共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 31 毫秒
1.
《Journal of Informetrics》2014,8(1):89-97
Ever more frequently, governments have decided to implement policy measures intended to foster and reward excellence in scientific research. This is in fact the intended purpose of national research assessment exercises. These are typically based on the analysis of the quality of the best research products; however, a different approach to analysis and intervention is based on the measure of productivity of the individual scientists, meaning the overall impact of their entire scientific production over the period under observation. This work analyzes the convergence of the two approaches, asking if and to what measure the most productive scientists achieve highly cited articles; or vice versa, what share of highly cited articles is achieved by scientists that are “non-top” for productivity. To do this we use bibliometric indicators, applied to the 2004–2008 publications authored by academics of Italian universities and indexed in the Web of Science. 相似文献
2.
Nicolás Robinson-Garcia Cassidy R. Sugimoto Dakota Murray Alfredo Yegros-Yegros Vincent Larivière Rodrigo Costas 《Journal of Informetrics》2019,13(1):50-63
This paper presents a methodological framework for developing scientific mobility indicators based on bibliometric data. We identify nearly 16 million individual authors from publications covered in the Web of Science for the 2008–2015 period. Based on the information provided across individuals’ publication records, we propose a general classification for analyzing scientific mobility using institutional affiliation changes. We distinguish between migrants--authors who have ruptures with their country of origin--and travelers--authors who gain additional affiliations while maintaining affiliation with their country of origin. We find that 3.7% of researchers who have published at least one paper over the period are mobile. Travelers represent 72.7% of all mobile scholars, but migrants have higher scientific impact. We apply this classification at the country level, expanding the classification to incorporate the directionality of scientists’ mobility (i.e., incoming and outgoing). We provide a brief analysis to highlight the utility of the proposed taxonomy to study scholarly mobility and discuss the implications for science policy. 相似文献
3.
《Journal of Informetrics》2014,8(3):710-727
By modeling research systems as complex systems we generalize similarity measures used in the literature during the last two decades. We propose to use the mathematical tools developed within the spin-glasses literature to evaluate similarity within systems and between systems in a unified manner. Our measure is based on the ‘overlap’ of disciplinary profiles of a set of research systems and can readily be integrated in the framework of traditional bibliometric profile analysis. The investigation of the distribution of the overlaps provides useful insights on the dynamics of the general system, that is whether it converges toward a unique disciplinary structure or to a differentiated pattern.We illustrate the usefulness of the approach by investigating the dynamics of disciplinary profiles of European countries from 1996 to 2011. We analyze several bibliometric indicators (including publications and citations) of European countries in the 27 Scopus subject categories. We compare the disciplinary profiles of European countries (i) among them; (ii) with respect to the European standard; and (iii) to the World reference.We find that there is a convergence toward a unique European disciplinary profile of the scientific production even if large differences in the scientific profiles still remain. The investigation of the dynamics by year shows that developing countries are converging toward the European model while some developed countries are departing from it. 相似文献
4.
In this paper, we develop a novel methodology within the IDCP measuring framework for comparing normalization procedures based on different classification systems of articles into scientific disciplines. Firstly, we discuss the properties of two rankings, based on a graphical and a numerical approach, for the comparison of any pair of normalization procedures using a single classification system for evaluation purposes. Secondly, when the normalization procedures are based on two different classification systems, we introduce two new rankings following the graphical and the numerical approaches. Each ranking is based on a double test that assesses the two normalization procedures in terms of the two classification systems on which they depend. Thirdly, we also compare the two normalization procedures using a third, independent classification system for evaluation purposes. In the empirical part of the paper we use: (i) a classification system consisting of 219 sub-fields identified with the Web of Science subject-categories; an aggregate classification system consisting of 19 broad fields, as well as a systematic and a random assignment of articles to sub-fields with the aim of maximizing or minimizing differences across sub-fields; (ii) four normalization procedures that use the field or sub-field mean citations of the above four classification systems as normalization factors; and (iii) a large dataset, indexed by Thomson Reuters, in which 4.4 million articles published in 1998–2003 with a five-year citation window are assigned to sub-fields using a fractional approach. The substantive results concerning the comparison of the four normalization procedures indicate that the methodology can be useful in practice. 相似文献
5.
Philip M. DAVIS 《Learned Publishing》2011,24(4):287-298
Prior research has suggested that providing free and discounted access to the scientific literature to researchers in low‐income countries increases article production and citation. Using traditional bibliometric indicators for institutions in sub‐Saharan Africa, we analyze whether institutional access to TEEAL (a digital collection of journal articles in agriculture and allied subjects) increases: (i) article production; (ii) reference length; and (iii) number of citations to journals included in the TEEAL collection. Our analysis is based on nearly 20,000 articles – containing half a million references – published between 1988 and 2009 at 70 institutions in 11 African countries. We report that access to TEEAL does not appear to result in higher article production, although it does lead to longer reference lists (an additional 2.6 references per paper) and a greater frequency of citations to TEEAL journals (an additional 0.4 references per paper), compared to non‐subscribing institutions. We discuss how traditional bibliometric indicators may not provide a full picture of the effectiveness of free and discounted literature programs. 相似文献
6.
In economics the Research Papers in Economics (RePEc) network has become an essential source for the gathering and the spread of both existing and new economic research. Furthermore, it is currently the largest bibliometric database in economic sciences containing 33 different indicators for more than 30,000 economists. Based on this bibliographic information RePEc calculates well-known rankings for authors and academic institutions. We provide some cautionary remarks concerning the interpretation of some provided bibliometric measures in RePEc. Moreover, we show how individual and aggregated rankings can be biased due to the employed ranking methodology. In order to select key indicators describing and assessing research performance of scientist, we propose to apply principal component analysis in this data-rich environment. This approach allows us to assign weights to each indicator prior to aggregation. We illustrate the approach by providing a new overall ranking of economists based on RePEc data. 相似文献
7.
8.
The numerical-algorithmic procedures of fractional counting and field normalization are often mentioned as indispensable requirements for bibliometric analyses. Against the background of the increasing importance of statistics in bibliometrics, a multilevel Poisson regression model (level 1: publication, level 2: author) shows possible ways to consider fractional counting and field normalization in a statistical model (fractional counting I). However, due to the assumption of duplicate publications in the data set, the approach is not quite optimal. Therefore, a more advanced approach, a multilevel multiple membership model, is proposed that no longer provides for duplicates (fractional counting II). It is assumed that the citation impact can essentially be attributed to time-stable dispositions of researchers as authors who contribute with different fractions to the success of a publication’s citation. The two approaches are applied to bibliometric data for 254 scientists working in social science methodology. A major advantage of fractional counting II is that the results no longer depend on the type of fractional counting (e.g., equal weighting). Differences between authors in rankings are reproduced more clearly than on the basis of percentiles. In addition, the strong importance of field normalization is demonstrated; 60% of the citation variance is explained by field normalization. 相似文献
9.
《Journal of Informetrics》2014,8(2):406-418
The journal impact factor is not comparable among fields of science and social science because of systematic differences in publication and citation behavior across disciplines. In this work, a source normalization of the journal impact factor is proposed. We use the aggregate impact factor of the citing journals as a measure of the citation potential in the journal topic, and we employ this citation potential in the normalization of the journal impact factor to make it comparable between scientific fields. An empirical application comparing some impact indicators with our topic normalized impact factor in a set of 224 journals from four different fields shows that our normalization, using the citation potential in the journal topic, reduces the between-group variance with respect to the within-group variance in a higher proportion than the rest of indicators analyzed. The effect of journal self-citations over the normalization process is also studied. 相似文献
10.
In recent years there has been a sharp increase in collaborations among scholars and there are studies on the effects of scientific collaboration on scholars’ performance. This study examines the hypothesis that geographically diverse scientific collaboration is associated with research impact. Here, the approach is differentiated from other studies by: (a) focusing on publications rather than researchers or institutes; (b) considering the geographical diversity of authors of each publication; (c) considering the average number of citations a publication receives per year (time-based normalization of citations) as a surrogate for its impact; and (d) not focusing on a specific country (developed or developing) or region. Analysis of the collected bibliometric data shows that a publication impact is significantly and positively associated with all related geographical collaboration indicators. But publication impact has a stronger association with the numbers of external collaborations at department and institution levels (inter-departmental and inter-institutional collaborations) compared to internal collaborations. Conversely, national collaboration correlates better with impact than international collaboration. 相似文献
11.
K. I. Belousov D. A. Baranov N. L. Zelyanskaya T. V. Karlina 《Scientific and Technical Information Processing》2015,42(4):299-305
The experience from the application of the OKVED 2 economic classifier for indexing scientific publications is considered. More than 9500 articles on the subject of “Automation. Computer Engineering” in authoritative Russian magazines were the material for the study. Some means for the comparative analysis of economic statistics and results of the classification of scientific publications are shown. 相似文献
12.
《Journal of Informetrics》2022,16(1):101244
The paper compares the scientific profiles of 199 countries relative to 254 subject categories, based on the impact of knowledge produced in each category, measured by the bibliometric indicator known as Total Fractional Impact (TFI). TFI is calculated on the basis of publications indexed in Web of Science (here over years 2010-2019). The approach taken overcomes some criticalities occurring with indicators previously proposed for the same purpose. With this approach, it is possible to: i) produce, for any country, a scientific specialization profile in correspondence with each subject category; ii) identify distinctive or common characteristics of individual countries or clusters of countries. The approach provides a new tool which may reveal useful for formulation of research policies. 相似文献
13.
This paper presents the results of a bibliometric study of the scientific publications that are affiliated with Russia and
included in multidisciplinary databases, such as Science Citation Index and Scopus, as well as in the specialized Chemical
Abstracts database, in the period from 2005 to 2009. Major bibliometric indicators, including citation indexes, are explored.
It is shown that the Scopus database contains most of the Russian publications in the period from 2005 to 2009. While a gradual
decrease in the number of peer-reviewed Russian-language journals constitutes a general trend for all three databases, the
Chemical Abstracts database leads in terms of the coverage of these journals. It is found that despite the large number of
translated versions of journals, Russian publications are still significantly late in their coverage by foreign databases,
which has a significant impact on their citation levels. 相似文献
14.
The launch of Google Scholar Metrics as a tool for assessing scientific journals may be serious competition for Thomson Reuters' Journal Citation Reports, and for the Scopus‐powered Scimago Journal Rank. A review of these bibliometric journal evaluation products is performed. We compare their main characteristics from different approaches: coverage, indexing policies, search and visualization, bibliometric indicators, results analysis options, economic cost, and differences in their ranking of journals. Despite its shortcomings, Google Scholar Metrics is a helpful tool for authors and editors in identifying core journals. As an increasingly useful tool for ranking scientific journals, it may also challenge established journals products. 相似文献
15.
《Journal of Informetrics》2019,13(2):695-707
Twitter accounts have already been used in many scientometric studies, but the meaningfulness of the data for societal impact measurements in research evaluation has been questioned. Earlier research focused on social media counts and neglected the interactive nature of the data. We explore a new network approach based on Twitter data in which we compare author keywords to hashtags as indicators of topics. We analyze the topics of tweeted publications and compare them with the topics of all publications (tweeted and not tweeted). Our exploratory study is based on a comprehensive publication set of climate change research. We are interested in whether Twitter data are able to reveal topics of public discussions which can be separated from research-focused topics. We find that the most tweeted topics regarding climate change research focus on the consequences of climate change for humans. Twitter users are interested in climate change publications which forecast effects of a changing climate on the environment and to adaptation, mitigation and management issues rather than in the methodology of climate-change research and causes of climate change. Our results indicate that publications using scientific jargon are less likely to be tweeted than publications using more general keywords. Twitter networks seem to be able to visualize public discussions about specific topics. 相似文献
16.
《Journal of Informetrics》2022,16(2):101280
International mobility in academia can enhance the human and social capital of researchers and consequently their scientific outcome. However, there is still a very limited understanding of the different mobility patterns among scholars with various socio-demographic characteristics. By studying these differences, we can detect inequalities in access to scholarly networks across borders, which can cause disparities in scientific advancement. The aim of this study is twofold. First, we investigate to what extent individuals’ factors (e.g., country, career stage, and field of research) associate with the mobility of male and female researchers. Second, we explore the relationship between mobility and scientific activity and impact. For this purpose, we used a bibliometric approach to track the mobility of authors. To compare the researchers’ scientific outcomes, we considered the number of publications and received citations as indicators, as well as the number of unique co-authors in all their publications. We also analyzed the co-authorship network of researchers and compared centrality measures of “mobile” and “non-mobile” researchers. Results show that researchers from North America and Sub-Saharan Africa, particularly female ones, have the lowest, respectively, highest tendency towards international mobility. Having international co-authors increases the probability of international movement. Our findings uncover gender inequality in international mobility across scientific fields and countries. Across genders, researchers in the Physical sciences have the most and in the Social sciences the least rate of mobility. We observed more mobility for Social scientists at the advanced career stage, while researchers in other fields prefer to move at earlier career stages. Also, we found a positive correlation between mobility and scientific outcomes, but no apparent difference between females and males. Indeed, researchers who have started mobility at the advanced career stages had a better scientific outcome. Comparing the centrality of mobile and non-mobile researchers in the co-authorship networks reveals a higher social capital advantage for mobile researchers. 相似文献
17.
Percentiles have been established in bibliometrics as an important alternative to mean-based indicators for obtaining a normalized citation impact of publications. Percentiles have a number of advantages over standard bibliometric indicators used frequently: for example, their calculation is not based on the arithmetic mean which should not be used for skewed bibliometric data. This study describes the opportunities and limits and the advantages and disadvantages of using percentiles in bibliometrics. We also address problems in the calculation of percentiles and percentile rank classes for which there is not (yet) a satisfactory solution. It will be hard to compare the results of different percentile-based studies with each other unless it is clear that the studies were done with the same choices for percentile calculation and rank assignment. 相似文献
18.
Is more always better? We address this question in the context of bibliometric indices that aim to assess the scientific impact of individual researchers by counting their number of highly cited publications. We propose a simple model in which the number of citations of a publication depends not only on the scientific impact of the publication but also on other ‘random’ factors. Our model indicates that more need not always be better. It turns out that the most influential researchers may have a systematically lower performance, in terms of highly cited publications, than some of their less influential colleagues. The model also suggests an improved way of counting highly cited publications. 相似文献
19.
In the analysis of bibliometric networks, researchers often use mapping and clustering techniques in a combined fashion. Typically, however, mapping and clustering techniques that are used together rely on very different ideas and assumptions. We propose a unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks. We show that the VOS mapping technique and a weighted and parameterized variant of modularity-based clustering can both be derived from the same underlying principle. We illustrate our proposed approach by producing a combined mapping and clustering of the most frequently cited publications that appeared in the field of information science in the period 1999–2008. 相似文献
20.
Jiansheng Yang Michael W. Vannier Fang Wang Yan Deng Fengrong Ou James Bennett Yang Liu Ge Wang 《Journal of Informetrics》2013,7(2):318-324
Academic productivity and research funding have been hot topics in biomedical research. While publications and their citations are popular indicators of academic productivity, there has been no rigorous way to quantify co-authors’ relative contributions. This has seriously compromised quantitative studies on the relationship between academic productivity and research funding. Here we apply an axiomatic approach and associated bibliometric measures to revisit a recent study by Ginther et al. (Ginther et al., 2011a, Ginther et al., 2011b) in which the probability of receiving a U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) R01 award was analyzed with respect to the applicant's race/ethnicity. Our results provide new insight and suggest that there is no significant racial bias in the NIH review process, in contrast to the conclusion from the study by D. K. Ginther et al. Our axiomatic approach has a potential to be widely used for scientific assessment and management. 相似文献