共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 31 毫秒
1.
Mike Thelwall 《Journal of Informetrics》2019,13(2):658-678
Articles are cited for different purposes and differentiating between reasons when counting citations may therefore give finer-grained citation count information. Although identifying and aggregating the individual reasons for each citation may be impractical, recording the number of citations that originate from different article sections might illuminate the general reasons behind a citation count (e.g., 110 citations = 10 Introduction citations + 100 Methods citations). To help investigate whether this could be a practical and universal solution, this article compares 19 million citations with DOIs from six different standard sections in 799,055 PubMed Central open access articles across 21 out of 22 fields. There are apparently non-systematic differences between fields in the most citing sections and the extent to which citations from one section overlap with citations from another, with some degree of overlap in most cases. Thus, at a science-wide level, section headings are partly unreliable indicators of citation context, even if they are more standard within individual fields. They may still be used within fields to help identify individual highly cited articles that have had one type of impact, especially methodological (Methods) or context setting (Introduction), but expert judgement is needed to validate the results. 相似文献
2.
Journal weighted impact factor: A proposal 总被引：3，自引：0，他引：3
The impact factor of a journal reflects the frequency with which the journal's articles are cited. It is the best available measure of journal quality. For calculation of impact factor, we just count the number of citations, no matter how prestigious the citing journal is. We think that impact factor as a measure of journal quality, may be improved if in its calculation, we not only take into account the number of citations, but also incorporate a factor reflecting the prestige of the citing journals relative to the cited journal. In calculation of this proposed “weighted impact factor,” each citation has a coefficient (weight) the value of which is 1 if the citing journal is as prestigious as the cited journal; is >1 if the citing journal is more prestigious than the cited journal; and is <1 if the citing journal has a lower standing than the cited journal. In this way, journals receiving many citations from prestigious journals are considered prestigious themselves and those cited by low-status journals seek little credit. By considering both the number of citations and the prestige of the citing journals, we expect the weighted impact factor be a better scientometrics measure of journal quality. 相似文献
3.
4.
Using 17 open-access journals published without interruption between 2000 and 2004 in the field of library and information science, this study compares the pattern of cited/citing hyperlinked references of Web-based scholarly electronic articles under various citation ranges in terms of language, file format, source and top-level domain. While the patterns of cited references were manually examined by counting the live hyperlinked-cited references, the patterns of citing references were examined by using the cited by tag in Google Scholar. The analysis indicates that although language, top-level domain, and file format of citations did not differ significantly for articles under different citation ranges, sources of citation differed significantly for articles in different citation ranges. Articles with fewer citations mostly cite less-scholarly sources such as Web pages, whereas articles with a higher number of citations mostly cite scholarly sources such as journal articles, etc. The findings suggest that 8 out of 17 OA journals in LIS have significant research impact in the scholarly communication process. 相似文献
5.
We address issues concerning what one may learn from how citation instances are distributed in scientific articles. We visualize and analyze patterns of citation distributions in the full text of 350 articles published in the Journal of Informetrics. In particular, we visualize and analyze the distributions of citations in articles that are organized in a commonly seen four-section structure, namely, introduction, method, results, and conclusions (IMRC). We examine the locations of citations to the groundbreaking h-index paper by Hirsch in 2005 and how patterns associated with citation locations evolve over time. The results show that citations are highly concentrated in the first section of an article. The density of citations in the first section is about three times higher than that in subsequent sections. The distributions of citations to highly cited papers are even more uneven. 相似文献
6.
Multidisciplinary cooperation is now common in research since social issues inevitably involve multiple disciplines. In research articles, reference information, especially citation content, is an important representation of communication among different disciplines. Analyzing the distribution characteristics of references from different disciplines in research articles is basic to detecting the sources of referred information and identifying contributions of different disciplines. This work takes articles in PLoS as the data and characterizes the references from different disciplines based on Citation Content Analysis (CCA). First, we download 210,334 full-text articles from PLoS and collect the information of the in-text citations. Then, we identify the discipline of each reference in these academic articles. To characterize the distribution of these references, we analyze three characteristics, namely, the number of citations, the average cited intensity and the average citation length. Finally, we conclude that the distributions of references from different disciplines are significantly different. Although most references come from Natural Science, Humanities and Social Sciences play important roles in the Introduction and Background sections of the articles. Basic disciplines, such as Mathematics, mainly provide research methods in the articles in PLoS. Citations mentioned in the Results and Discussion sections of articles are mainly in-discipline citations, such as citations from Nursing and Medicine in PLoS. 相似文献
7.
This study provides a conceptual overview of the literature dealing with the process of citing documents (focusing on the literature from the recent decade). It presents theories, which have been proposed for explaining the citation process, and studies having empirically analyzed this process. The overview is referred to as conceptual, because it is structured based on core elements in the citation process: the context of the cited document, processes from selection to citation of documents, and the context of the citing document. The core elements are presented in a schematic representation. The overview can be used to find answers on basic questions about the practice of citing documents. Besides understanding of the process of citing, it delivers basic information for the proper application of citations in research evaluation. 相似文献
8.
《编辑学报》高被引论文分析 总被引：5，自引：1，他引：4
以中国知网<中国学术文献网络出版总库>为统计源,从文献引证的角度分析<编辑学报>高被引论文的分布规律.研究结果表明:该数据库共收录<编辑学报>1989-2009年原文3 508篇,被引文献2545篇,被引率为73%,总被引频次为1万5 863,单篇最高被引频次71;较少的论文拥有较高的被引频次,基本符合"二八定律";前100篇高被引论文中,栏目高被引论文数最多的是<理论研究>(46篇),个人高被引论文数最多的是游苏宁(6篇);前10篇高被引论文每年都在被引用,具有旺盛的生命力. 相似文献
9.
Ashlynn Kogut 《The Journal of Academic Librarianship》2019,45(2):137-145
Connecting academic libraries to the higher education environment is crucial for demonstrating the impact of libraries on student success. The purpose of this study is to examine the information transfer between the disciplines of library and information science (LIS) and higher education in order to evaluate the influence of ideas between the two disciplines. Information transfer was analyzed in 39 articles focused on the library's contributions to student success by examining the cited references, the author and collaborator affiliations, and the forward citations. The findings from the cited reference analysis suggest that LIS is borrowing concepts and methods through citations from the discipline of education. Authorship affiliations showed that some non-LIS authors are publishing in the field of LIS and that LIS authors are collaborating with non-LIS authors. Finally, based on the forward citations, other disciplines are rarely citing LIS research about student success. This article's findings highlight the need to consider research and collaborators outside of the LIS field when researching the library's contribution to student success. 相似文献
10.
Kevin W. Boyack Nees Jan van Eck Giovanni Colavizza Ludo Waltman 《Journal of Informetrics》2018,12(1):59-73
We report characteristics of in-text citations in over five million full text articles from two large databases – the PubMed Central Open Access subset and Elsevier journals – as functions of time, textual progression, and scientific field. The purpose of this study is to understand the characteristics of in-text citations in a detailed way prior to pursuing other studies focused on answering more substantive research questions. As such, we have analyzed in-text citations in several ways and report many findings here. Perhaps most significantly, we find that there are large field-level differences that are reflected in position within the text, citation interval (or reference age), and citation counts of references. In general, the fields of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Life and Earth Sciences, and Physical Sciences and Engineering have similar reference distributions, although they vary in their specifics. The two remaining fields, Mathematics and Computer Science and Social Science and Humanities, have different reference distributions from the other three fields and between themselves. We also show that in all fields the numbers of sentences, references, and in-text mentions per article have increased over time, and that there are field-level and temporal differences in the numbers of in-text mentions per reference. A final finding is that references mentioned only once tend to be much more highly cited than those mentioned multiple times. 相似文献
11.
Google Scholar,Web of Science,and Scopus: A systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
Alberto Martín-Martín Enrique Orduna-Malea Mike Thelwall Emilio Delgado López-Cózar 《Journal of Informetrics》2018,12(4):1160-1177
Despite citation counts from Google Scholar (GS), Web of Science (WoS), and Scopus being widely consulted by researchers and sometimes used in research evaluations, there is no recent or systematic evidence about the differences between them. In response, this paper investigates 2,448,055 citations to 2299 English-language highly-cited documents from 252 GS subject categories published in 2006, comparing GS, the WoS Core Collection, and Scopus. GS consistently found the largest percentage of citations across all areas (93%–96%), far ahead of Scopus (35%–77%) and WoS (27%–73%). GS found nearly all the WoS (95%) and Scopus (92%) citations. Most citations found only by GS were from non-journal sources (48%–65%), including theses, books, conference papers, and unpublished materials. Many were non-English (19%–38%), and they tended to be much less cited than citing sources that were also in Scopus or WoS. Despite the many unique GS citing sources, Spearman correlations between citation counts in GS and WoS or Scopus are high (0.78-0.99). They are lower in the Humanities, and lower between GS and WoS than between GS and Scopus. The results suggest that in all areas GS citation data is essentially a superset of WoS and Scopus, with substantial extra coverage. 相似文献
12.
13.
The paper introduces a new journal impact measure called The Reference Return Ratio (3R). Unlike the traditional Journal Impact Factor (JIF), which is based on calculations of publications and citations, the new measure is based on calculations of bibliographic investments (references) and returns (citations). A comparative study of the two measures shows a strong relationship between the 3R and the JIF. Yet, the 3R appears to correct for citation habits, citation dynamics, and composition of document types – problems that typically are raised against the JIF. In addition, contrary to traditional impact measures, the 3R cannot be manipulated ad infinitum through journal self-citations. 相似文献
14.
为正确理解并执行GB/T7714-2015《信息与文献参考文献著录规则》,对阅读型参考文献与引文参考文献的概念和定义进行分析,提出正确理解阅读型参考文献定义的要点,并通过示例对阅读型参考文献与引文参考文献的特征及其在论著正文中的提示或引用模式做了简要说明. 相似文献
15.
《资料收集管理》2013,38(1-2):77-95
The impact of monographs in a vertebrate zoology collection on the scientific literature was assessed using a randomly selected sample (52 monographs), Science Citation Index and a statistical package. Characterstics of the monographs considered were: copyright date, circulation, citation frequency and subdiscipline (ichthyology, herpetology, ornithology, mammalogy). Citing references were dispersed among journals in a wide array of disciplines. A few monographs proved to be very highly cited (one being cited nearly 600 times), and so generated the majority of the database of 2,971 citations. The ichthyology monographs generated the broadest subject dispersion among citing references. The herpetology collection is less active than are the others in terms of circulation and current citation frequency. The sample has been generating an ever increasing share of the citations in the Science Citation Index. A method that applies citation analysis to the evaluation of monograph collections is outlined. 相似文献
16.
Although it is generally understood that different citation counting methods can produce quite different author rankings, and although “optimal” author co-citation counting methods have been identified theoretically, studies that compare author co-citation counting methods in author co-citation analysis (ACA) studies are still rare. The present study applies strict all-author-based ACA to the Information Science (IS) field, in that all authors of all cited references in a classic IS dataset are counted, and in that even the diagonal values of the co-citation matrix are computed in their theoretically optimal form. Using Scopus instead of SSCI as the data source, we find that results from a theoretically optimal all-author ACA appear to be excellent in practice, too, although in a field like IS where co-authorship levels are relatively low, its advantages over classic first-author ACA appear considerably smaller than in the more highly collaborative ones targeted before. Nevertheless, we do find some differences between the two approaches, in that first-author ACA appears to favor theorists who presumably tend to work alone, while all-author ACA appears to paint a somewhat more recent picture of the field, and to pick out some collaborative author clusters. 相似文献
17.
Mohammad Reza Ghane 《Learned Publishing》2016,29(2):77-82
The references cited in scientific articles are as important as any other part of the paper, because of their usefulness to the scientific community and to abstracting and indexing services and citation databases. I studied inaccuracies in references and in‐text citations in sample of 97 of the 519 peer‐reviewed journals accredited by the Iranian National Commission for Journal Accreditation Policy (Ministry of Research, Science and Technology). The target journals published 2,980 articles with 74,577 cited references and 108,151 in‐text citations. The results showed 36.6% as the average percentage error rate (range 5.6% to 61.3%). The mean number of errors in cited reference and in‐text citations was 2.7 per article, and the mean number of errors per journal was 690. For the entire sample of articles, 4,369 in‐text citations did not match any source in the list of references (4%), and 8,683 cited references did not match any in‐text citation (11.6%). The stakeholders in scholarly communication, especially authors, pay insufficient attention to the accuracy of bibliographic references. Peer‐reviewed journals should encourage the use of standardized journal policies and quality‐control measures regarding peer review, data quality and accuracy. 相似文献
18.
贾洁 《图书馆工作与研究》2011,(8):70-72
本文借助《中文社会科学引文索引》(2000-2007)数据,利用引文分析法,对图书馆、情报与文献学学科论文引用的图书进行了统计,推出该学科领域最具学术影响力的21种工具书。通过简要介绍这些著作的内容,并结合来源文献主题对这些著作被引情况进行分析,以反映这些著作在本领域内的学术影响。 相似文献
19.
Review papers tend to be cited more frequently than regular research articles. This fact, together with the continuous increase of the share of reviews in scientific literature, can have important consequences for the measurement of individuals’ research output, usually based on citation analysis. However, studies evaluating the differences in citations of review papers compared to original research articles are almost non-existing in the literature. This paper presents a thorough analysis of the overcitation and overrepresentation of review papers in the most cited papers of the 35 largest subject categories in Science Citation Index-Expanded. Results indicate the average citations received by reviews depends largely on the research area considered, varying from 1.34 to 6.74 times the citations received by original research articles (average value is 2.95). Correlated with this overcitation, there is an important overrepresentation of reviews in the most cited papers, this overrepresentation being greater when the most highly cited papers are considered, i.e. 0.05% and 0.1% most cited papers, where the share of reviews have increased from 16 to 18% in 1990 to around 40% in 2010. Interestingly, the overcitation and overrepresentation in the most cited papers is more important in the areas with the lowest shares of reviews in total publications. 相似文献
20.
本文对新近提出的学术迹和影响矩指标应用于单篇论著的评价效果进行比较研究,以JASIST 2005—2014年间发表的25篇高被引论文和ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL 2011—2014年间发表的24篇高被引论文为两个样本集,研究学术迹和影响矩相对于总被引数和h指数等学术评价指标的异同,发现各指标排序既具有一定相关性,也呈现出一定独立性,说明这些指标均有独立存在价值,而学术迹和影响矩能提供更全面的测度信息。图3。表6。参考文献25。附录2。 相似文献