首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
相似文献
 共查询到20条相似文献,搜索用时 15 毫秒
1.
Many altmetric studies have analyzed which papers were mentioned how often on Twitter (one of the most important altmetrics sources). In order to study the potential relevance of tweets from another perspective, we investigate which tweets were cited in papers. If many tweets were cited in publications, this might demonstrate that tweets have substantial and useful content. Overall, a rather low number of citations to tweets (n=13,149) by less than 7,000 papers was found. Most tweets do not seem to be cited because of any cognitive influence they might have had on studies; they rather were study objects. Thus, this study does not support a high relevance of tweets (for research). Most of the papers that cited tweets are from the subject areas Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities, and Medicine. Most of the papers cited only one tweet. Up to 65 tweets cited in a single paper were found. An author keyword analysis revealed that the single largest topic seems to be the COVID-19/corona pandemic.  相似文献   

2.
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   

3.
科学研究的目的在于创造知识,并应用理论成果解决我国社会、经济、文化等发展中的实际问题。将论文发表在国际期刊上可以让更多的国际同行了解我国最新的科研成果,为我国获得更多的国际影响力,所以在过去二十多年里SCI论文成为我国科研考核的一个重要指标。在这种科研评价导向下,我国学者发表的国际论文数量已居世界第一位,而大量来自国内同行的引用使得我国国际论文的被引量排名世界第二。本文提取1990至2015年Web of Science论文及其引文的数据,分析不同国家、不同学科在国家层次的自引情况,并在不同国家、不同学科之间进行比较。研究发现,在排除国内同行的自引后,我国国际论文的真实国际影响力仍然有限,除了临床医学和物理等少数学科外,其他学科仍然低于全球平均水平。  相似文献   

4.
This paper provides information on a research project undertaken at the University of Arkansas in Fayetteville to study publications by the campus researchers with an emphasis on the STEM (agricultural sciences, physical science, biological sciences, engineering and mathematics, etc.) disciplines at the macro level for a 3-year period. The overall objective of the study was to provide evidence-based data of periodical use to assist with collection decisions and to identify collection strengths at the university level. We used the Web of Knowledge database (Science Citation Index, Social Science Citation Index, and Arts and Humanities Citation Index) to identify the periodical literature in which our researchers published and those that they cite in their publications. We also determined the extent to which our researchers are publishing in and citing periodicals from the Elsevier, Wiley, and IEEE journal packages. A methodology for extracting citations from Web of Knowledge into an Excel spreadsheet is also provided.  相似文献   

5.
Altmetrics have been proposed as a way to assess the societal impact of research. Although altmetrics are already in use as impact or attention metrics in different contexts, it is still not clear whether they really capture or reflect societal impact. This study is based on altmetrics, citation counts, research output and case study data from the UK Research Excellence Framework (REF), and peers’ REF assessments of research output and societal impact. We investigated the convergent validity of altmetrics by using two REF datasets: publications submitted as research output (PRO) to the REF and publications referenced in case studies (PCS). Case studies, which are intended to demonstrate societal impact, should cite the most relevant research papers. We used the MHq’ indicator for assessing impact – an indicator which has been introduced for count data with many zeros. The results of the first part of the analysis show that news media as well as mentions on Facebook, in blogs, in Wikipedia, and in policy-related documents have higher MHq’ values for PCS than for PRO. Thus, the altmetric indicators seem to have convergent validity for these data. In the second part of the analysis, altmetrics have been correlated with REF reviewers’ average scores on PCS. The negative or close to zero correlations question the convergent validity of altmetrics in that context. We suggest that they may capture a different aspect of societal impact (which can be called unknown attention) to that seen by reviewers (who are interested in the causal link between research and action in society).  相似文献   

6.
不同类型论文层面计量指标间的相关性研究   总被引:1,自引:0,他引:1  
对补充计量学的研究背景进行梳理,总结出补充计量学的5个特点,并对论文层面计量指标体系和当前常用的补充计量工具进行介绍。为探究综合性指标Altmetric score与引用指标之间的关系,分别对PLOS和F1000网站中提供的论文数据和指标数据进行收集,检测两个指标之间的相关性,并对比两组实验结果。结果表明,Altmetric score与引用指标存在正相关关系,且在评价论文时具有一定的一致性。  相似文献   

7.
《Journal of Informetrics》2019,13(2):515-539
Counting of number of papers, of citations and the h-index are the simplest bibliometric indices of the impact of research. We discuss some improvements. First, we replace citations with individual citations, fractionally shared among co-authors, to take into account that different papers and different fields have largely different average number of co-authors and of references. Next, we improve on citation counting applying the PageRank algorithm to citations among papers. Being time-ordered, this reduces to a weighted counting of citation descendants that we call PaperRank. We compute a related AuthorRank applying the PageRank algorithm to citations among authors. These metrics quantify the impact of an author or paper taking into account the impact of those authors that cite it. Finally, we show how self- and circular-citations can be eliminated by defining a closed market of Citation-coins. We apply these metrics to the InSpire database that covers fundamental physics, presenting results for papers, authors, journals, institutes, towns, countries for all-time and in recent time periods.  相似文献   

8.
Previous reports stressed on the importance of international collaboration and open access (OA) publishing, as they increase the quality of the research and increase its benefits. In this study, we will assess Jordanian international research collaboration and OA publishing in the past 10 years. We performed a Scopus search for Jordanian publications in the years 2008–2017, where we extracted and calculated the total number of publications, publications in OA journals, publications with international collaborations. Moreover, we assessed the disciplines Jordanians usually publish in. During the 10-year interval, we found a total of 20,359 Jordan-affiliated publications indexed in Scopus. We found a dramatic increase in number of publications with international collaboration from 38% in 2008 reaching 53.3% in 2017, and an increase in OA publications from 7.3% of the total publications in 2008, reaching 18.7% of the total publications in 2017. Total number of Scopus indexed publications from Jordan has increased by 57.9% over the past 10 years. Although international collaboration and OA publications have dramatically increased in recent years, Jordanian researchers should focus more on international collaboration with developed countries and on self-archiving their publications.  相似文献   

9.
This article analyzes the bibliometric features (the number of pages, completion years, the fields of subject, the number of citations, and their distribution by types of sources and years) of 100 theses and dissertations completed at the Department of Librarianship of Hacettepe University between 1974 and 2002. Almost a quarter (24%) of all dissertations were on university libraries, followed by public libraries (9%). Doctoral dissertations were, on average, twice as long as master's theses and contained 2.5 times more citations. Monographs received more citations (50%) than journal articles did (42%). Recently completed theses and dissertations contained more citations to electronic publications. Fourteen (or 3.2% of all) journal titles (including Türk Kütüphaneciliği, College & Research Libraries, and Journal of the American Society for Information Science) received almost half (48.9%) of all citations. Eighty percent of journal titles were cited infrequently. No correlation was found between the frequency of citations of the most frequently cited journals and their impact factors. Cited journal titles in master's and doctoral theses and dissertations overlapped significantly. Similarly, journal titles cited in dissertations also overlapped significantly with those that were cited in the journal articles published in the professional literature. The distribution of citations to foreign journal titles fit Bradford's Law of Scattering. The mean half-life of all cited sources was 9 years. Sources cited in master's dissertations were relatively more current. Single authorship was the norm in cited resources. Coupled with in-library use data, findings of the present study can be used to identify the core journal titles in librarianship as well as to evaluate the existing library collections to decide which journal titles to keep, discard, or relegate to off-site storage areas.  相似文献   

10.
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   

11.
12.
The status of a journal is commonly determined by two factors: popularity and prestige. While the former counts citations, the latter recursively weights them with the prestige of the citing journals. We make a thorough comparison of the bibliometric concepts of popularity and prestige for journals in the sciences and in the social sciences. We find that the two notions diverge more for the hard sciences, including physics, engineering, material sciences, and computer sciences, than they do for the geosciences, for biology-medical disciplines, and for the social sciences. Moreover, we identify the science and social science journals with the highest diverging ranks in popularity and prestige compilations.  相似文献   

13.
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   

14.
Questionable publications have been accused of “greedy” practices; however, their influence on academia has not been gauged. Here, we probe the impact of questionable publications through a systematic and comprehensive analysis with various participants from academia and compare the results with those of their unaccused counterparts using billions of citation records, including liaisons, i.e., journals and publishers, and prosumers, i.e., authors. Questionable publications attribute publisher-level self-citations to their journals while limiting journal-level self-citations; yet, conventional journal-level metrics are unable to detect these publisher-level self-citations. We propose a hybrid journal-publisher metric for detecting self-favouring citations among QJs from publishers. Additionally, we demonstrate that the questionable publications were less disruptive and influential than their counterparts. Our findings indicate an inflated citation impact of suspicious academic publishers. The findings provide a basis for actionable policy-making against questionable publications.  相似文献   

15.
This bibliometric study quantified the impact of different open access (OA) implementations on the number and subject diversity of citations to articles. The study compared two partial OA journals and found that green (institutional repository) OA articles received up to 106% more citations on average than gold (publisher provided) OA or non-OA articles. OA articles received up to 36% more diverse (interdisciplinary) citations than non-OA articles. This result could inform libraries in their decisions regarding OA, specifically the continued importance of institutional repositories. The results will also assist librarians in educating faculty on the benefits of OA.  相似文献   

16.
The main objective of this study is to analyze the relationship between research impact and the structural properties of co-author networks. A new bibliographic source, Microsoft Academic Search, is introduced to test its suitability for bibliometric analyses. Citation counts and 500 one-step ego networks were extracted from this engine. Results show that tiny and sparse networks – characterized by a high Betweenness centrality and a high Average path length – achieved more citations per document than dense and compact networks – described by a high Clustering coefficient and a high Average degree. According to disciplinary differences, Mathematics, Social Sciences and Economics & Business are the disciplines with more sparse and tiny networks; while Physics, Engineering and Geosciences are characterized by dense and crowded networks. This suggests that in sparse ego networks, the central author have more control on their collaborators being more selective in their recruitment and concluding that this behaviour has positive implications in the research impact.  相似文献   

17.
A variety of bibliometric measures have been proposed to quantify the impact of researchers and their work. The h-index is a notable and widely used example which aims to improve over simple metrics such as raw counts of papers or citations. However, a limitation of this measure is that it considers authors in isolation and does not account for contributions through a collaborative team. To address this, we propose a natural variant that we dub the Social h-index. The idea is to redistribute the h-index score to reflect an individual's impact on the research community. In addition to describing this new measure, we provide examples, discuss its properties, and contrast with other measures.  相似文献   

18.
Reliable methods for the assessment of research success are still in discussion. One method, which uses the likelihood of publishing very highly cited papers, has been validated in terms of Nobel prizes garnered. However, this method cannot be applied widely because it uses the fraction of publications in the upper tail of citation distribution that follows a power law, which includes a low number of publications in most countries and institutions. To achieve the same purpose without restrictions, we have developed the double rank analysis, in which publications that have a low number of citations are also included. By ranking publications by their number of citations from highest to lowest, publications from institutions or countries have two ranking numbers: one for their internal and another one for world positions; the internal ranking number can be expressed as a function of the world ranking number. In log–log double rank plots, a large number of publications fit a straight line; extrapolation allows estimating the likelihood of publishing the highest cited publication. The straight line derives from a power law behavior of the double rank that occurs because citations follow lognormal distributions with values of μ and σ that vary within narrow limits.  相似文献   

19.
In the second half of the 20th century, scientific research in physics, chemistry, and engineering began to focus on the use of large government-funded laboratories. This shift toward so-called big science also brought about a concomitant change in scientific work itself, with a sustained trend toward the use of highly specialized scientific teams, elevating the role of team characteristics on scientific outputs. The actual impact of scientific knowledge is commonly measured by how often peer-reviewed publications are, in turn, cited by other researchers. Therefore, how characteristics such as author team seniority, affiliation diversity, and size affect the overall impact of team publications was examined. Citation information and author demographics were reviewed for 123 articles published in Physical Review Letters from 2004 to 2006 and written by 476 scientists who used the National High Magnetic Field Laboratory's facilities. Correlation analysis indicated that author teams that were more multi-institutional and had homogeneous seniority tended to have more senior scientists. In addition, the analysis suggests that more mixed seniority author teams were likely to be less institutionally dispersed. Quantile regression was used to examine the relationships between author-team characteristics and publication impact. The analysis indicated that both weighted average seniority and average seniority had a negative relationship with the number of citations the publication received. Furthermore, the analysis also showed a positive relationship between first-author seniority and the number of citations, and a negative relationship between the number of authors and the number of citations.  相似文献   

20.
We study the effects of an article featured on the cover of the journal Nature on citations to all articles published by its authors. Based on 30 years of bibliometric data, we find that cover articles are cited significantly more than non-cover articles, with this difference being long-lasting. However, when considering all articles (past and future) by Nature authors, we find that the publication of a cover article causes citations to previous articles by its authors to decline relative to citations to articles by non-cover authors.  相似文献   

设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号