most highly cited papers were 2–3 times more likely to denote substantial influence. Experimental and correlational data show a key mechanism: displaying low citation counts lowers perceptions of a paper's quality, and papers with poor perceived quality are read more superficially. The results suggest that higher citation counts lead to more meaningful engagement from readers and, consequently, the most highly cited papers influence the research frontier much more than their raw citation counts imply.
Цитируемость все больше используется в качестве показателя производительности в научной политике и внутри исследовательской системы. Как правило, предполагается, что цитируемость свидетельствует о влиянии исследования или его качества. Что подтверждает эти предположения и как цитируемость соотносится с качеством исследований? Эти и подобные вопросы изучаются на протяжении десятилетий наукометрических исследований. Предоставляется обзор некоторых основных актуальных вопросов, включающих теории цитируемости, трактовку и обоснованность использования цитируемости как измерения результативности. Качество исследований является многоаспектным понятием, в котором достоверность/правильность, оригинальность, научная ценность, а также общественная ценность общепринято воспринимаются ключевыми характеристиками. Изучается то, как цитируемость может затрагивать подобные разнообразные измерения качества исследований. Утверждается, что цитируемость отражает аспекты, касающиеся научного влияния и релевантности, но с определенными ограничениями. С другой стороны, нет ни одного свидетельства, подтверждающего, что цитируемость отражает другие ключевые величины качества исследований. Следовательно, рост использования показателей цитируемости в оценке исследований и финансирования может снижать внимание к этим иным величинам качества исследований, таким как надежность/достоверность, оригинальность и общественная ценность.
Abstrak: Analisis kutipan adalah metode pengukuran paling populer dan berguna dalam konteks kebijakan ilmu pengetahuan dan manajemen penelitian. Analisis kutipan memiliki banyak keterbatasan. Aksesibilitas perpustakaan digital online dan portal konten digital ilmiah seperti E-Journal dipengaruhi banyak faktor, salah satunya adalah dikarenakan konten digital mudah diakses melalui media sosial. Seiring dengan dimulainya berbagai media platform informasi dan komunikasi, bagaimanapun, bibliometrik dianggap tidak lagi mampu memenuhi persyaratan standar pengukuran yang diterbitkan di media baru, terutama di web sosial atau media sosial. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui pengaruh altmetric terhadap konten Perpustakaan Digital dan E-Journal. Mengetahui implementasi Altmetric dalam rangka meningkatkan aksesibilitas perpustakaan digital dan E-Journal melalui media social. Dengan adanya Implementasi altmetric pada perpustakaan digital dan e-journal dengan optimal maka aksesibilitas perpustakaan digital akan meningkat. Selain itu terdapat beberapa kelemahan altmetric yang harus dikaji pada penelitian selanjutnya. Kata kunci: altmetric, perpustakaan digital, e-journal, media sosial, dampak ilmiah Pendahuluan Perkembangan teknologi informasi dan komunikasi sangat pesat diera globalisasi ini. Media sosial saat ini sudah menjadi konsumsi publik sehari-hari. Setiap waktu hampir semua orang memanfaatkan media sosial. Pekerja, pelajar, Ilmuwan, pustakawan, hingga ibu rumah tangga, siapapun dapat memanfaatkan media sosial untuk keperluan apapun. Sebagai sumber informasi perpustakaan dituntut untuk terus meningkatkan pelayanan informasi untuk pemustaka. Pelayanan informasi yang dapat mengikuti perkembangan pola hidup pemustaka yang selalu berhubungan dengan media sosial. Media sosial menjadi hal yang sangat esensial dikarenakan merubah berbagai aspek, termasuk didalamnya perubahan aspek komunikasi yang lebih terbuka dan bervariasi. Perubahan tersebut terjadi diantara para pemustaka, kalangan ilmiah dan pustakawan dalam mengakses konten digital ilmiah dan popular Aksesibilitas perpustakaan digital online dan portal konten digital ilmiah seperti E-Journal dipengaruhi banyak faktor, salah satunya adalah dikarenakan konten digital mudah diakses melalui media sosial. Sehingga user lebih memilih mengakses media sosial untuk
a atuação do profissional bibliotecário junto ao profissional da saúde,
através de técnicas para a busca e recuperação das informações relevantes, além
do manejo dos estudos bibliométricos, pode garantir a oportunidade de colaborar
no contexto da Medicina Baseada em Evidências. Nesse sentido, foram
delineados os procedimentos para realização deste estudo, que se dedicou à
avaliação da produção científica dos pesquisadores do Programa de PósGraduação em Ortopedia e Traumatologia da Faculdade de Medicina,
Universidade de São Paulo, considerando variáveis qualitativas e quantitativas
de 157 artigos publicados no período de 2012 a 2014. Foi avaliada a qualidade
metodológica dos artigos, assim como seu nível de evidência. Os aspectos
quantitativos consistiram no número de citações recebidas na base Scopus, em
uma janela de citação de quatro anos, e a classificação dos periódicos no Qualis
da área de Medicina III. Constatou-se uma nítida preferência dos pesquisadores
por Estudos Terapêuticos, assim como pelo nível IV de evidência, bem como
pela publicação em periódicos do estrato Qualis B3. Contudo, os estudos do
nível I de evidência receberam a maior média de citações, ainda que grande
parte dos artigos estivesse em estratos Qualis mais baixos. O tipo de estudo mais
citado foram os Estudos Anatômicos, mas os Estudos Terapêuticos de nível I se
sobrepuseram. Finalmente, constatou-se haver relação entre o impacto dos
artigos e os níveis de evidência, e também com os níveis dos periódicos (estratos
Qualis), sendo mais pronunciada com este último. Concluiu-se que os
pesquisadores devem acentuar a prática da Medicina Baseada em Evidências,
buscando aperfeiçoamento de suas pesquisas, publicando em periódicos de
circulação mais ampla, e melhorando a performance do Programa na avaliação
da Capes. E sua relação com o bibliotecário em ciência da saúde deve ser
estreitada.
This study investigates the degree of disciplinary diversity among the reference lists of articles published between 1990 and 2019 in three leading interdisciplinary accounting research journals. The results reveal that the cited references are not a homogeneous field but based on a diverse set of disciplines consisting mostly of business, sociology, economics and psychology. Further analysis of a subset of the data finds that the level of citations is negatively associated with measures of diversity, suggesting that scholars are active in widening the spread of cited disciplines but are not rewarded in terms of citations.
This paper presents the results of a study comparing the past scientific performance of high-energy physics accelerators in the Eastern bloc with that of their main Western counterparts. Output-evaluation indicators are used. After carefully examining the extent to which the output indicators used may be biased against science in the Eastern bloc, various conclusions are drawn about the relative contributions to science made by these accelerators. Where significant differences in performance are apparent, an attempt is made to identify the main factors responsible.
Citation counts are central to many studies in the sociology of science. Due to cost considerations and the format of the Science Citation Index, researchers often collect citations only to a scientist's first-authored publications (so called 'straight counts'), rather than to complete counts based on all published papers. This paper examines the consequences of using straight counts to study the careers of a sample of PhD biochemists. It is found that even though these two measures are highly correlated, there is a significant chance of making substantive errors when straight counts are substituted for complete counts. The problem is found to be more severe when citations are the dependent variable rather than an independent variable. It is argued that our findings can be generalized to other fields where multiple authorship is common. Accordingly, extreme care must be used in interpreting results based on straight citation counts.
Recent studies of scientific texts need to be set against the history of the genre, which in part establishes the institutional framework within which any individual text is created. The definition of the appropriate form of communication is part of how a discipline constitutes itself, and is part of the achievement of that discipline. This paper examines the changing features of spectroscopic articles in Physical Review since its founding. Analyses of article length, use of references, sentence length and syntax, vocabulary, graphic features, organization and argument indicate that articles become increasingly theory-based and knowledge-embedded through time. Self-consciousness about the theoretical character of argument also increases. The changing character of communication within a scientific community also has implications for the social structure of that community.
The bibliometric methodology of citation tabulation is applied to the problem of identifying highly cited Soviet scientific areas. A general lack of highly cited Soviet papers is apparent. A further indication of the isolation of Soviet science is the existence of two discrete sets of highly cited Soviet papers, one set published in Soviet journals and cited by Soviet scientists, and a second set published in international journals and cited by non-Soviet scientists. The lists of highly cited papers were reviewed by experts in the field. The consensus was that these lists were indicative of areas of strong Soviet research and that lists of institutions producing these papers included the important Soviet labs.
Reviews certain aspects of the communication crisis in science. Empirical findings relative to the nature of a scientific discipline's role in evaluating, processing, and compacting scientific information for researchers, scholars, and students are presented. An overview of data is provided, collected by the american psychological association project on scientific information exchange in psychology, together with more recent information relative to other disciplines. The roles of formal vs. Informal channels for communicating scientific information are compared. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
An analysis of three major problems in the application of bibliometric research performance indicators is made in three separate sections. In the first section, the influence of field-dependent citation practices is analysed. The results indicate that rankings of publications from different fields, based on citation counts, can be affected seriously by differences between citation characteristics in those fields. If certain assumptions hold, one should expect high (short term) citation levels in Biochemistry, Celbiology and Biophysics. Medium citation levels are to be expected in Experimental and Molecular Physics, Physical and Organic Chemistry, Pharmacology and Plant Physiology, and low citation levels in Mathematics, Taxonomy, Pharmacognosy and Inorganic Solid State Chemistry. In the second section time-dependent factors are studied. It is shown that trend-analyses of output and impact based on bibliometric scores can be disturbed by changes in theSCI-database and in publication and citation practices. One of the disturbing factors is shown to be the inclusion of so called Books into theSCI data-base in 1977. Finally, in the third section a case is presented which illustrates the consequences of operating on incomplete bibliometric data in the evaluation of scientific performance. A completeness percentage of 99% for publication data is proposed as a standard in evaluations of the performance of small university research groups).
A comprehensive discussion on the use of citation analysis to rate scientific performance and the controversy surrounding it. The general adverse criticism that citation counts include an excessive number of negative citations (citations to incorrect results worthy of attack), self-citations (citations to the works of the citing authors), and citations to methodological papers is analyzed. Included are a discussion of measurement problems such as counting citations for multiauthored papers, distinguishing between more than one person with the same last name (homographs), and what it is that citation analysis actually measures. It is concluded that as the scientific enterprise becomes larger and more complex, and its role in society more critical, it will become more difficult, expensive and necessary to evaluate and identify the largest contributors. When properly used, citation analysis can introduce a useful measure of objectivity into the evaluation process at relatively low financial cost.
A footnote appears, at first sight, a trivial thing, and easily understood. But in the pages of the Social Sciences Citation Index, these scholarly creations step forth as independent beings, endowed with a life of their own. The Citation Index is the most recent, and most titanic, achievement of the burgeoning information storage and retrieval industry. It is dedicated to the proposition that the best way to find out what an article is about is not to look at its title, but at its footnotes. As the publicity brochure explains, “no human indexer has to decide what is the subject of an article. The author of a new article indexes his own work through his references.”
A newly published report reviews the techniques available for evaluating national performance in basic research and applies these techniques to solid state physics and genetics.
Studies of scientific communication have relied on citation indices and bibliographies for data. We examined papers to see how much influence appears as references in bibliographies. We found that very little does.
Previous studies in the sociology of science have relied on measures of production and citations which have failed to take account of multiple authorship. This study indicates that these previous (and still currently used) measures introduce intolerable error and often profoundly influence substantive interpretation. To address the problem of multiple authorship in the measurement of publications and citations, a revision of current indices is presented. Previous measurement error may well require a re-analysis and rethinking of previous reported studies in the sociology of science.
The total number of citations to all previous publications (the life work has often been used to evaluate the research output of target units such as persons or departments. However, a study of a sample of Dutch full professors of sociology shows that simple counting of citations may lead to unreliable results. Dependent upon recency of publication period, large variations in rankings and citation scores were observed. Other pitfalls of using life work citation counts were discussed, as well as how to avoid them. For fine-tuned assessment of research output, longitudinal analysis seems to be called for.
Using data collected for a sample of 69 Dutch physicists, the present study employs a multivariate approach in order to re-examine the Ortega hypothesis. Stated succinctly, the Ortega hypothesis maintains that, in large measure, science has progressed through the efforts of many quite average scientists. Based on a combined citation search of 2763 source and reference authors, eminent scientists are shown to cite other eminent scientists, although not to the extent reported among American physicists in earlier research by theColes. The tendency for eminent scientists to cite other eminent scientists is a rather recent occurrence in The Netherlands, and may signal a major trend in the differential allocation of facilities and resources which, in turn, impact on the development of science in that country. In addition to the citation rate of source author's year of article's publication and length of source author's professional experience, are also shown to be significantly related to the eminence of reference authors cited, thereby signaling caution concerning rejection of the Ortega hypothesis.
This paper is an attempt to improve on the approximation. First author citations (Cf)Total citations (Ct) of an author's publications without the work of making the complete citation count under the author and all co-author names.Using the bibliographies of all faculty from each of four large departments: Physics, Chemistry, Materials Sciences, and Biosciences, in the same university, both first author and complete citation counts were made, care being taken to avoid the most common errors in such counts. It is shown that the function Cf·T/F (where T and F are the total number of papers and F those with subject author's name first) correlates strongly (>90%) with Ct. We find also that Ct correlates strongly with T.The data also may be used as one more line of evidence to obtain normalizing ratios for possible comparisons of productivityacross different disciplinary universes. A very tentative ratio from different studies would be 8 (Chem.)=4 (Physics)=2.5 (Mat. Sci.)=2 (Mathematics)=4.5 (Biophysics-Biochemistry).
The validity of the Roy approximation for citation counting is critically evaluated.
The theoretical introductions in empirical journal articles have been analyzed looking for factors determining citation habits. Own-country-biases and English-American predominance in citations were not regularly found. Preferred language of the cited publications and absolute citation frequencies were dependent upon both the disciplines and the countries where the journals are published. However, relative citation frequencies (citations related to the length of the text available) have been found to be rather constant across countries (within psychology and psychiatry, respectively) which indicates no such dependence.
A sample of 80 Hungarian scientists, authors or co-authors of a total number of 6273 papers—published between 1930–1976—has been analysed. Citation data to eachpaper were collected form the 1964–76 SCI's by manual search. Citation counts were distinguished with respect to the following categories: (I) the set of cited authors has element(s) common with the set of citing authors (self citation), (II) condition I is not satisfied, but the cited author under study and at least one of the citing authors were co-authors prior to the publication of the cited paper, (III) none of the former criteria is satisfied. The yearly average citation frequency of a paper was not corrected for obsolescence, since there is no evidence that the decay of citation frequency with time is independent of the absolute citedness of the paper. Individual performance has been measured (a) by the sum of the vearly average typeIII fractional citation frequencies over all of the author's papers, (b) by the sum of the yearly average citation frequency normalized to one single-authored paper per year over the period of the author's activity, (c) by the same as ina, but summed up only over the most highly cited papers scattering upwards from the individual's own average, (d) by the fractional authorship, and (e) by the number of items in the author's publication list. The first three parameters seem to be applicable in measuring the utility of the individual's scientific contribution with slightly different emphasis on different aspects. These parameters are uncorrelated with those measuring the output of individuals.
The classification of citations by their context, previously formulated and used for other studies, is employed here to see if the citation patterns of big and little science are different or not. Theoretical physics articles in 1935 and 1955 are thus compared. No significant differences were found except in the number of references per article which increased significantly from 1935 to 1955, and again to 1968. It is found, however, that the German journal Zeitschrift für Physik has considerably higher percentages of conceptual, organic, and evolutionary citations, both in 1935 and in 1955, than The Physical Review. The interpretation of this difference remains unclear.
The purpose of the present investigation was to determine to what extent authors of scientific articles cite their previous publications and what are the principal distinguishing features of this particular type of citation. We have analysed the bibliographies of a group of articles from the areas of plant physiology and neurobiology, and have examined the relationship of the self-citations to some characteristics of the articles in which they occurred. We found self-citations to be more recent and to be cited more frequently in the text of the citing articles than citations of other authors. The extent of self-citing did not appear to be related to the number of co-authors and to the bibliography size of the citing articles, or to their authors' productivity.
There is evidence that the number of citations to a paper and to the total work of a scientist constitutes a good measure
of the quality of both. This paper discusses the application of this method of citation analysis to measure quality, and illustrates
with data on the work of Nobel laureates and entomologists.
The Note examines the negational citation, and suggests why it is uncommon in scientific writing.
Most citation analyses are based on references taken from two or three source journals. There are good theoretical reasons for believing that these may not be representative of all references. In the social science citation analyses carried out as part of the DISISS programme, references were collected from 140 journals, including forty-seven drawn at random from a comprehensive list, and also from 148 monographs. Analyses of references drawn from high ranking and randomly selected journals showed differences in date distribution, forms of material cited and rank order of journals cited. Analyses of references drawn from journals and monographs showed differences, some of them large, in date distributions, forms of material cited, subject self-citation and citations beyond the social sciences, and countries of publication cited. These differences may be peculiar to the social sciences, but any citation analyses that are based on only a limited number and type of sources without specific justification must be regarded with suspicion.
Let us consider, then, some general conclusions that may be drawn from the findings reported in this study. The data allow
us to question the view stated by Ortega, Florey, and others that large numbers of average scientists contribute substantially
to the advance of science through their research. It seems, rather, that a relatively small number of physicists produce work that becomes the base for future discoveries
in physics. We have found that even papers of relatively minor significance have used to a disproportionate degree the work
of the eminent scientists. Although the conclusions of this paper may be reasonably clear, the implications of these data
for the structure of scientific activity, at least in physics, need careful consideration.
More than 2,000 documents about citations, citation analysis, citation indexes, and bibliometrics are cited in this bibliography. Some documents on communication in science, scientometrics, the science of science, and information retrieval have been included where they apply to citation indexing. Although most of the documents cited are in English, several documents in Russian and other languages are included. A subject (keyword) index to the citations is appended. Printed and online sources used in compiling the bibliography are listed. (SW)
Four hundred eighty-seven citations of the 1976 issues of the Journal of the American Society for Information Science and the Personnel and Guidance Journal were checked for accuracy: total error was 13.6 percent and 10.7 percent, respectively. Error categories included incorrect author name, article/book title, journal title; wrong entry; and omission errors. (JD)
Naturalistic constructs begun over a third of a century ago in the author's Principles of Psychology are here continued and refined in an attempt to smooth psychology's path toward its goal of a natural science. Part I treats of the cultural and philosophical backgrounds of the interbehavioral system, the type of logic most serviceable to it, the interbehavioral continuum involved in scientific as well as non-scientific activities, and gives a detailed analysis of scientific systemology. Part II considers metasystemic features of interbehavioral psychology. Part III offers an exposition of the interbehavioral system with illustrations of its manner of handling specific events. Part IV discusses psychological systems and sub-systems as a way of considering particular issues and of illuminating certain important psychological questions. In Part V, the interrelations between psychology and other sciences are considered. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
The classification of scientific citations according to their quality and function, established in a previous paper, is strengthened by tests of its reproducibility and universality. The method is then applied to articles in various specialties of theoretical physics published in various journals, and conclusions are drawn about differences by specialty and by geographical areas. Specifically, it is shown for the sample investigated (a) that the number of papers referred to per article is much lower for Soviet journals than for European, US, or Japanese journals; (b) that this number is much lower for solid state physics than for high energy or nuclear physics; (c) that US journals have a higher percentage of conceptual citations, and a much higher percentage of organic citations than Soviet journals; (d) that the Soviet Journal of Nuclear Physics has citation patterns markedly different than the other two Soviet journals investigated and is rather similar to that of the US journals; (e) that high energy physics shows a significantly higher percentage of organic citations and a somewhat higher percentage of evolutionary citations than either nuclear physics or solid state physics. Some speculations are presented to “explain” these effects.
The publications explosion has focused renewed attention on the lowly footnote. While we are all at least partially aware of the technical functions of the citation for both the writer and the reader of the scientific paper, little is known about the norms operating in actual practice. Even less is known about the operating norms with respect to the more sociological functions, including the acknowledgement of intellectual debts or the conferral of recognition upon the works of others. This paper reviews the state of our knowledge, raises questions, and proposes suggestions and hypotheses for studying the relationships between footnoting practices among scientists and the social system of science.
There were 20 scholars interviewed about their citation motives in recently published articles. Their 437 citations were scaled along 1 or more of the following 7 citer motives: currency, negative credit, operational information, persuasiveness, positive credit, reader alert, and social consensus. The majority (70.7%) of the references were attributed to more than 1 motive. Analysis of the clustering of the citer motives showed 3 groupings: (1) persuasiveness, positive credit, currency, and social consensus, (2) negative credit, and (3) reader alert and operational information. Negative credit references were often found to be used with a countervailing positive credit, currency, or social consensus reference. This is considered to be empirical evidence of MacRoberts and MacRoberts' [8] hypothesis that scholars dissemble when giving negative references. © 1986 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
The adequacy of the Science Citation Index (SCI) as a data source for developing indicators of international scientific activity was tested by comparing country-by-country journal counts based on the SCI with British Library Lending Division country-by-country journal counts, and with country-by-country counts of papers in other abstracting services, and by looking at the patterns of references from key journals. While the SCI appears to be an excellent, internationally balanced data source for the core of the physical and biological sciences, particularly for the English-speaking countries, there still are significant differences between the SCI and other sources in national coverage of fields with a more dispersed literature, especially in the case of journals from countries with non-Roman alphabets. In particular, SCI coverage of the Soviet literature appears incomplete, especially in the biological and medical sciences.
Citation analysis has been used as a method for evaluating scholars and their impact. Evaluative citation analysis has been employed without a clear understanding of why authors give references and in the absence of any empirical work investigating citer motivations. The debate over the validity of evaluative citation analysis derives from the competing theoretical models used to describe the citer's motivations. Current models describing citer motivations were analyzed in this article and the seven most significant citer motivations identified. These seven citer motivations were presented to 26 authors at the University of Iowa each of whom had recently published an academic article. The authors indicated their motivations for giving each reference in their articles. As a result, the motivational background for more than 900 citational acts were gathered and analyzed.
Conclusion With the research byLong, Allison andMcGinnis, Cole andCole, an-Garfield an initial understanding of the consequences of multiple authorship for empirical studies of science is emerging.9 It is too early to suggest, asLong andMcGinnis do, that indices which disgegard multiple authorship are without serious short-comings. The best advise would be to use measures which take multiple authorship into account, compare them with others that do not, and examine any differences that might emerge. At least for the data will which I have worked, multiple authorship makes a considerable difference. Although little difference is found with the data collected by long and his colleagues when examined within an unclear regression analysis framework, it would seem premature to recommend unadjusted counts. The best advice to the prospective researcher would be to collect complete information on the number of authors for all published work and all citations assuming that difference between adjusted and unadjusted counts will emerge and be comfortable with the knowledge that if it does, the measures used can properly treat the data.The major point I made earlier, that the failure to adjust for multiple authorship is the most serious error in empirical judgment made in the sociology of science, emerges more forcefully. The error will require substantial redevelopment of previous empirical literature constructed with these faulty measures.Finally, the point should not be lost that the most serious problem remains and that is the validity of the paper model of science with examines article and citation counts to understand this complex dynamic project of human inquiry.10
Vue d'ensemble sur les etudes bibliometriques des publications de physique eclairant l'histoire de la discipline, l'evolution de la recherche, les pays leaders, les laboratoires, le niveau de cooperation dans ce secteur de la recherche, les periodiques, les cartes de la recherche et les pratiques de citation
InThe Revolt of the Masses, JoseOrtega y Gasset suggests that the work of average or mediocre researchers plays a role in the advancement of science. In order to examine the Ortega hypothesis in sociology, lifework citations to scholars referred to in 5 of the most highly cited contemporary sociological articles are examined. The findings do not support the hypothesis. That is, few average scholars received citations to their work in these influential articles. This finding is consistent with similar analyses for physics and criminology.
With the research byLong, Allison andMcGinnis, Cole andCole, an-Garfield an initial understanding of the consequences of multiple authorship for empirical studies of science is emerging.9 It is too early to suggest, asLong andMcGinnis do, that indices which disgegard multiple authorship are without serious short-comings. The best advise would be to use measures which take multiple authorship into account, compare them with others that do not, and examine any differences that might emerge. At least for the data will which I have worked, multiple authorship makes a considerable difference. Although little difference is found with the data collected by long and his colleagues when examined within an unclear regression analysis framework, it would seem premature to recommend unadjusted counts. The best advice to the prospective researcher would be to collect complete information on the number of authors for all published work and all citations assuming that difference between adjusted and unadjusted counts will emerge and be comfortable with the knowledge that if it does, the measures used can properly treat the data.
The major point I made earlier, that the failure to adjust for multiple authorship is the most serious error in empirical judgment made in the sociology of science, emerges more forcefully. The error will require substantial redevelopment of previous empirical literature constructed with these faulty measures.
Finally, the point should not be lost that the most serious problem remains and that is the validity of the “paper model” of science with examines article and citation counts to understand this complex dynamic project of human inquiry.10
The objective of this study is to find out whether methodological papers published in core sociological journals are more frequently cited than theoretical or empirical (substantive) papers. The results indicate that such is indeed the case; moreover, this result is not due to a few outlying, very highly cited papers. These findings are based on all the methodological and theoretical papers, and a sample of the empirical papers, published in 1972 and 1973 in three high-impact sociological journals. The citation counts for these papers were compiled from theSocial Science Citation Index for the years 1972–1981. The data were analyzed separately for each journal and year of publication.