共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 35 毫秒
1.
Book editors in the social sciences and humanities: an analysis of publication and collaboration patterns of established researchers in Flanders 
下载免费PDF全文
下载免费PDF全文 Book editors in the social sciences and humanities play an important role in their fields but little is known about their typical publication and collaboration patterns. To partially fill this gap, we compare Flemish editors and other researchers, in terms of career stage, productivity, publication types, publications with domestic and international collaboration as well as the number of (international or all) unique co‐authors, co‐editors and associated book chapter authors. The results show that editors are mostly established researchers, especially in the social sciences, produce more book chapters and monographs than do other researchers, and are more productive. Nevertheless, editors collaborate less than do other researchers, both in terms of publications and in number of co‐authors. Including book chapter authors in the editors' collaboration networks makes those networks substantially larger, demonstrating that editors do not mainly call upon authors from their existing collaboration network when choosing book chapter authors in the edited books. Finally, editors seem to co‐author with their book chapter authors slightly more often after the publication of the edited book than before. 相似文献
2.
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
3.
This paper analyses the publication patterns of researchers in the field of applied sciences at Universities of Technology in South Africa. Aspects investigated include publications in SCOPUS-listed journals; number of citations and countries of publication. Collaborative research patterns at national and international levels were also investigated. A bibliometric analysis approach was followed using SCOPUS as the main source of data and analysing the articles published in selected applied science disciplines. Results show that researchers in the field of applied sciences in universities of technology have increased their number of publications over the past 10?years and are also working in conjunction with other researchers both nationally and internationally. The analysis is an important addition to the field in South Africa which helps in measuring how institutions are positively responding to government incentives in research. The results are also important to information professionals who are increasingly playing an important role in research impact assessments. 相似文献
4.
从CSSCI引文年代分布看中国社会科学期刊影响因子的计算 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
Garfield等在20世纪60年代提出的期刊影响因子是评价期刊的重要指标之一。对中文社会科学引文索引(CSSCI)来源论文之引文年代分布及其与美国社会科学引文索引(SSCI)的比较分析说明两者基本一致,对CSSCI引文中中文期刊、中文社科学术期刊及CSSCI来源期刊的年代分布分析说明:中文社科期刊的被引高峰期与国际期刊被引高峰期相同,均在其出版后的第二年和第三年。国际通用的影响因子算法完全适用于中国的中文人文社会科学期刊。 相似文献
5.
Mohammadamin Erfanmanesh Muzammil Tahira A. Abrizah 《Publishing Research Quarterly》2017,33(4):421-432
Over the years, the number of journals indexed in Scopus has increased, although it varies significantly between countries. The increasing proportion of international journals of a country provides new venues for papers from that country to be seen by other researchers worldwide. In this work, we evaluate the relationship of a country’s scientific performance or publication success with both its journals’ quantity and quality. The specific objective of the study is to identify the relationship between the country’s publication success and the quantity and quality of those country’s journals indexed in Scopus during 2005–2014. The publication success of 102 individual countries, measured by their scientific productivity, impact and collaboration indicators, the quantity of country’s Scopus-indexed journals in 2014 (a total of 22,581 journals) as well as the quantity of its journals were investigated. Scopus-indexed journals are predominantly from Western Europe (48.9%) and North America (27.7%), with the United States and the United Kingdom dominate with a total 51%. The contribution from the peripheral countries is comparatively small, however there are a good number of contributions from the South-East Asian countries. Estonia is the fastest growing country in terms of having indexed journals in Scopus, following by Iran and Malaysia. Among the studied indices, it was found that publication success (total publications and total citations) of 102 countries are strongly correlated with quantity (number of indexed journals and number of documents published in indexed journals) and quality (citations per paper, SJR, h-index, CiteScore and SNIP) indicators of country’s journals. We can conclude that the scientific productivity of a country depend critically on the number of journals indexed from that country in citation databases. The study provides a context with which the relative success of publications can be assessed, yielding new insights into the scientific impact of individual countries and the performance of journals that they published. 相似文献
6.
7.
In this paper, we investigate the effects of using four methods of publication counting (complete, whole, fractional, square root fractional) and limiting the number of publications (at researcher and institution levels) on the results of a national research evaluation exercise across fields using Polish data. We use bibliographic information on 0.58 million publications from the 2013–2016 period. Our analysis reveals that the largest effects are in those fields within which a variety publication and cooperation patterns can be observed (e.g. in Physical sciences or History and archeology). We argue that selecting the publication counting method for national evaluation purposes needs to take into account the current situation in the given country in terms of the excellence of research outcomes, level of internal, external and international collaboration, and publication patterns in the various fields of sciences. Our findings show that the social sciences and humanities are not significantly influenced by the different publication counting methods and limiting the number of publications included in the evaluation, as publication patterns in these fields are quite different from those observed in the so-called hard sciences. When discussing the goals of any national research evaluation system, we should be aware that the ways of achieving these goals are closely related to the publication counting method, which can serve as incentives for certain publication practices. 相似文献
8.
《Journal of Informetrics》2020,14(4):101068
In the previous literature, no clear conclusions have been reached about the effect of gender differences on research performance (RP) in science, as measured by publication productivity, number of citations, and academic awards. Meanwhile, a gap also exists in the research regarding gender differences in international academic collaboration. To complement the existing literature, this study investigated the achievements of scientists engaged in international academic collaboration, which places heavy demands on language and communication skills and in which female scientists appear to have more advantages than male scientists. We investigated the effect of international collaboration carried out by chemists from China’s Project 985 universities and the Chinese Academy of Sciences and compared the extent to which the international collaboration improved female and male scientists’ academic performance. The results indicated that, compared to male scientists, female scientists performed better and significantly improved their academic performance through international collaboration. This conclusion was valid for different periods throughout chemists’ academic careers. The policy implications are discussed at the end of this study. 相似文献
9.
Contributing factors to long‐term citation count in marine and freshwater biology articles 下载免费PDF全文
下载免费PDF全文 Researchers have investigated factors thought to affect the total number of citations in various academic disciplines, and some general trends have emerged. However, there are still limited data for many fields, including aquatic sciences. Using papers published in 2003–2005 (n = 785), we investigated marine and freshwater biology articles to identify factors that may contribute to the probability of citation and for cumulative citation counts over 10 years. We found no relationships with probability of citation; however, we found evidence that for those that were cited at least once, cumulative citations were related to several factors. Articles cited by books received more citations than those never cited by books, which we hypothesized to be indicative of the impact an article may have in the field. We also found that articles first cited within 2 years of publication received more cumulative citations than those first cited after 2 years. We found no evidence that self‐citation (as the first citation) had a significant effect on total citations. Our findings were compared with previous studies in other disciplines, and it was found that aquatic science citation patterns are comparable to fields in science and technology but less so to humanities and social sciences. 相似文献
10.
In this work we investigate the sensitivity of individual researchers’ productivity rankings to the time of citation observation. The analysis is based on observation of research products for the 2001–2003 triennium for all research staff of Italian universities in the hard sciences, with the year of citation observation varying from 2004 to 2008. The 2008 rankings list is assumed the most accurate, as citations have had the longest time to accumulate and thus represent the best possible proxy of impact. By comparing the rankings lists from each year against the 2008 benchmark we provide policy-makers and research organization managers a measure of trade-off between timeliness of evaluation execution and accuracy of performance rankings. The results show that with variation in the evaluation citation window there are variable rates of inaccuracy across the disciplines of researchers. The inaccuracy results negligible for Physics, Biology and Medicine. 相似文献
11.
Because of the variations in citation behavior across research fields, appropriate standardization must be applied as part of any bibliometric analysis of the productivity of individual scientists and research organizations. Such standardization involves scaling by some factor that characterizes the distribution of the citations of articles from the same year and subject category. In this work we conduct an analysis of the sensitivity of researchers’ productivity rankings to the scaling factor chosen to standardize their citations. To do this we first prepare the productivity rankings for all researchers (more than 30,000) operating in the hard sciences in Italy, over the period 2004–2008. We then measure the shifts in rankings caused by adopting scaling factors other than the particular factor that seems more effective for comparing the impact of publications in different fields: the citation average of the distribution of cited-only publications. 相似文献
12.
To study the explicit organizational knowledge pattern of an education and research institute is a tedious process as it deals with multiple subjects. Also, many qualitative and quantitative indicators such as peer review process, awards and honors received by the constitute members of the institute, national and international grants, and different types of publications can be considered to study the pattern followed in different disciplines over a period of time. Not all of these indicators will be giving the same message, and the choice of which one to select will depend on the type of research being evaluated. In this study to analyze explicit organizational knowledge, publications of Indian Institute of Science (IISc) in different disciplines over a span of 10 years from 1996 to 2005 are considered as given in the multidisciplinary database SCOPUS using correspondence analysis and cluster analysis.According to correspondence analysis, the study indicated that publication productivity of IISc is on the rise during the study period and research in Engineering, Agriculture & Biological science, Chemistry and Life sciences is high. Although a cluster analysis is carried out to find out demarcations between row elements and column elements, no useful interpretation could be drawn.However, this analysis has to be carried out further, by factoring indicators from research input as well as other socio-economic political, and cultural factors affecting the explicit organizational knowledge. Correspondence analysis and cluster analysis highlights what is interesting, and indicates the direction in which further inquiry should be done. 相似文献
13.
To study the explicit organizational knowledge pattern of an education and research institute is a tedious process as it deals with multiple subjects. Also, many qualitative and quantitative indicators such as peer review process, awards and honors received by the constitute members of the institute, national and international grants, and different types of publications can be considered to study the pattern followed in different disciplines over a period of time. Not all of these indicators will be giving the same message, and the choice of which one to select will depend on the type of research being evaluated. In this study to analyze explicit organizational knowledge, publications of Indian Institute of Science (IISc) in different disciplines over a span of 10 years from 1996 to 2005 are considered as given in the multidisciplinary database SCOPUS using correspondence analysis and cluster analysis.According to correspondence analysis, the study indicated that publication productivity of IISc is on the rise during the study period and research in Engineering, Agriculture & Biological science, Chemistry and Life sciences is high. Although a cluster analysis is carried out to find out demarcations between row elements and column elements, no useful interpretation could be drawn.However, this analysis has to be carried out further, by factoring indicators from research input as well as other socio-economic political, and cultural factors affecting the explicit organizational knowledge. Correspondence analysis and cluster analysis highlights what is interesting, and indicates the direction in which further inquiry should be done. 相似文献
14.
《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
15.
Felix de Moya-Anegon Vicente P. Guerrero-Bote Carmen Lopez-Illescas Henk F. Moed 《Journal of Informetrics》2018,12(4):1251-1262
This paper presents a statistical analysis of the relationship between three science indicators applied in earlier bibliometric studies, namely research leadership based on corresponding authorship, international collaboration using international co-authorship data, and field-normalized citation impact. Indicators at the level of countries are extracted from the SIR database created by SCImago Research Group from publication records indexed for Elsevier’s Scopus. The relationship between authorship and citation-based indicators is found to be complex, as it reflects a country’s phase of scientific development and the coverage policy of the database. Moreover, one should distinguish a genuine leadership effect from a purely statistical effect due to fractional counting. Further analyses at the level of institutions and qualitative validation studies are recommended. 相似文献
16.
This article reports a comparative study of five measures that quantify the degree of research collaboration, including the collaborative index, the degree of collaboration, the collaborative coefficient, the revised collaborative coefficient, and degree centrality. The empirical results showed that these measures all capture the notion of research collaboration, which is consistent with prior studies. Moreover, the results showed that degree centrality, the revised collaborative coefficient, and the degree of collaboration had the highest coefficient estimates on research productivity, the average JIF, and the average number of citations, respectively. Overall, this article suggests that the degree of collaboration and the revised collaborative coefficient are superior measures that can be applied to bibliometric studies for future researchers. 相似文献
17.
The purpose of this study was to examine whether scientific mobility, either between countries or between affiliations has an effect on researchers’ productivity and impact. In order to investigate this issue, we examined the relationships between the number of institutional affiliations and countries of the top 100 authors in seven disciplines. The selected authors’ profiles contained the number of affiliations and countries each author is assigned. We studied the number of affiliations and countries and compared them to three bibliometric indicators: the number of publications in international, peer-reviewed journals, h-index and Field Weighted Citations Impact. Our findings show that although there are differences in the relationship between mobility, productivity and impact between disciplines, mobility between at least two affiliations has an overall positive effect on both output and impact while mobility between countries does not. Therefore, in most disciplines positive impact and productivity effects are tracked in affiliation mobility within a single country. 相似文献
18.
This paper investigates the citation impact of three large geographical areas – the U.S., the European Union (EU), and the rest of the world (RW) – at different aggregation levels. The difficulty is that 42% of the 3.6 million articles in our Thomson Scientific dataset are assigned to several sub-fields among a set of 219 Web of Science categories. We follow a multiplicative approach in which every article is wholly counted as many times as it appears at each aggregation level. We compute the crown indicator and the Mean Normalized Citation Score (MNCS) using for the first time sub-field normalization procedures for the multiplicative case. We also compute a third indicator that does not correct for differences in citation practices across sub-fields. It is found that: (1) No geographical area is systematically favored (or penalized) by any of the two normalized indicators. (2) According to the MNCS, only in six out of 80 disciplines – but in none of 20 fields – is the EU ahead of the U.S. In contrast, the normalized U.S./EU gap is greater than 20% in 44 disciplines, 13 fields, and for all sciences as a whole. The dominance of the EU over the RW is even greater. (3) The U.S. appears to devote relatively more – and the RW less – publication effort to sub-fields with a high mean citation rate, which explains why the U.S./EU and EU/RW gaps for all sciences as a whole increase by 4.5 and 5.6 percentage points in the un-normalized case. The results with a fractional approach are very similar indeed. 相似文献
19.
We study how scholar collaboration varies across disciplines in science, social science, arts and humanities and the effects of author collaboration on impact and quality of co-authored papers. Impact is measured with the aid of citations collected by papers, while quality is determined by the judgements expressed by peer reviewers. To this end, we take advantage of the dataset provided by the first-ever national research assessment exercise of Italian universities, which involved 20 disciplinary areas, 102 research structures, 18,500 research products, and 6661 peer reviewers. Collaboration intensity neatly varies across disciplines: it is inescapable is most sciences and negligible in most humanities. We measured a general positive association between cardinality of the author set of a paper and citation count as well as peer quality of the contribution. The correlation is stronger when the affiliations of authors are heterogeneous. There exist, however, notable and interesting counter-examples. 相似文献
20.
The evaluation of performance at the individual level is of fundamental importance in informing management decisions. The literature provides various indicators and types of measures, however a problem that is still unresolved and little addressed is how to compare the performance of researchers working in different fields (apples to oranges). In this work we propose a solution, testing various scaling factors for the distributions of research productivity in 174 scientific fields. The analysis is based on the observation of scientific production by all Italian university researchers active in the hard sciences over the period 2004–2008, as indexed by the Web of Science. The most effective scaling factor is the average of the productivity distribution of researchers with productivity above zero. 相似文献