From loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET Tue May 3 07:12:47 2005 From: loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET (Loet Leydesdorff) Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 13:12:47 +0200 Subject: Science shops: A kaleidoscope of science-society collaborations in Europe Message-ID: Science shops: A kaleidoscope of science-society collaborations in Europe Public Understanding of Science (forthcoming) Loet Leydesdorff [1] & Janelle Ward [2] Abstract The science-shop model was initiated in the Netherlands in the 1970s. During the 1980s, the model spread throughout Europe, but without much coordination. The crucial idea behind the science shops involves a working relationship between knowledge-producing institutions like universities and citizen groups that need answers to relevant questions. More recently, the European Commission has funded a number of projects for taking stock of the results of science shops. Twenty-one in-depth case studies by seven science shops across Europe enable us to draw some conclusions about the variety of experiences in terms of differences among disciplines, nations, and formats of the historical institutionalization. The functions of science shops in the mediation of normative concerns with analytical perspectives can further be specified. Keywords: science shop, empowerment, democratization, university, NGO, knowledge, access ** apologies for cross-postings. _____ Loet Leydesdorff Honory Chair of the City of Lausanne (March - July) Universit? de Lausanne, School of Economics (HEC), BFSH 1, 1015 Lausanne-Dorigny, Switzerland Tel.:+41-21-6923469 Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) Kloveniersburgwal 48, 1012 CX Amsterdam Tel.: +31-20-525 6598; fax: +31-20-525 3681 loet at leydesdorff.net; http://www.leydesdorff.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: clip_image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 1101 bytes Desc: not available URL: From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Tue May 3 14:26:53 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 14:26:53 -0400 Subject: deGroote SL, Shultz M, Doranski M, "Online journals' impact on the citation patterns of medical faculty" Journal of the Medical Library Association 93(2):223-228, April 2005. Message-ID: Sandra L. De Groote: sgroote at uic.edu Mary Shultz: shultz at uic.edu Marceline Doranski: marcicd at uic.edu TITLE :Online journals' impact on the citation patterns of medical faculty AUTHOR :Sandra L. De Groote, MLIS, AHIP, Assistant Professor and Assistant Information Services Librarian Library of the Health Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, 1750 West Polk Street, Chicago, IL 60612. Mary Shultz, MS, AHIP, Assistant Professor and Assistant Health Sciences Librarian. Library of the Health Sciences-Urbana University of Illinois at Chicago 506 South Mathews Urbana, Illinois 61801 Marceline Doranski, RN, MLIS, Assistant Professor and Assistant Information Services Librarian Library of the Health Sciences University of Illinois at Chicago 1750 West Polk Street Chicago, Illinois 60612 SOURCE : Journal of the Medical Library Association 93(2):223-228, April 2005. Abstract Purpose: The purpose was to determine the impact of online journals on the citation patterns of medical faculty. This study looked at whether researchers were more likely to limit the resources they consulted and cited to those journals available online rather than those only in print. Setting: Faculty publications from the college of medicine at a large urban university were examined for this study. The faculty publications from a regional medical college of the same university were also examined in the study. The number of online journals available for faculty, staff, and students at this institution has increased from an initial core of 15 online journals in 1998 to over 11,000 online journals in 2004. Methodology: Searches by author affiliation were performed in the Web of Science to find all articles written by faculty members in the college of medicine at the selected institution. Searches were conducted for the following years: 1993, 1996, 1999, and 2002. Cited references from each faculty-authored article were recorded, and the corresponding cited journals were coded into four categories based on their availability at the institution in this study: print only, print and online, online only, and not owned. Results were analyzed using SPSS. Results: The number of journals cited per year continued to increase from 1993 to 2002. The results did not indicate that researchers were more likely to cite online journals or were less likely to cite journals only in print. At the regional location where the number of print-only journals was minimal, use of the print-only journals did decrease in 2002, although not significantly. Conclusion/Discussion: It is possible that electronic access to information (i.e., online databases) has had a positive impact on the number of articles faculty will cite. Results of this study suggest, at this point, that faculty are still accessing the print-only collection, at least for research purposes, and are therefore not sacrificing quality for convenience. From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Wed May 4 12:43:41 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 12:43:41 -0400 Subject: Agrawal AA "Corruption of journal Impact Factors" Trends in Ecology and Evolution 20(4):157, April 2005. Message-ID: reproduced with permission from the author Letters 11 February 2005. TITLE : Corruption of journal Impact Factors SOURCE: Trends in Ecology and Evolution 20(4):157, April 2005 AUTHOR: Anurag A. Agrawal E-mail :aa337 at cornell.edu Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Cornell University, Corson Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA SOURCE : Trends in Ecology and Evolution 20(4):157, April 2005 FULL TEXT FOLLOWS : Letters Corruption of journal Impact Factors Anurag A. Agrawal E-mail The Corresponding Author Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Cornell University, Corson Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA Scientists and academic institutions widely use Impact Factors (http://wos.mimas.ac.uk/) to evaluate the relative importance of journals. Although sometimes considered controversial, publishing in relatively high Impact Factor journals has been broadly applied as a stamp of approval for hiring and promotions, to rate the accomplishments of academic departments, and the importance of particular disciplines. Both authors and publishers strive to publish high impact journal articles, and the pressure to do so has apparently lead to an insidious abuse in how some publishers correspond with authors of nearly accepted manuscripts. At or before the time of acceptance, several journals' editors are requesting that authors cite additional papers published in that same journal. Some of these requests are general such as ?We would also appreciate it if you would consider citing relevant past papers [from our journal] in your manuscript?, whereas others are more specific, with journal editors indicating one to several recent (often unpublished) citations. Although the extent of this practice is unknown, at least four major journals in the area of ecology and evolutionary biology routinely encourage such self citation. Because Impact Factors are calculated by dividing the number of citations in the current year (e.g. in 2004) to articles published in the two previous years (i.e. in 2003 and 2002) by the total number of articles published in the two previous years (i.e. in 2003 and 2002), citation of articles relatively hot off the press will increase the Impact Factor of a journal. A gentle nudge by an editor to cite additional papers if relevant is all too easy to be uncritically accepted by most authors who are simply overjoyed with the news that their paper has been accepted. To maintain the integrity of objective scientific research, this questionable policy that essentially results in the ?businessification? of science must be stopped. Publishers should be embarrassed and authors should not comply. Editor's Note Requiring authors to cite articles from the same journal in which they hope to publish is a practice that the Editors of all Trends journals disapprove of. Beyond pointing authors in the direction of papers that they might have missed and would improve the quality of their articles, we do not require authors to cite articles from our journals. From eugene.garfield at THOMSON.COM Wed May 4 14:35:49 2005 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSON.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 14:35:49 -0400 Subject: Impact factor in publication selection. Message-ID: 'Peer Review' and 'Impact Factor' Among Top Factors in Medical Publication Selection http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=109&STORY=/www/story/0 5-03-2005/0003538944&EDATE= Press release from a company called Cutting Edge Information on their new report: Pharmaceutical Medical Publications. Mentions impact factor. Note the report itself is $7,000. When responding, please attach my original message __________________________________________________ Eugene Garfield, PhD. email: garfield at codex.cis.upenn.edu home page: www.eugenegarfield.org Tel: 215-243-2205 Fax 215-387-1266 Chairman Emeritus, ISI www.isinet.com 3501 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104-3302 President, The Scientist LLC. www.the-scientist.com 400 Market Street, Suite 1250, Philadelphia, PA 19106-2501 Past President, American Society for Information Science and Technology (ASIS&T) www.asis.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From quentinburrell at MANX.NET Wed May 4 14:55:22 2005 From: quentinburrell at MANX.NET (Quentin L. Burrell) Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 19:55:22 +0100 Subject: Agrawal AA "Corruption of journal Impact Factors" Trends in Ecology and Evolution 20(4):157, April 2005. Message-ID: Gene Thanks for this. I was particularly interested in the start of the second sentence of the Editor's Note: "Beyond pointing authors in the direction of papers that they might have missed and would improve the quality of their articles...." Are editors taking over the role of referees? And what advice are these editors including in their "Instructions to referees"? Or maybe these journals do not have referees, only editors! Quentin Dr Quentin L Burrell Isle of Man International Business School The Nunnery Old Castletown Road Douglas Isle of Man IM9 4EX via United Kingdom www.ibs.ac.im ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eugene Garfield" To: Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 5:43 PM Subject: [SIGMETRICS] Agrawal AA "Corruption of journal Impact Factors" Trends in Ecology and Evolution 20(4):157, April 2005. reproduced with permission from the author Letters 11 February 2005. TITLE : Corruption of journal Impact Factors SOURCE: Trends in Ecology and Evolution 20(4):157, April 2005 AUTHOR: Anurag A. Agrawal E-mail :aa337 at cornell.edu Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Cornell University, Corson Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA SOURCE : Trends in Ecology and Evolution 20(4):157, April 2005 FULL TEXT FOLLOWS : Letters Corruption of journal Impact Factors Anurag A. Agrawal E-mail The Corresponding Author Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Cornell University, Corson Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA Scientists and academic institutions widely use Impact Factors (http://wos.mimas.ac.uk/) to evaluate the relative importance of journals. Although sometimes considered controversial, publishing in relatively high Impact Factor journals has been broadly applied as a stamp of approval for hiring and promotions, to rate the accomplishments of academic departments, and the importance of particular disciplines. Both authors and publishers strive to publish high impact journal articles, and the pressure to do so has apparently lead to an insidious abuse in how some publishers correspond with authors of nearly accepted manuscripts. At or before the time of acceptance, several journals' editors are requesting that authors cite additional papers published in that same journal. Some of these requests are general such as 'We would also appreciate it if you would consider citing relevant past papers [from our journal] in your manuscript', whereas others are more specific, with journal editors indicating one to several recent (often unpublished) citations. Although the extent of this practice is unknown, at least four major journals in the area of ecology and evolutionary biology routinely encourage such self citation. Because Impact Factors are calculated by dividing the number of citations in the current year (e.g. in 2004) to articles published in the two previous years (i.e. in 2003 and 2002) by the total number of articles published in the two previous years (i.e. in 2003 and 2002), citation of articles relatively hot off the press will increase the Impact Factor of a journal. A gentle nudge by an editor to cite additional papers if relevant is all too easy to be uncritically accepted by most authors who are simply overjoyed with the news that their paper has been accepted. To maintain the integrity of objective scientific research, this questionable policy that essentially results in the 'businessification' of science must be stopped. Publishers should be embarrassed and authors should not comply. Editor's Note Requiring authors to cite articles from the same journal in which they hope to publish is a practice that the Editors of all Trends journals disapprove of. Beyond pointing authors in the direction of papers that they might have missed and would improve the quality of their articles, we do not require authors to cite articles from our journals. From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Wed May 4 15:37:36 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 15:37:36 -0400 Subject: English Translation of Buela-Casal G "Evaluating quality of articles and scientific journals.Proposal of weighted impact factor and a quality index?" is available. Message-ID: This paper is being re-posted to the list to inform you that the author has very kindly provided an English translation at : http://www.psychologyinspain.com/content/full/2004/frame.asp?id=8006 E-MAIL: G. Buela-Casal : gbuela at ugr.es FULL TEXT OF THIS PAPER IN SPANISH IS AVAILABLE AT : Title : Evaluating quality of articles and scientific journals. Proposal of weighted impact factor and a quality index? Author : Buela-Casal G Journal : PSICOTHEMA 15 (1): 23-35 FEB 2003 Document type: Article Language: Spanish Cited References: 70 Times Cited: 0 Abstract: The factor of impact and other bibliometric indices are currently used in several countries to evaluate the type and quality of scientific production. However, the impact factor (or prestige) rarely receives an accurate interpretation. Available impact factors display a number of shortcomings: they only refer to citations in the previous two or three years, and they do not take into account the impact or prestige of the periodicals where citations appear, so that every citation is given the same value, regardless of the periodical where it appears. In order to overcome these limitations, two indices are proposed: a mean impact factor of the journals where citations appear (FIMRC) and a weighted impact factor (FIP). Additionally, other useful indices are suggested for the analysis of interaction between periodicals: a percentage of partial interaction of citations (PIPC), and a percentage of mutual interaction among citations (PIMC). This paper explains their details a procedures for their calculation. Several problem areas are discussed, namely, peer review, the policy of publications, qualification of referees, and assessment criteria. It is also argued that quality of studies should not only be primarily evaluated in terms of the periodical where they are published. Finally, an alternative is offered for the assessment of quality of scientific articles and journals on three bases: what is to be evaluated, who is to be an evaluator, and possible criteria for evaluation. These considerations lead to a proposal for a quality index aside of impact or prestige. KeyWords Plus: PSYCHOLOGY, SCIENCE Addresses: Buela-Casal G, Univ Granada, Fac Psicol, E-18071 Granada, Spain Univ Granada, Fac Psicol, E-18071 Granada, Spain Publisher: COLEGIO OFICIAL DE PSICOLOGOS DE ASTURIAS, OVIEDO IDS Number: 640AB ISSN: 0214-9915 From loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET Thu May 5 09:37:19 2005 From: loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET (Loet Leydesdorff) Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 15:37:19 +0200 Subject: Visualization of the citation environments in CSTPC Message-ID: ?????????????? ??????????/??? ??????? ?? ?2003???????????????????????????CSTPC??1576? ?????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????????????????? ???????/??????????????????????/????(c)?? ???????????(p)??c/p?????????????????????? ?????????????????????????????????????? ???????????(????????)?????????????????? ?????????????????????????????????????? ????????????Pajek???????????? ?? ??????????????????? zhoup at istic.ac.cn & Loet Leydesdorff Honory Chair of the City of Lausanne (March - July) Universit? de Lausanne, School of Economics (HEC), BFSH 1, 1015 Lausanne-Dorigny, Switzerland Tel.:+41-21-6923469 Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) Kloveniersburgwal 48, 1012 CX Amsterdam Tel.: +31-20-525 6598; fax: +31-20-525 3681 loet at leydesdorff.net; http://www.leydesdorff.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Fri May 6 15:59:42 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Fri, 6 May 2005 15:59:42 -0400 Subject: Osca-Lluch, J; Haba, J "Dissemination of Spanish social sciences and humanities journals" JOURNAL OF INFORMATION SCIENCE 31 (3). 2005. p.230-237 Message-ID: Julia Osca-Lluch ; e-mail : M.Julia.Osca at uv.es TITLE: Dissemination of Spanish social sciences and humanities journals (Article, English) AUTHOR: Osca-Lluch, J; Haba, J SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMATION SCIENCE 31 (3). 2005. p.230-237 SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD, LONDON ABSTRACT: The presence of scholarly journals in international data bases promotes the dissemination of research results and also facilitates requests for specific articles or journals by end users. As scientists seek optimal visibility for their work and wish their results to be published in journals with high circulation, it is important to know which are the leading journals within each scientific area. This paper contains a bibliometric study of scientific journals in the areas of Social Sciences and Humanities that are currently published in Spain, together with information concerning their production and circulation in the different national and international bibliographical data bases, publisher, scientific discipline, impact factor, frequency of publication, language and type of delivery used. AUTHOR ADDRESS: J Osca-Lluch, UV CSIC, Inst Hist Ciencia & Documentac Lopez Pinero, Avda Blasco Ibanez 15, Valencia 46010, Spain From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Fri May 6 16:23:10 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Fri, 6 May 2005 16:23:10 -0400 Subject: Higgitt D, and Haigh M. "Contemplating pedagogy and the mainstream" Journal of Geography in Higher Education 28(1):3-8, March 2004. Message-ID: M. Haigh : mhaigh at brookes.ac.uk D. Higgitt: geodlh at nus.edu.sg Title: Contemplating pedagogy and the mainstream Author(s): Higgitt D, Haigh M Source: JOURNAL OF GEOGRAPHY IN HIGHER EDUCATION 28 (1): 3-8 MAR 2004 Addresses: Higgitt D (reprint author), Natl Univ Singapore, Dept Geog, Singapore, 0511 Singapore Natl Univ Singapore, Dept Geog, Singapore, 0511 Singapore Oxford Brookes Univ, Ctr Geog Higher Educ, Oxford, OX3 0BP England Publisher: CARFAX PUBLISHING, RANKINE RD, BASINGSTOKE RG24 8PR, HANTS, ENGLAND Subject Category: EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH; GEOGRAPHY IDS Number: 815SF ISSN: 0309-8265 CITED REFERENCES : CR CASTREE N, 1999, ENVIRON PLANN D, V17, P257 COOK I, 2000, J GEOGR HIGHER EDUC, V24, P13 GARFIELD E, ISI ESSAYS GARFIELD E, 1996, CONS C THEOR PRACT R GARFIELD E, 1998, UNFALLCHIRURG, V48, P413 HEYMAN R, 2001, ENVIRON PLANN D, V19, P1 JOHNSTON R, 2003, T I BRIT GEOGR, V28, P133 MATTHEWS H, 2002, J GEOGR HIGHER EDUC, V26, P5 YEUNG HWC, 2002, ENVIRON PLANN A, V34, P2093 From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Fri May 6 16:54:35 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Fri, 6 May 2005 16:54:35 -0400 Subject: Kovacic N and Misak A. "Author self-citation in medical literature" Canadian Medical Association Journal, 170(13):1929-1930, Message-ID: Natasa Kovacic : natasa at mef.hr CANADIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL CMAJ ? June 22, 2004; 170 (13). doi:10.1503/cmaj.1040513 Full text : http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/170/13/1929?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=self-citation+in+medical+literature&andorexactfulltext=and&searchid=1115412227760_3195&stored_search=&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&resourcetype=1&journalcode=cmaj TITLE : Author self-citation in medical literature AUTHOR : Natasa Kovacic and Aleksandra Misak SOURCE : Canadian Medical Association Journal, 170(13):1929-1930, June 22 2004 Cited References: 6 CR CHRISTOPHER MM, 2003, VET CLIN PATH, V32, P98 FASSOULAKI A, 2000, BRIT J ANAESTH, V84, P266 GAMI AS, 2004, CAN MED ASSOC J, V170, P1925 GARFIELD E, 1999, CAN MED ASSOC J, V161, P979 KOVACIC N, 2004, CROAT MED J, V45, P18 SEGLEN PO, 1997, BRIT MED J, V314, P498 Addresses: Kovacic N (reprint author), Univ Zagreb, Sch Med, Dept Anat, Salata 3B, Zagreb, 10000 Croatia Univ Zagreb, Sch Med, Dept Anat, Zagreb, 10000 Croatia E-mail Addresses: natasa at mef.hr Publisher: CANADIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1867 ALTA VISTA DR, OTTAWA, ONTARIO K1G 3Y6, CANADA Subject Category: MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL IDS Number: 833LL ISSN: 0820-3946 >From the Department of Anatomy (Kovacic) and the Croatian Medical Journal (both authors), Zagreb University School of Medicine, Zagreb, Croatia. Correspondence to: Dr. Natasa Kovacic, Department of Anatomy, Zagreb University School of Medicine, Salata 3B, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia; fax +385-1-4590-222; natasa at mef.hr ________________________________________________________ In this issue Gami and colleagues1 report on their investigation of author self-citation (the practice of citing one's previous publications in a new publication) as a possible source of bias in bibliometric assessment of the importance of a journal or an auth or. Focusing on articles about diabetes mellitus as representative of the general clinical medical literature, they found that nearly one-fifth of all citations per year were author self-citations. They found no association between methodologic quality of articles and frequency of author self-citation. Compared with review articles, original articles had double the proportion of author self-citations. Articles published in highly cited journals had a smaller proportion of author self-citations than articles published in less-cited journals. Citing is an established way for authors to declare their sources of information and politely recognize someone's intellectual property. The importance of an article, author or journal can be estimated through the number of citations each acquires. For journals, such a number is transformed into the impact factor, which approximates the frequency with which articles have been cited in the 2 years after publication.2 However imperfect and potentially unfair it may be, the impact factor is the best measure of a journal's quality we have today.3,4 But what can the proportion of a certain type of citation, such as author self-citation, tell us about a given article, author or journal? A high rate of author self-citation may result from the fact that authors stick to their specific field of research and, naturally, rely on their previous results. To reduce article length, authors may cite previous work in which, for example, the same methods are described. It is also possible, however, that they overestimate the importance of their earlier research compared with other work they could have cited, or that they want to increase artificially the number of citations to their own work, thus distorting the perception of its importance. Institutional criteria for academic advancement take into account the total number of publications by the author and sometimes the total number of citations of that author's work. The latter might provide incentive for authors to self-cite, but self-citation does not really reflect the visibility and quality of their work. Finally, authors who publish a lot have more opportunities to cite their own previous work, which is why author self-citation rates may correlate with authors' publishing productivity. For these reasons, it is impossible to determine the level of authors' integrity with regard to self-citation. Gami and colleagues' finding that review articles had a smaller proportion of self-citations than original scientific articles1 may be explained by the fact that review articles are more widely read and therefore receive more citations in general. Both journal self-citation (when articles in a journal cite previous articles in the same journal) and author self-citation may influence the journal's impact factor.5 From the e-table presented by Gami and colleagues1 it is clear that author self-citations accounted for a negligible proportion of citations in the high-impact journals and, therefore, would not substantially distort the impact factor of those journals. From the same data, one can also presume that there is an inverse correlation between the proportion of author self-citations and the impact factor of a journal. Our analysis of citations of the Croatian Medical Journal indicated that an increase in the absolute number of citations was indeed followed by a decrease in the proportion of both author and journal self-citations.6 The decrease in author self-citations could have been due to widening of the author pool (a result of better international visibility of the journal) or to increased quality of articles (which would attract independent citations), or it may simply have been mathematical, self-citations having been "diluted" by the higher number of independent citations. The decrease in the proportion of journal self-citations probably reflected the journal's increased visibility.6 Although a high proportion of journal self-citations may indeed increase the impact factor of a journal, in small journals this increase is illusory: it does not reflect an increase in international visibility, since the flow of information is limited mostly to the pool of the journal's authors and readers. Whatever the reason, a high proportion of self-citations per article cannot be taken solely as a reflection of the limited quality of a journal: some journals have a narrower scope, either thematically or geographically, and consequently a smaller pool of authors. Journals that are both influential and important are characterized by a high impact factor, the publication of "milestone" articles and prestigious authors. Journals that make an important but less influential contribution typically publish in a fruitful area of research occupied by fewer investigators who are nonetheless highly productive and well cited. Journals with limited influence and importance publish in a highly specific area, have a small circulation, a high degree of overlap between the readership and the author pool, and receive few citations. For almost identical reasons, an article or author with a high proportion of self-citations cannot be accused of lower research quality or integrity. This is supported by Gami and colleagues' finding that "self-citations had little relation with the quality of an article."1 The total number of citations also has to be taken into account. A highly cited article, author or journal with a substantial proportion of self-citations (considering the total citation number) is more visible than the rarely cited without any self-citations. In this way, this noteworthy article1 opens the question of the "morally allowable" proportion of self-citations and offers an elegant and workable model for the pertinent research. ? See related article page 1925 Footnotes This article has been peer reviewed. Contributors: Both authors contributed substantially to all phases of manuscript preparation and approved the version to be published. Competing interests: None declared. References 1. Gami AS, Montori VM, Wilczynski NL, Haynes RB. Author self-citation in the diabetes literature. CMAJ 2004;170(13):1925-7.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 2. Garfield E. Journal impact factor: a brief review [editorial]. CMAJ 1999; 161: 979-80.[Free Full Text] 3. Christopher MM. The impact factor: getting a grip. Vet Clin Pathol 2003; 32: 98-100.[Medline] 4. Seglen PO. Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. BMJ 1997;314:498-502.[Medline] 5. Fassoulaki A, Paraskeva A, Papilas K, Karabinis G. Self-citations in six anaesthesia journals and their significance in determining the impact factor. Br J Anaesth 2000;84:266-9.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 6. Kovacic N, Misak A. What can be learned from impact factor of Croatian Medical Journal, 1994-2003? Croat Med J 2004;45:18-24.[Medline] Related Article Author self-citation in the diabetes literature Apoor S. Gami, Victor M. Montori, Nancy L. Wilczynski, and R. Brian Haynes Can. Med. Assoc. J. 2004 170: 1925-1927. [Abstract] [Full Text] From eugene.garfield at THOMSON.COM Fri May 6 16:56:33 2005 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSON.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Fri, 6 May 2005 16:56:33 -0400 Subject: Higgitt D, and Haigh M. "Contemplating pedagogy and the mainstream" Journal of Geography in Higher Education 28(1):3-8, March 2004. Message-ID: Meher:I think there is a small error in the cited references. It should be umfallchirurg. No need to change it here, but if it is WOS that way we can get Marion to correct it. EG When responding, please attach my original message __________________________________________________ Eugene Garfield, PhD. email: garfield at codex.cis.upenn.edu home page: www.eugenegarfield.org Tel: 215-243-2205 Fax 215-387-1266 Chairman Emeritus, ISI www.isinet.com 3501 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104-3302 President, The Scientist LLC. www.the-scientist.com 400 Market Street, Suite 1250, Philadelphia, PA 19106-2501 Past President, American Society for Information Science and Technology (ASIS&T) www.asis.org -----Original Message----- From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Garfield, Eugene Sent: Friday, May 06, 2005 4:23 PM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: [SIGMETRICS] Higgitt D, and Haigh M. "Contemplating pedagogy and the mainstream" Journal of Geography in Higher Education 28(1):3-8, March 2004. M. Haigh : mhaigh at brookes.ac.uk D. Higgitt: geodlh at nus.edu.sg Title: Contemplating pedagogy and the mainstream Author(s): Higgitt D, Haigh M Source: JOURNAL OF GEOGRAPHY IN HIGHER EDUCATION 28 (1): 3-8 MAR 2004 Addresses: Higgitt D (reprint author), Natl Univ Singapore, Dept Geog, Singapore, 0511 Singapore Natl Univ Singapore, Dept Geog, Singapore, 0511 Singapore Oxford Brookes Univ, Ctr Geog Higher Educ, Oxford, OX3 0BP England Publisher: CARFAX PUBLISHING, RANKINE RD, BASINGSTOKE RG24 8PR, HANTS, ENGLAND Subject Category: EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH; GEOGRAPHY IDS Number: 815SF ISSN: 0309-8265 CITED REFERENCES : CR CASTREE N, 1999, ENVIRON PLANN D, V17, P257 COOK I, 2000, J GEOGR HIGHER EDUC, V24, P13 GARFIELD E, ISI ESSAYS GARFIELD E, 1996, CONS C THEOR PRACT R GARFIELD E, 1998, UNFALLCHIRURG, V48, P413 HEYMAN R, 2001, ENVIRON PLANN D, V19, P1 JOHNSTON R, 2003, T I BRIT GEOGR, V28, P133 MATTHEWS H, 2002, J GEOGR HIGHER EDUC, V26, P5 YEUNG HWC, 2002, ENVIRON PLANN A, V34, P2093 From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Mon May 9 16:02:43 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Mon, 9 May 2005 16:02:43 -0400 Subject: Gami AS, Montori VA, Wilczynski NL, Haynes RB "Author self-citation in the diabetes literature" CANADIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL 170 (13): 1925-1927 JUN 22 2004 Message-ID: For Full Text go to : http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/reprint/170/13/1925 and click on "Manual Download" Apoor S. Gami : gami.apoor at mayo.edu Title : Author self-citation in the diabetes literature Author(s): Gami AS, Montori VA, Wilczynski NL, Haynes RB Source : CANADIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL 170 (13): 1925-1927 JUN 22 2004 Abstract: Background: Author self-citation is the practice of citing one's previous publications in a new publication. Its extent is unknown. We studied author self-citation, choosing the major clinical field of diabetes mellitus to represent the general medical literature. Methods: We identified every article about diabetes mellitus in 170 hand-searched clinical journals published in 2000. For every article, we recorded the bibliographic citation an publication type (original or review article) and assessed the methodologic rigour. Citation information was obtained from the ISI Web of Knowledge in April 2003. Results: Of 49 028 articles, 289 were about diabetes mellitus and had citation information. Citation counts ranged from 0 to 347 (median 6, interquartile range [IQR] 2-12). Author self-citation counts ranged from 0 to 16 (median 1, IQR 0-2). Author self-citations accounted for an average of 18% (95% confidence interval [CI] 15%-21%) and a median of 7% (95% CI 5%-11%) of all citations of each publication that was cited at least once (n = 266). Original articles had double the mean proportion of author self-citations compared with review articles (19% v. 9%; median 7% v. 0%, difference 7%, 95% CI 0-10%). Methodologic rigour and review type were not significantly associated with subsequent author self-citation. Interpretation: Nearly one-fifth of all citations to articles about diabetes mellitus in clinical journals in the year 2000 were author self-citations. The frequency of self-citation was not associated with the quality of publications. These findings are likely applicable to the general clinical medicine literature and may have important implications for the assessment of journal or publication importance and the process of scientific discovery. Addresses: Gami AS (reprint author), Mayo Clin, Div Cardiovasc Dis, Dept Internal Med, Coll Med, 200 1st St SW, Rochester, MN 55905 USA Mayo Clin, Div Cardiovasc Dis, Dept Internal Med, Coll Med, Rochester, MN 55905 USA McMaster Univ, Dept Clin Epidemiol & Biostat, Hamilton, ON Canada McMaster Univ, Dept Med, Hamilton, ON Canada E-mail Addresses: gami.apoor at mayo.edu Publisher: CANADIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1867 ALTA VISTA DR, OTTAWA, ONTARIO K1G 3Y6, CANADA IDS Number: 833LL ISSN: 0820-3946 CITED REFERENCES: CR CALLAHAM M, 2002, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V287, P2847 CRADDOCK N, 1996, BRIT MED J, V313, P1659 DEMARIA AN, 2003, J AM COLL CARDIOL, V42, P952 FASSOULAKI A, 2000, BRIT J ANAESTH, V84, P266 GARFIELD E, 1992, SCI PUBL POLICY, V19, P321 HYLAND K, 2003, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V54, P251 KAPOOR VK, 1993, INDIAN J GASTROEN S1, V12, S12 MONTORI VM, 2003, BMC MED, V1, P2 From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Mon May 9 16:36:42 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Mon, 9 May 2005 16:36:42 -0400 Subject: Glanzel W. Garfield E. "The myth of delayed recognition" SCIENTIST 18 (11): 8-8 JUN 7 2004 Message-ID: FULL TEXT AVAILABLE AT : http://garfield.library.upenn.edu/papers/mythdelayedrecognition2004.html For more articles on "Delayed Recognition" see http://www.garfield.library.upenn.edu/delayedrecognition.html Title: The myth of delayed recognition Author(s): Glanzel W, Garfield E Source: SCIENTIST 18 (11): 8-8 JUN 7 2004 Addresses: Inst Sci Informat, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA Publisher: SCIENTIST INC, 3535 MARKET ST, SUITE 200, PHILADELPHIA, PA 19104-3385 USA IDS Number: 826WD ISSN: 0890-3670 Cited References: CALLAHAM M, 2002, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V287, P2847. CRADDOCK N, 1996, BRIT MED J, V313, P1659. DEMARIA AN, 2003, J AM COLL CARDIOL, V42, P952. FASSOULAKI A, 2000, BRIT J ANAESTH, V84, P266. GARFIELD E, 1992, SCI PUBL POLICY, V19, P321. HYLAND K, 2003, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V54, P251. KAPOOR VK, 1993, INDIAN J GASTROEN S1, V12, S12. MONTORI VM, 2003, BMC MED, V1, P2. From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Mon May 9 17:36:56 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Mon, 9 May 2005 17:36:56 -0400 Subject: Mannino DM "Impact factor, impact, and smoke and mirrors" AMERICAN JOURNAL OF RESPIRATORY AND CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE 171 (4): 417-418 FEB 15 2005 Message-ID: A lively debate between the Editor of the journal and an informed reader who questions the emphasis on Impact Factors. Publication lags play a critical role. David M. Mannino: dmannino at cdc.gov Title : Impact factor, impact, and smoke and mirrors Author(s): Mannino DM Source : AMERICAN JOURNAL OF RESPIRATORY AND CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE 171 (4): 417-418 FEB 15 2005 Document Type: Letter Addresses: Mannino DM (reprint author), Univ Kentucky, Sch Med, Lexington, KY USA Univ Kentucky, Sch Med, Lexington, KY USA Publisher: AMER THORACIC SOC, 1740 BROADWAY, NEW YORK, NY 10019-4374 USA IDS Number: 895SA ISSN: 1073-449X Cited References : CR TOBIN MJ, 2002, AM J RESP CRIT CARE, V166, P433 TOBIN MJ, 2004, AM J RESP CRIT CARE, V169, P239 TOBIN MJ, 2004, AM J RESP CRIT CARE, V169, P254 TOBIN MJ, 2004, AM J RESP CRIT CARE, V169, P265 TOBIN MJ, 2004, AM J RESP CRIT CARE, V169, P277 TOBIN MJ, 2004, AM J RESP CRIT CARE, V169, P288 TOBIN MJ, 2004, AM J RESP CRIT CARE, V169, P301 TOBIN MJ, 2004, AM J RESP CRIT CARE, V170, P351 AND Response from Martin J. Tobin Tobin MJ, Impact Factor, Impact, and Smoke and Mirrors Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2005; 171: 418 From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Tue May 10 12:50:56 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 12:50:56 -0400 Subject: Sidiropoulos A , Manolopoulos Y "A new perspective to automatically rank scientific conferences using digital libraries" INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT 41 (2): 289-312 MAR 2005 Message-ID: This and other papers by the authors are available at : http://delab.csd.auth.gr/publications.html A. Sidiropoulos : e-mail : asidirop at delab.csd.auth.gr Y. Manolopoulos : e-mail : manolopo at delab.csd.auth.gr Title: A new perspective to automatically rank scientific conferences using digital libraries Author(s): Sidiropoulos A , Manolopoulos Y Source: INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT 41 (2): 289-312 MAR 2005 Document Type: Article Language: English Cited References: 26 Times Cited: 0 Abstract: Citation analysis is performed in order to evaluate authors and scientific collections, such as journals and conference proceedings. Currently, two major systems exist that perform citation analysis: Science Citation Index (SCI) by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) and Citeseer by the NEC Research Institute. The SCI, mostly a manual system up until recently, is based on the notion of the ISI Impact Factor, which has been used extensively for citation analysis purposes. On the other hand the CiteSeer system is an automatically built digital library using agents technology, also based on the notion of ISI Impact Factor. In this paper, we investigate new alternative notions besides the ISI impact factor, in order to provide a novel approach aiming at ranking scientific collections. Furthermore, we present a web-based system that has been built by extracting data from the Databases and Logic Programming (DBLP) website of the University of Trier. Our system, by using the new citation metrics, emerges as a useful tool for ranking scientific collections. In this respect, some first remarks are presented, e.g. on ranking conferences related to databases. (C) 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Addresses: Sidiropoulos A (reprint author), Aristotle Univ Thessaloniki, Dept Informat, Data Engn Lab, Thessaloniki, 54124 Greece Aristotle Univ Thessaloniki, Dept Informat, Data Engn Lab, Thessaloniki, 54124 Greece E-mail Addresses: asidirop at delab.csd.auth.gr , manolopo at delab.csd.auth.gr Publisher: PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD, THE BOULEVARD, LANGFORD LANE, KIDLINGTON, OXFORD OX5 1GB, ENGLAND Subject Category: COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS; INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE IDS Number: 874AK ISSN: 0306-4573 CITED REFERENCES: CR AN Y, IN PRESS KNOWLEDGE I BAUMGARTNER H, 2000, INFLUENCE MARKETING BRADSHAW S, 2001, KNOWL-BASED SYST, V14, P29 BRIN S, 1998, P 7 INT WORLD WID WE, P107 DHYANI D, 2002, P 13 DEX C, P19 DING Y, 2001, INFORMATION PROCESSI, V57, P817 GARFIELD E, 1972, ESSAYS INFORMATION S, V1, P527 GARFIELD E, 1994, IMPACT FACTOR GOODRUM A, 2001, INFORMATION PROCESSI, V57, P661 HAN E, 1997, P DMKD 97 WORKSH HE Y, 2002, INFORMATION PROCESSI, V55, P491 HULT G, 1997, J MARKETING ED, V19, P37 JAIN AK, 1999, ACM COMPUT SURV, V31, P264 KARYPIS G, 1997, P ACM IEEE DES AUT C, P526 KLEIJNEN JPC, 2000, INFORM PROCESS MANAG, V36, P551 KLEINBERG JM, 1999, J ACM, V46, P604 KLEINBERG JM, 1999, P 5 INT C COMP COMB, P1 KOROBKIN R, 1999, RANKING J SOME THOUG LAWRENCE S, 1999, IEEE COMPUT, V32, P67 LAWRENCE S, 1999, P 8 INT C INF KNOWL, P139 LEY M, 2002, P SPIRE 2002 LISB PO, P1 LIN X, 2003, INFORM PROCESS MANAG, V39, P689 MEGHABGHAB G, 2002, INFORM PROCESS MANAG, V38, P111 MYLONOPOULOS NA, 2001, COMMUN ACM, V44, P29 PRETTO L, 2002, P SPIR S, P131 TAHAI A, 1998, INFORM PROCESS MANAG, V34, P341 From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Wed May 11 10:55:27 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 10:55:27 -0400 Subject: Podsakoff PM, Mackenzie SB, Bachrach DG, Podsakoff NP "The influence of management journals in the 1980s and 1990s" STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT JOURNAL 26 (5): 473-488 MAY 2005 Message-ID: P.M. Podsakoff : E-mail Addresses: podsakof at indiana.edu Title: The influence of management journals in the 1980s and 1990s Author(s): Podsakoff PM, Mackenzie SB, Bachrach DG, Podsakoff NP Source: STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT JOURNAL 26 (5): 473-488 MAY 2005 Document Type: Article Language: English Cited References: 29 Abstract: It is difficult to get a clear picture of the relative influence of management journals because previous studies have focused on a single sub-area in the field over a relatively restricted number of years, and/or have used inconsistent criteria to judge journal influence. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to examine journal influence using citations from 28 journals over the past two decades. The findings show that the top seven journals accounted for 61 percent of all of the citations in the journals included, and that the three journals that showed the greatest increase in influence over the past 20 years were AMJ, AMR, and SMJ. Copyright (c) 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Addresses: Podsakoff PM (reprint author), Indiana Univ, Kelley Sch Business, Dept Management, 1309 E 10th St, Bloomington, IN 47405 USA Indiana Univ, Kelley Sch Business, Dept Management, Bloomington, IN 47405 USA Univ Alabama, Culverhouse Coll Commerce & Business Adm, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487 USA Warrington Coll Business, Dept Management, Gainesville, FL USA Publisher: JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD, THE ATRIUM, SOUTHERN GATE, CHICHESTER PO19 8SQ, W SUSSEX, ENGLAND Subject Category: BUSINESS; MANAGEMENT IDS Number: 918SP ISSN: 0143-2095 Cited References : BOWMAN EH, 2001, STRATEGIC MANAGE J, V22, P1. CABELL DWE, 2000, DIRECTORY PUBLISHING. COE R, 1969, AACSB B, V6, P23. COE R, 1984, ACAD MANAGE J, V27, P660. ELLISON G, 2002, J POLIT ECON, V110, P947. EXTEJT MM, 1990, J MANAGE, V16, P539. FRANKE RH, 1990, STRATEGIC MANAGE J, V11, P243. GOMEZMEJIA LR, 1992, ACAD MANAGE J, V35, P921. JARLEY P, 1998, HUM RELAT, V51, P799. JOHNSON JL, 1994, ACAD MANAGE J, V37, P1392. KERR S, 1975, ACAD MANAGE J, V18, P769. KIRKPATRICK SA, 1992, GROUP ORGAN MANAGE, V17, P5. MACMILLAN IC, 1987, STRATEGIC MANAGE J, V8, P183. MACMILLAN IC, 1989, J BUS VENTURING, V4, P289. MACMILLAN IC, 1991, STRATEGIC MANAGE J, V12, P161. MACMILLAN IC, 1993, J BUS VENTURING, V8, P377. NIEMI AW, 1988, REV BUSINESS EC RES, V23, P1. PARK SH, 1996, STRATEGIC MANAGE J, V17, P109. PFEFFER J, 1977, SOC FORCES, V55, P938. PFEFFER J, 1993, ACAD MANAGE REV, V18, P599. PHENE A, 1998, J INT BUS STUD, V29, P621. PORTER ME, 1980, COMPETITIVE STRATEGY. PORTER ME, 1985, COMPETITIVE ADVANTAG. SALANCIK GR, 1986, ADMIN SCI QUART, V31, P194. SHANE SA, 1997, J MANAGE, V23, P83. SHARPLIN AD, 1985, HUM RELAT, V38, P139. STAHL MJ, 1988, ACAD MANAGE J, V31, P707. TAHAI A, 1999, STRATEGIC MANAGE J, V20, P279. TRIESCHMANN JS, 2000, ACAD MANAGE J, V43, P1130. From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Wed May 11 11:06:45 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 11:06:45 -0400 Subject: Kushkowski JD. "Web citation by graduate students: A comparison of print and electronic theses" PORTAL-LIBRARIES AND THE ACADEMY 5 (2). APR 2005.. p.259-276. Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, Baltimore Message-ID: Jeff Kushkowski : kushkows at iastate.edu TITLE: Web citation by graduate students: A comparison of print and electronic theses (Article, English) AUTHOR: Kushkowski, JD SOURCE: PORTAL-LIBRARIES AND THE ACADEMY 5 (2). APR 2005. p.259-276 JOHNS HOPKINS UNIV PRESS, BALTIMORE ABSTRACT: This article reports on the Web citation behavior of print and electronic thesis authors at Iowa State and Virginia Tech from 1997 to 2003. Citations from print theses were compared with those submitted as an electronic thesis or dissertation (ETD). This study suggests that students who are required to publish their theses digitally exhibit citation behavior that is no different from students who produce their theses in print. Web citations accounted for 2.2 percent of citations in print theses and 5.4 percent of citations in ETDs. Persistence of Web citations was uniformly poor. The implications for library services and future research directions are discussed. AUTHOR ADDRESS: JD Kushkowski, Iowa State Univ, Ames, IA USA From samorri at OKSTATE.EDU Thu May 12 10:56:07 2005 From: samorri at OKSTATE.EDU (Steven A. Morris) Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 10:56:07 -0400 Subject: Indicators of collaboration intensity? Message-ID: Hi folks, Does anyone out there know of an indicator of the "intensity" of collaboration that characterizes a research specialty? For example, mathematicians tend to be loners that don't often work with others, therefore mathematical specialties have "low" collaboration intensity. Biomedical researchers tend to work in large teams, so biomedical specialties have "high" collaboration intensity. One possible indicator would be the mean authors per paper in a specialty's literature. This is actually not a very sensitive indicator I think. Another indicator could be the percentage of single authored papers, which I think is more sensitive, e.g., Specialty percent 1 collaboration auth papers intensity ====================================== Distance 47% low eductation Complex 23% medium networks angio- 7% high genesis Does anyone have any ideas or references on collaboration intensity indicators? Thanks, Steven Morris Oklahoma State University From Michel.Menou at WANADOO.FR Thu May 12 12:03:50 2005 From: Michel.Menou at WANADOO.FR (Michel J. Menou) Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 18:03:50 +0200 Subject: Indicators of collaboration intensity? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Steven There is also a difference between 2 or 3 co-authors and many co-authors. Not to mention the case when the co-authors are students and project director, head of Department and assistants, etc. More importantly 12 co-authors from same institution does not reflect the same level of collaboration intensity than 12 co-authors from different institutions. I'd rather combine percentual of single authorship and percentual of multiple co-authors from different institutions Michel Steven A. Morris wrote: >Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): >http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > >Hi folks, > >Does anyone out there know of an indicator of the "intensity" of >collaboration that characterizes a research specialty? For example, >mathematicians tend to be loners that don't often work with others, >therefore mathematical specialties have "low" collaboration intensity. >Biomedical researchers tend to work in large teams, so biomedical >specialties have "high" collaboration intensity. > >One possible indicator would be the mean authors per paper in a >specialty's literature. This is actually not a very sensitive indicator I >think. Another indicator could be the percentage of single authored >papers, which I think is more sensitive, e.g., > >Specialty percent 1 collaboration > auth papers intensity >====================================== >Distance 47% low >eductation > >Complex 23% medium >networks > >angio- 7% high > genesis > >Does anyone have any ideas or references on >collaboration intensity indicators? > >Thanks, > >Steven Morris >Oklahoma State University > > > > > -- ================================================================= Dr. Michel J. Menou Consultant in ICT policies and Knowledge & Information Management Adviser of Somos at Telecentros board http://www.tele-centros.org B.P. 15 49350 Les Rosiers sur Loire, France Email: Michel.Menou at wanadoo.fr Phone: +33 (0)2 41518165 Fax: +33 (0)2 41511043 http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ciber/peoplemenou.php ================================================================== From Paul.Wouters at NIWI.KNAW.NL Thu May 12 12:11:55 2005 From: Paul.Wouters at NIWI.KNAW.NL (Paul Wouters) Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 18:11:55 +0200 Subject: Indicators of collaboration intensity? Message-ID: Hi, there is a huge literature on collab indicators in the journal Scientometrics and in JASIST. It is also important to think about the level of measurement (from countries to authors). Important authors: Hildrun Kretschmer, Wolfgang Glanzel, Henk Moed, Mike Thelwall, Sylvan Katz et al. Paul Wouters Dr. P. F. Wouters Programme Leader Networked Research and Digital Information (Nerdi) NIWI-KNAW The Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences PO Box 95110 1090 HC Amsterdam The Netherlands T 3120 4628654 F 3120 6658013 http://www.nerdi.knaw.nl paul.wouters at niwi.knaw.nl -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From iajiferu at UWO.CA Thu May 12 12:05:23 2005 From: iajiferu at UWO.CA (Isola) Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 12:05:23 -0400 Subject: Indicators of collaboration intensity? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Steven : You have mentioned two of the indicators, i.e. the mean number of authors per paper, and the percentage of multiple-authored papers (this is just the complement of the percentage of single authored papers). There is a third one, called the collaborative coefficient, which is more sensitive than the other two. See the following article for details : Ajiferuke, I. , Burrell, Q. & Tague, J. (1998). Collaborative coefficient : A single measure of the degree of collaboration in research. Scientometrics, 14(5-6), 421-433. Best wishes, Isola Steven A. Morris wrote: >Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): >http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > >Hi folks, > >Does anyone out there know of an indicator of the "intensity" of >collaboration that characterizes a research specialty? For example, >mathematicians tend to be loners that don't often work with others, >therefore mathematical specialties have "low" collaboration intensity. >Biomedical researchers tend to work in large teams, so biomedical >specialties have "high" collaboration intensity. > >One possible indicator would be the mean authors per paper in a >specialty's literature. This is actually not a very sensitive indicator I >think. Another indicator could be the percentage of single authored >papers, which I think is more sensitive, e.g., > >Specialty percent 1 collaboration > auth papers intensity >====================================== >Distance 47% low >eductation > >Complex 23% medium >networks > >angio- 7% high > genesis > >Does anyone have any ideas or references on >collaboration intensity indicators? > >Thanks, > >Steven Morris >Oklahoma State University > > -- -- I.S.Y. Ajiferuke Faculty of Information and Media Studies North Campus Building, Rm. 257 University of Western Ontario London, Ontario Canada N6A 5B7 E-mail : iajiferu at uwo.ca ; iajife at hotmail.com Tel. : 1-519-661-2111 ext 81364(W) ; 1-519-438-9309 (H) Fax : 1-519-661-3506 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From noruzi at CRRM.U-3MRS.FR Thu May 12 11:59:39 2005 From: noruzi at CRRM.U-3MRS.FR (Alireza Noruzi) Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 17:59:39 +0200 Subject: Webology: Volume 2, Number 1, April, 2005 Message-ID: Dear All, Apologies for cross-posting firstly. We are pleased to inform you that the third issue of Webology, an OPEN ACCESS journal, is published and is available ONLINE now. This issue contains: ----------------------------- Editorial -- Saeid Asadi -- http://www.webology.ir/2005/v2n1/editorial3.html ----------------------------------------- Information Search Strategies on the Internet: A critical component of new literacies -- Laurie A. Henry -- http://www.webology.ir/2005/v2n1/a9.html ----------------------------------------- Information searching habits of Internet users: A case study on Medical Sciences University of Isfahan (MUI), Iran -- Asefeh Asemi -- http://www.webology.ir/2005/v2n1/a10.html ----------------------------------------- Web Impact Factors for Iranian universities -- Alireza Noruzi -- http://www.webology.ir/2005/v2n1/a11.html ----------------------------------------- Call for Papers: http://www.webology.ir/callforpapers.html ----------------------------------------- Regards, A. Noruzi Department of Information Science University of Paul Cezanne, France -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From samorri at OKSTATE.EDU Thu May 12 12:41:04 2005 From: samorri at OKSTATE.EDU (Steven A. Morris) Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 12:41:04 -0400 Subject: Indicators of collaboration intensity? Message-ID: Michel, I understand what you're getting at, and that's another question... What indicators can be used to characterize the degree of collaboration via 'strong ties' (within a team) and alternately, how to characterize the degree of collaboration via 'weak ties' (between teams)? The second method you mention, percentage of authors outside the main institution, could work to measure 'weak tie' collaboration. Frankly, I have a terrible time extracting institution names from Web of Science records. So I don't know exactly how to make such a measure reliable. Thanks, Steven Morris On Thu, 12 May 2005 18:03:50 +0200, Michel J. Menou wrote: >Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): >http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > >Steven > >There is also a difference between 2 or 3 co-authors and many co-authors. >Not to mention the case when the co-authors are students and project >director, head of Department and assistants, etc. >More importantly 12 co-authors from same institution does not reflect >the same level of collaboration intensity than 12 co-authors from >different institutions. >I'd rather combine percentual of single authorship and percentual of >multiple co-authors from different institutions >Michel > >Steven A. Morris wrote: > >>Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): >>http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html >> >>Hi folks, >> >>Does anyone out there know of an indicator of the "intensity" of >>collaboration that characterizes a research specialty? For example, >>mathematicians tend to be loners that don't often work with others, >>therefore mathematical specialties have "low" collaboration intensity. >>Biomedical researchers tend to work in large teams, so biomedical >>specialties have "high" collaboration intensity. >> >>One possible indicator would be the mean authors per paper in a >>specialty's literature. This is actually not a very sensitive indicator I >>think. Another indicator could be the percentage of single authored >>papers, which I think is more sensitive, e.g., >> >>Specialty percent 1 collaboration >> auth papers intensity >>====================================== >>Distance 47% low >>eductation >> >>Complex 23% medium >>networks >> >>angio- 7% high >> genesis >> >>Does anyone have any ideas or references on >>collaboration intensity indicators? >> >>Thanks, >> >>Steven Morris >>Oklahoma State University >> >> >> >> >> > >-- >================================================================= >Dr. Michel J. Menou >Consultant in ICT policies and Knowledge & Information Management >Adviser of Somos at Telecentros board http://www.tele-centros.org >B.P. 15 >49350 Les Rosiers sur Loire, France >Email: Michel.Menou at wanadoo.fr >Phone: +33 (0)2 41518165 >Fax: +33 (0)2 41511043 >http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ciber/peoplemenou.php >================================================================== From samorri at OKSTATE.EDU Thu May 12 13:03:24 2005 From: samorri at OKSTATE.EDU (Steven A. Morris) Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 13:03:24 -0400 Subject: Indicators of collaboration intensity? Message-ID: Wow! So much information just for the asking... Isola, Thanks kindly for the reference. It looks very relevant to what I'm after. I'll have to order it through interlibrary loan, since my Scientometric subscription only goes back to 2000.... Steven On Thu, 12 May 2005 12:05:23 -0400, Isola wrote: >Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): >http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > >Steven : > >You have mentioned two of the indicators, i.e. the mean number of >authors per paper, and the percentage of multiple-authored papers (this >is just the complement of the percentage of single authored papers). >There is a third one, called the collaborative coefficient, which is >more sensitive than the other two. See the following article for details : > >Ajiferuke, I. , Burrell, Q. & Tague, J. (1998). Collaborative >coefficient : A single measure of the degree of collaboration in >research. Scientometrics, 14(5-6), 421-433. > >Best wishes, > >Isola > >Steven A. Morris wrote: > >>Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): >>http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html >> >>Hi folks, >> >>Does anyone out there know of an indicator of the "intensity" of >>collaboration that characterizes a research specialty? For example, >>mathematicians tend to be loners that don't often work with others, >>therefore mathematical specialties have "low" collaboration intensity. >>Biomedical researchers tend to work in large teams, so biomedical >>specialties have "high" collaboration intensity. >> >>One possible indicator would be the mean authors per paper in a >>specialty's literature. This is actually not a very sensitive indicator I >>think. Another indicator could be the percentage of single authored >>papers, which I think is more sensitive, e.g., >> >>Specialty percent 1 collaboration >> auth papers intensity >>====================================== >>Distance 47% low >>eductation >> >>Complex 23% medium >>networks >> >>angio- 7% high >> genesis >> >>Does anyone have any ideas or references on >>collaboration intensity indicators? >> >>Thanks, >> >>Steven Morris >>Oklahoma State University >> >> > >-- >-- > >I.S.Y. Ajiferuke >Faculty of Information and Media Studies >North Campus Building, Rm. 257 >University of Western Ontario >London, Ontario >Canada N6A 5B7 > >E-mail : iajiferu at uwo.ca ; iajife at hotmail.com >Tel. : 1-519-661-2111 ext 81364(W) ; 1-519-438-9309 (H) >Fax : 1-519-661-3506 > > > From eugene.garfield at THOMSON.COM Thu May 12 13:20:53 2005 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSON.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 13:20:53 -0400 Subject: Web Impact Factors for Iranian universities Message-ID: Web Impact Factors for Iranian universities -- Alireza Noruzi -- http://www.webology.ir/2005/v2n1/a11.html When responding, please attach my original message __________________________________________________ Eugene Garfield, PhD. email: garfield at codex.cis.upenn.edu home page: www.eugenegarfield.org Tel: 215-243-2205 Fax 215-387-1266 Chairman Emeritus, ISI www.isinet.com 3501 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104-3302 President, The Scientist LLC. www.the-scientist.com 400 Market Street, Suite 1250, Philadelphia, PA 19106-2501 Past President, American Society for Information Science and Technology (ASIS&T) www.asis.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From suarezbc03 at YAHOO.ES Thu May 12 13:54:06 2005 From: suarezbc03 at YAHOO.ES (Carlos Suarez) Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 19:54:06 +0200 Subject: Indicators of collaboration intensity? In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: Dear Steven - I think that the year of publication of Isola article is 1988 and not 1998 ... regards Carlos "Steven A. Morris" escribi?: Wow! So much information just for the asking... Isola, Thanks kindly for the reference. It looks very relevant to what I'm after. I'll have to order it through interlibrary loan, since my Scientometric subscription only goes back to 2000.... Steven On Thu, 12 May 2005 12:05:23 -0400, Isola wrote: >Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): >http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > >Steven : > >You have mentioned two of the indicators, i.e. the mean number of >authors per paper, and the percentage of multiple-authored papers (this >is just the complement of the percentage of single authored papers). >There is a third one, called the collaborative coefficient, which is >more sensitive than the other two. See the following article for details : > >Ajiferuke, I. , Burrell, Q. & Tague, J. (1998). Collaborative >coefficient : A single measure of the degree of collaboration in >research. Scientometrics, 14(5-6), 421-433. > >Best wishes, > >Isola > >Steven A. Morris wrote: > >>Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): >>http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html >> >>Hi folks, >> >>Does anyone out there know of an indicator of the "intensity" of >>collaboration that characterizes a research specialty? For example, >>mathematicians tend to be loners that don't often work with others, >>therefore mathematical specialties have "low" collaboration intensity. >>Biomedical researchers tend to work in large teams, so biomedical >>specialties have "high" collaboration intensity. >> >>One possible indicator would be the mean authors per paper in a >>specialty's literature. This is actually not a very sensitive indicator I >>think. Another indicator could be the percentage of single authored >>papers, which I think is more sensitive, e.g., >> >>Specialty percent 1 collaboration >> auth papers intensity >>====================================== >>Distance 47% low >>eductation >> >>Complex 23% medium >>networks >> >>angio- 7% high >> genesis >> >>Does anyone have any ideas or references on >>collaboration intensity indicators? >> >>Thanks, >> >>Steven Morris >>Oklahoma State University >> >> > >-- >-- > >I.S.Y. Ajiferuke >Faculty of Information and Media Studies >North Campus Building, Rm. 257 >University of Western Ontario >London, Ontario >Canada N6A 5B7 > >E-mail : iajiferu at uwo.ca ; iajife at hotmail.com >Tel. : 1-519-661-2111 ext 81364(W) ; 1-519-438-9309 (H) >Fax : 1-519-661-3506 > > > Carlos A. Su?rez Balseiro .............................................................. Observatorio de Estudios Relacionados con la Informaci?n (OERI) Escuela Graduada de Ciencias y Tecnolog?as de la Informaci?n Univ. de Puerto Rico, Recinto de R?o Piedras Edif. Jos? M.L?zaro, Piso 3ro. Tel. +1-(787) 764-0000 ext. 5266 | Fax +1-(787) 764-2311 OERI Web | http://egcti.upr.edu/observa/ Simbiosis E-Journal | http://simbiosis.uprrp.edu/ .............................................................. --------------------------------- Correo Yahoo! Comprueba qu? es nuevo, aqu? http://correo.yahoo.es -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From iajiferu at UWO.CA Thu May 12 14:12:49 2005 From: iajiferu at UWO.CA (Isola) Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 14:12:49 -0400 Subject: Indicators of collaboration intensity? In-Reply-To: <20050512175406.90419.qmail@web26208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Carlos : You are right ! I am sorry for the error. Isola Carlos Suarez wrote: > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > Dear Steven - I think that the year of publication of Isola article is > 1988 and not 1998 ... > > regards > Carlos > > "Steven A. Morris" escribi?: > > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > Wow! So much information just for the asking... > > Isola, > > Thanks kindly for the reference. It looks very relevant to what > I'm after. > I'll have to order it through interlibrary loan, since my > Scientometric > subscription only goes back to 2000.... > > Steven > > > On Thu, 12 May 2005 12:05:23 -0400, Isola wrote: > > >Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > >http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > > >Steven : > > > >You have mentioned two of the indicators, i.e. the mean number of > >authors per paper, and the percentage of multiple-authored papers > (this > >is just the complement of the percentage of single authored papers). > >There is a third one, called! the collaborative coefficient, which is > >more sensitive than the other two. See the following article for > details : > > > >Ajiferuke, I. , Burrell, Q. & Tague, J. (1998). Collaborative > >coefficient : A single measure of the degree of collaboration in > >research. Scientometrics, 14(5-6), 421-433. > > > >Best wishes, > > > >Isola > > > >Steven A. Morris wrote: > > > >>Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > >>http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > >> > >>Hi folks, > >> > >>Does anyone out there know of an indicator of the "intensity" of > >>collaboration that characterizes a research specialty? For example, > >>mathematicians tend to be loners that don't often work with others, > >>therefore mathematical specialties have "low" collaboration > intensity. > >>Biomedical researchers tend to work in large teams, so biomedical > >>specialties have "high" collaboration intensity. > >> > >>One possible indicator would be the mean authors per paper in a > >>specialty's literature. This is actually not a very sensitive > indicator I > >>think. Another indicator could be the percentage of single authored > >>papers, which I think is more sensitive, e.g., > >> > >>Specialty percent 1 collaboration > >> auth papers intensity > >>====================================== > >>Distance 47% low > >>eductation > >> > >>Complex 23% medium > >>networks > >> > >>angio- 7% high > >> genesis > >> > >>Does anyone have any ideas or references on > >>collaboration intensity indicators? > >> > >>Thanks, > >> > >>Steven Morris > >>Oklahoma State University > >> > >> > > > >-- > >-- > > > >I.S.Y. Ajiferuke > >Faculty of Information and Media Studies > >North Campus Building, Rm. 257 > >University of Western Ontario > >London, Ontario > >Canada N6A 5B7 > > > >E-mail : iajiferu at uwo.ca ; iajife at hotmail.com > >Tel. : 1-519-661-2111 ext 81364(W) ; 1-519-438-9309 (H) > >Fax : 1-519-661-3506 > > > > > > > > > > Carlos A. Su?rez Balseiro > .............................................................. > Observatorio de Estudios Relacionados con la Informaci?n (OERI) > Escuela Graduada de Ciencias y Tecnolog?as de la Informaci?n > Univ. de Puerto Rico, Recinto de R?o Piedras > Edif. Jos? M.L?zaro, Piso 3ro. > Tel. +1-(787) 764-0000 ext. 5266 | Fax +1-(787) 764-2311 > OERI Web | http://egcti.upr.edu/observa/ > Simbiosis E-Journal | http://simbiosis.uprrp.edu/ > .............................................................. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Correo Yahoo! > Comprueba qu? es nuevo, aqu? > > http://correo.yahoo.es -- -- I.S.Y. Ajiferuke Faculty of Information and Media Studies North Campus Building, Rm. 257 University of Western Ontario London, Ontario Canada N6A 5B7 E-mail : iajiferu at uwo.ca ; iajife at hotmail.com Tel. : 1-519-661-2111 ext 81364(W) ; 1-519-438-9309 (H) Fax : 1-519-661-3506 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jrussell at SERVIDOR.UNAM.MX Thu May 12 16:25:01 2005 From: jrussell at SERVIDOR.UNAM.MX (Jane M. Russell) Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 15:25:01 -0500 Subject: Indicators of collaboration intensity? Message-ID: Dear Steven, I would like to draw your attention to the following paper published by two of my Mexican colleagues: Liberman, S. & Wolf, K.B.: Bonding number in scientific disciplines. Social Networks, 20: 239-246(1998). Hope you find it useful, Jane *********************** Dr. Jane M. Russell Centro Universitario de Investigaciones Bibliotecol?gicas Universidad Nacional Aut?noma de M?xico Torre II de Humanidades piso 11 Ciudad Universitaria 04510 M?xico DF M?xico Tel: (52) 55-56230363 Fax: (52) 55-55507461 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steven A. Morris" To: Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 9:56 AM Subject: [SIGMETRICS] Indicators of collaboration intensity? > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > Hi folks, > > Does anyone out there know of an indicator of the "intensity" of > collaboration that characterizes a research specialty? For example, > mathematicians tend to be loners that don't often work with others, > therefore mathematical specialties have "low" collaboration intensity. > Biomedical researchers tend to work in large teams, so biomedical > specialties have "high" collaboration intensity. > > One possible indicator would be the mean authors per paper in a > specialty's literature. This is actually not a very sensitive indicator I > think. Another indicator could be the percentage of single authored > papers, which I think is more sensitive, e.g., > > Specialty percent 1 collaboration > auth papers intensity > ====================================== > Distance 47% low > eductation > > Complex 23% medium > networks > > angio- 7% high > genesis > > Does anyone have any ideas or references on > collaboration intensity indicators? > > Thanks, > > Steven Morris > Oklahoma State University > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Bonding.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 256519 bytes Desc: not available URL: From prabirgd11 at REDIFFMAIL.COM Fri May 13 03:20:26 2005 From: prabirgd11 at REDIFFMAIL.COM (Prabir G. Dastidar) Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 07:20:26 -0000 Subject: Indicators of collaboration intensity? Message-ID: An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Collaboration1.doc Type: application/msword Size: 27136 bytes Desc: not available URL: From kretschmer.h at T-ONLINE.DE Sun May 15 12:40:26 2005 From: kretschmer.h at T-ONLINE.DE (kretschmer.h@t-online.de) Date: Sun, 15 May 2005 18:40:26 +0200 Subject: Indicators of collaboration intensity? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear Steven, You can find a list of publications about the topic "Collaboration in Science and in Technology" in the website: www.collnet.de (Publications, CollBib). Best regards, Hildrun -----Original Message----- Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 16:56:07 +0200 Subject: [SIGMETRICS] Indicators of collaboration intensity? From: "Steven A. Morris" To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Hi folks, Does anyone out there know of an indicator of the "intensity" of collaboration that characterizes a research specialty? For example, mathematicians tend to be loners that don't often work with others, therefore mathematical specialties have "low" collaboration intensity. Biomedical researchers tend to work in large teams, so biomedical specialties have "high" collaboration intensity. One possible indicator would be the mean authors per paper in a specialty's literature. This is actually not a very sensitive indicator I think. Another indicator could be the percentage of single authored papers, which I think is more sensitive, e.g., Specialty percent 1 collaboration auth papers intensity ====================================== Distance 47% low eductation Complex 23% medium networks angio- 7% high genesis Does anyone have any ideas or references on collaboration intensity indicators? Thanks, Steven Morris Oklahoma State University From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Thu May 19 13:19:51 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 13:19:51 -0400 Subject: Baudoin L, Haeffner-Cavaillon N, Pinhas N, Mouchet S, Kordon C " Message-ID: The Authors have very kindly provided an extended summary in English which follows the Abstract below: E-mail Addresses: kordon at necker.fr Title: Bibliometric indicators: realities, myth and prospective Author(s): Baudoin L, Haeffner-Cavaillon N, Pinhas N, Mouchet S, Kordon C Source: M S-MEDECINE SCIENCES 20 (10): 909-915 OCT 2004 Document Type: Review Language: French Cited References: 13 Abstract: The impact factor of scientific reviews, calculated by the Institute for Scientific Information (61), is increasingly used to evaluate the performance of scientists and programmes. Bibliometric indicators, originally designed for other purposes than individual evaluation, are very useful tools provided their interpretation is not extrapolated beyond their limits of validity. Here we present a critical analysis of appropriate uses and misuses of bibliometric data based on case studies. We also outline anticipated consequences of new information technologies, such as electronic journals or open access schemes, on the mode of science production, evaluation and dissemination in biomedical sciences. EXTENDED SUMMARY IN ENGLISH PROVIDED BY THE AUTHORS : ENGLISH SUMMARY: Bibliometric Indicators in Biomedical Research Realities, Myths and Prospective Abstract The impact factor of scientific publications, calculated by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI), is increasingly used to evaluate the performance of scientists and research programs. Bibliometric indicators, originally designed for other purposes than individual evaluation, are useful tools provided their interpretation is not extrapolated beyond their limits of validity. Here we present a critical analysis of appropriate uses and misuses of bibliometric data based on case studies. We also outline anticipated consequences of new information technologies, such as electronic journals or open access schemes, on the mode of science production, evaluation and dissemination in biomedical sciences. The inflation in the number of the scientific papers, together with growing needs for scientific expertise prompted universities and research institutions to search for readily available criteria for evaluating the performance of scientists and their projects. In this view, ?commercialized? bibliometric indicators appeared as useful tools, with their apparent objectivity reflecting the users? interest in the published results through citations. However, the ?secular use? of these indicators makes more and more clear that they can be diverted from the initial objective of their inventor, Eugene Garfield. The shortcomings of the main journal indicators (impact factor, immediacy index, cited and citing half-life) calculated by ISI have been largely discussed. Bibliometric indicators give a neutral estimation of the exploitation of scientific results, but scarcely take into account the diversity of publication strategies and the requirements of different disciplines. For example, impact factors of generalist and specialist journals differ considerably. This is also the case of journals that publish above all clinical or review articles. In biomedical research the journals can be classified into three broad categories : - ?top multidisciplinary? journals of very high-impact (Nature, Science, PNAS...) that publish original analyses or obvious discoveries (but sometimes results that are questionable or based on superficial and quickly forgotten analyses). - ?field generalists? that are devoted to a single discipline (The Journal of Immunology, The Journal of Biological Chemistry, Endocrinology, Brain...) or are even more specialized (Cerebral Cortex, The Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, Neuroimage...). - finally, ?low-impact or no-impact journals? whose readership is ?thin on the ground? (Neurotoxicology, Human Movement Science ) and that sometimes emerge from rival schools of thought. They also include non-English-language journals. Each category therefore occupies a special niche. Clearly science can?t advance by relying solely on ?hot? articles. Innovations often result from findings whose importance was not at first apparent. The discovery of Helicobacter pylori pathogenesis by B. Marshall illustrates this point. A first paper, although published in Lancet, did not attract much interest. Attention to this work was received after the authors swallowed a culture of Helicobacter to prove that the bacterium was the cause of gastric ulceration and the results were published in the low-impact Medical Journal of Australia (IF < 2). This article received 780 citations and the discovery made a revolution in gastroenterology ! What is the reliability of the indicators? Several technical shortcomings of the impact factor have been reported previously (inconsistency between citing and cited items, too short window, etc.). According to its mode of calculation, the impact factor is not representative of individual papers? citation rate. On the other hand, the impact factor of the small size journals is rather sensitive to the appearance of highly cited papers (illustrated with Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology that doubled its impact factor in 2001 due to two highly cited articles in 1999). Moreover numerous are the cases of manipulating the journal impact factor for the purpose of better funding or journals marketing policy. Many examples demonstrate that one should listen to the advice of the impact factor?s designer to not to attribute excessive significance to his indicator. The misuse of impact factors for the evaluation of individual researchers presents a real danger for the development of science. In contrast, the use of bibliometric indicators to access the performance of a large institute, an university or even a country seems methodologically better justified. In the original article (http://www.edk.fr/reserve/revues/ms_papier/e-docs/00/00/05/EA/document_article.md), several figures illustrate these contentions The new landscape of the electronic publishing: The interpretation of bibliometric indicators may soon be left in the wake of upheavals in scientific publishing. Internet access facilitates literature searches by scientists and instilles new practices of sharing knowledge. Moreover, the advent of open access schemes challenges the traditional business model of scientific publishing, where publishers are often paid twice for article distribution, first by the producers of knowledge in the form of page charges and then again by the journal?s subscribers. In this new publishing model, the authors bear the publishing costs and readers have free access. New initiatives have emerged in the biomedical field, foremost among them BioMed Central and the Public Library of Science (PLOS). In 1991, the physicists were the first to launch a free server of preprints. The formula of preprints is less easy to implement in biology because of a greater risk of a scoop. Thus the biologists are turning to new electronic journals whose quality is guaranteed by peer review. These journals will be indexed and, therefore, cited like traditional journals (this is already widespread). They also cut costs and save time. The National Institutes of Health in the United States and Signal Hill in Europe are working along the same lines by setting up quality electronic journals. Reasonable production costs and open access to electronic journals, as published by BioMed Central, will perhaps enhance the diversity of publishers/chances for survival of little publishers, and above all will improve information access in the developing countries. There are still many questions to answer. Will the electronic papers be more cited than traditional ones? The existing examples seem to be contradictory. What impact will these changes have on reading habits and citation practice, given that what is read will increasingly be limited to what is easily available online? Growth in knowledge dissemination initiates the emergence of new indicators (such as access counts) that should put the reference indicator, the impact factor, into perspective. Conclusions and prospective: Because of the historical precedence of the ISI database and the absence of other quantitative criteria, the impact factor has gradually gained predominance as a key indicator of scientific evaluation. But electronic publishing opens up new vistas in evaluation and should lead to refinement of information indicators and hence a more apposite role for the impact factor. Ongoing changes are also likely to affect the relations between science and society. For example, the logistic analysis developed by archaeologists can unearth relatively reliable data embedded in more speculative findings. By reducing their number, logistic analysis should increase the transparency of information sources. New indicators could also incorporate societal parameters into a more global approach, as all forms of sharing activities, knowledge dissemination, and training. But these developments will only be effective if public research institutions and national agencies play their part to the full, notably by rapidly adapting their assessment procedures to the new order. Addresses: Kordon C (reprint author), INSERM, Grp Bibliometrie, 101 Rue Tolbiac, Paris, F-75654 13 France INSERM, Grp Bibliometrie, Paris, F-75654 13 France Inst Necker, Paris, F-75015 France E-mail Addresses: kordon at necker.fr Publisher: MASSON EDITEUR, 21 STREET CAMILLE DESMOULINS, ISSY, 92789 MOULINEAUX CEDEX 9, FRANCE IDS Number: 862ZW ISSN: 0767-0974 CITED REFERENCES: AMIN M, 2000, PERSPECTIVES PUBLISH, V1, P1. ANDERSON K, PUBLISHING ONLINE ON. BURKE J, 1995, CONNECTIONS. GARDIN JC, 2002, EXPLANATORY POWER MO, P267. GARFIELD E, 1989, CURR CONTENTS, V14, P3. GARFIELD E, 1996, BRIT MED J, V313, P411. GARFIELD E, 1998, UNFALLCHIRURG, V101, P413. JACSO P, 2001, CORTEX, V37, P590. LAWRENCE PA, 2003, NATURE, V422, P259. LAWRENCE S, 2001, NATURE, V411, P521. LEWISON G, 2002, SCIENTOMETRICS, V53, P229. MARSHALL BJ, 1984, LANCET, V1, P1311. MARSHALL BJ, 1985, MED J AUSTRALIA, V142, P436. From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Thu May 19 14:12:02 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 14:12:02 -0400 Subject: Falagas, ME; Karavasiou, AI; Bliziotis, IA "Estimates of global research productivity in virology" JOURNAL OF MEDICAL VIROLOGY 76 (2). JUN 2005. p.229-233 Message-ID: E-mail Addresses: matthew.falagas at tufts.edu TITLE: Estimates of global research productivity in virology (Article, English) AUTHOR: Falagas, ME; Karavasiou, AI; Bliziotis, IA SOURCE: JOURNAL OF MEDICAL VIROLOGY 76 (2). JUN 2005. p.229-233 WILEY-LISS, HOBOKEN ABSTRACT: The quantity and quality of published research in the field of Virology by different world regions was estimated in this study. Using the PubMed database, articles from journals included in the "Virology" category of the "Journal Citation Reports" database of the Institute for Scientific Information for the period 1995-2003 were retrieved. The world was divided into nine regions based on geographic, economic, and scientific criteria. Data on the country of origin of the research was available for 33,425 out of 33,712 articles (99.2% of all articles from the included journals). USA exceeds all other world regions in research production for the period studied (42% of total articles), with Western Europe ranking second (35.7%). The mean impact factor in articles published in Virology journals was highest for the USA (4.60), while it was 3.90 for Western Europe and 3.22 for the rest of the world (seven regions combined). USA and Canada ranked first in research productivity when both gross national income per capita (GNIPC) and population were taken into account. The results of this analysis show a distressing fact; the absolute and relative production of research in the field of Virology by the developing regions is very low, although viral diseases cause considerable morbidity and mortality in these areas. It is evident from this study that developing regions need more help from the developed regions to enhance research infrastructure. (c) 2005 Wiley- Liss, Inc. AUTHOR ADDRESS: ME Falagas, 9 Neapoleos St, Maroussi 15123, Greece Alfa Inst Biomed Sci, Athens, Greece Henry Dunant Hosp, Dept Med, Athens, Greece Tufts Univ, Sch Med, Dept Med, Boston, MA 02111 USA Publisher: WILEY-LISS, DIV JOHN WILEY & SONS INC, 111 RIVER ST, HOBOKEN, NJ 07030 USA Subject Category: VIROLOGY IDS Number: 921RY ISSN: 0146-6615 Cited References: 2004, INDEX MEDICUS DATABA. 2004, SCI SCI CITATION IND. 2004, UN STAT YB. *WORLD BANK, 2004, WORLD DEV IND. BARNABY DP, 1998, ANN EMERG MED, V31, P78. GARFIELD E, 1955, SCIENCE, V122, P108. KEISER J, 2004, BRIT MED J, V328, P1229. LUUKKONEN T, 1990, ANN MED, V22, P145. RAMOS JM, 2004, EUR J CLIN MICROBIOL, V23, P180. SEGLEN PO, 1997, BRIT MED J, V314, P498. VERGIDIS PI, 2005, IN PRESS EUR J CLIN. WHITEHOUSE GH, 2002, EUR RADIOL, V12, P715. WINKMANN G, 2000, DEUT MED WOCHENSCHR, V125, P1133. From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Thu May 19 14:37:02 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 14:37:02 -0400 Subject: Jim=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=E9nez-Contreras_E.,_Delgado_L=F3pez-C=F3zar_E._Ruiz_P=E9rez_R._"Impact_Index_of_Spanish_Social_Science_journals_(In-RECS:_=EDndice_de_impacto_de_revistas_espa=F1olas?= de Ciencias Sociales) Message-ID: E-Mail : evaristo at ugr.es AUTHORS: Dr. E. Jim?nez-Contreras Dr. E. Delgado L?pez-C?zar Dr. R. Ruiz P?rez and research team Posted at: http://ec3.ugr.es/in-recs/Sociologia.htm The authors have kindly provided an English translation of their study. _____________________________________________________________________ Impact Index of Spanish Social Science journals (In-RECS: ?ndice de impacto de revistas espa?olas de Ciencias Sociales) Although the databases of the ISI have universal application, because of its international and multidisciplinary character, it presents certain thematic, geographic, and linguistic biases that should be taken into account when used for evaluative purposes. These have been described in different publications: in favour of the English language, in favour of publications in countries with predominantly Anglo-Saxon populations, in favour of certain disciplines, especially experimental at the expense of social sciences. Spain undergoes these biases; thus, of a potential population of some 600 of Spanish scientific journals in the social sciences, the ISI database includes only two journals (Psicothema and European Journal of Psychiatry). IN-RECS (Impact index of Spanish social-science journals) emerges with the immediate objective of rectifying this bias. IN-RECS is a bibliometric index that offers statistical information from a count of the bibliographical citations, seeking to determine scientific relevance, influence, and impact of Spanish social-science journals, of the authors publishing in these journals, and of the institutions with which the authors are affiliated. Also, this provides an individualized way of knowing the bibliographical citations that published works receive in Spanish scientific journals, and thus it becomes possible to determine the real impact that such works have in the scientific community to which they are directed. Almost all Spanish researchers in the social sciences regularly publish in Spanish journals, while only a few publish in foreign journals, with the exception of Psychology, where foreign publication is far more frequent. The databases of the ISI represent only 10% of the Spanish scientific production in the social sciences. In consonance with these practices, Spanish researchers in the social sciences cite more national publications and positively value publication in Spanish journals. In addition, we know that 70% of the citations received by works published by Spanish researchers in foreign journals are made by Spanish researchers. Among these, some 40% are citations made by the 44 Spanish journals indexed in the ISI. At the same time, between 70 and 90% of the citations that Spanish journals receive in the ISI databases are made by Spanish journals. An example of this would be the case of a journal such as Papeles de Econom?a Espa?ola. While this journal has received 1052 citations in 19 Spanish journals in 9 years (1994-2003), it has received only 239 citations from the 8900 ISI journals between 1945 and 2003. The conclusion could not be clearer: the best way to ascertain the real audience of Spanish research as a whole is to construct databases with the bibliographic references made by the articles published in the Spanish journals to complement international and existing databases. In general lines, the works originating in the sphere of social sciences attract the attention fundamentally within the ambits where the discoveries are made. They are used by national scientific communities, as this research is highly influenced by cultural peculiarities, where context is foremost, local problems are predominant, and an applied orientation is adopted. Finally, we believe that an initiative of this nature will have other positive consequences. With the quantification of the influence of journals and works, the periodical publications that gain better ranking will prove more attractive for the researchers and will eventually improve the quality of the works published there. The indicators will be more precise and the national scientific production will receive the recognition it deserves and will be able to be evaluated on a plane of equality with international works. Paradoxically, today we know that work by researchers in Spain has international impact, but we do not know what part of it has national impact; that is, we do not know which works are really used in the sphere of social sciences in Spain. This index resolves this problem. Furthermore, this index is potentially useful for researchers (both by authors as well as by readers), editors, librarians, documentalists, managers, administrators, and those responsible for agencies of scientific evaluation. In addition, we believe that the scientific policy of Spain will benefit from having more information to identify the equipment, research lines, etc. which are currently poorly known because they remain within the national orbit. Methodology In the construction of the index, the following steps were followed. 1. Identification of the population of Spanish scientific journals in the social sciences For this task, the main national and international directories specialized in the monitoring of periodical publications have been used: the journal directory LATINDEX, Spanish Directory of Journals of the Social Sciences and Humanities (Directorio Espa?ol de Revistas de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades), Ulrichs Periodicals International Directory, and the collective catalogue of the network of university libraries. 2. Distribution of journals by discipline and specialty In thematic terms, a prerequisite for a non-biased construction of the impact index is for the main specialities and sub-specialities be represented in the database. Consequently, at least one specialized journal from each area appears in the index as a source journal. For this task, two procedures were used: ? The thematic classifications that the databases used for categorizing the indexed journals: C.D.U., Classification of Unesco, Dewey, and Ulrich's thematic classification. ? The method of co-word analysis for constructing thematic clusters of journals. For this, the records of the source journals processed by the ISOC database 1993-2002 were analysed. 3. Selection of source journals It has been widely known ever since the description by S. C. Bradford that a relatively small number of journals publish the substantial core of the significant scientific results, in any field of knowledge considered. Bibliometric studies based on the count of citations in the ISI databases have demonstrated that only 150 journals concentrate half of what is cited and a fourth of what is published on a given theme. Consequently, our aim has been to identify the core of the most influential Spanish scientific journals in the social sciences. For this, four criteria were used: ? Survival or age. ? Editorial quality in two senses: quality in the editorial process (use of a rigorous selection and evaluation system) and reputation and prestige of the editor and editorial committees. ? Scientific impact of Spanish journals in the social sciences both at the national as well as the international level. ? Polled opinion of Spanish researchers on the perceived quality of journals in their speciality. The first two criteria act as prerequisites for entering the database?that is, those journals that do not satisfy the requirements are automatically eliminated. The second two criteria are definitive for the selection. 4 Sphere of development For reasons of security, robustness, efficiency, scalability, and interconnection, the management system chosen for the database (SGBD) was version 7.1 of the PostgreSQL system. The SGBD was run under the platform SuSe Linux 9.1. 6. Generation of indicators 1. Journals: from each journal title the index offers the following information: ? Annual scientific impact, following the standard methodology. ? Number and percentage of self-references and self-citations per year. ? Evolution of impact and position of the journals by quartiles and in graphs. ? Ageing curves. ? List of journals citing and cited, arranged in descending order. ? Citation rate per article published for the entire period. ? Number of ?hot papers? per journal. 2. Works: a ranking is offered by speciality of the most cited works in the database, with an indication of the citing and cited works. 3. Authors: a list is offered by speciality of the most cited authors in the database, with an indication of the citing and cited works (in progress). 4. Institutions: A list will be offered by specialities of the most cited institutions in the database, with an indication of the citing and cited works (in progress). General data of the index Categories Source journals Journals with the impact index calculated Source articles Processed citations Self-references 1994-03 Self-citations 1994-03 Economics 19 95 9192 22865 0.31671598 0.18476331 Geography 9 44 2936 6916 0.44171123 0.28128342 Sociology 8 58 3050 3709 0.47014218 0.25023697 Psychology 20 97 5388 11104 0.45953631 0.34864392 Totals 56 294 20566 44594 We estimate that when the database covers all the disciplines projected, it will have some 70,000-75,000 citations to Spanish journals made by some 30,000 articles published in 100 journals that serve as the source for the generation of the impact indicators. Annually, the volume of information increases by some 12,000 bibliographical citations. The project is financed by the Plan Nacional I+D+I (SEJ 2004/08027SOCI) and by the Direcci?n General de Universidades (Proyectos EA2003-086, EA2004-0119), and offers free and open access. From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Thu May 19 14:50:30 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 14:50:30 -0400 Subject: Kushkowski JD. "Web citation by graduate students: A comparison of print and electronic theses" PORTAL-LIBRARIES AND THE ACADEMY 5 (2). APR 2005. p.259-276 Message-ID: E-mail Addresses: kushkows at gwgate.lib.iastate.edu TITLE: Web citation by graduate students: A comparison of print and electronic theses (Article, English) AUTHOR: Kushkowski, JD SOURCE: PORTAL-LIBRARIES AND THE ACADEMY 5 (2). APR 2005. p.259-276 JOHNS HOPKINS UNIV PRESS, BALTIMORE Document Type: Article Language: English Cited References: 57 Abstract: This article reports on the Web citation behavior of print and electronic thesis authors at Iowa State and Virginia Tech from 1997 to 2003. Citations from print theses were compared with those submitted as an electronic thesis or dissertation (ETD). This study suggests that students who are required to publish their theses digitally exhibit citation behavior that is no different from students who produce their theses in print. Web citations accounted for 2.2 percent of citations in print theses and 5.4 percent of citations in ETDs. Persistence of Web citations was uniformly poor. The implications for library services and future research directions are discussed. Addresses: Kushkowski JD (reprint author), Iowa State Univ, Ames, IA USA Iowa State Univ, Ames, IA USA Publisher: JOHNS HOPKINS UNIV PRESS, JOURNALS PUBLISHING DIVISION, 2715 NORTH CHARLES ST, BALTIMORE, MD 21218-4363 USA IDS Number: 920PR ISSN: 1531-2542 CITED REFERENCES : BIBLIOTHEK U KONSTAN. BIOMED CENTRAL. CORNELLS DISTRIBUTED. J EC LITERATURE CLAS. NATURE WEB FOCUS. 2000, INFORMATION LITERACY. 2004, J AM SOC INFORMA JUL. 2004, J AM SOC INFORMA JUN. *NETW DIG LIB THES, NDLTD MEMB LIST. *VI TECH, DIG LIB ARCH. *VI TECH, GRAD SCH GUID. ALMIND TC, 1997, J DOC, V53, P404. ALMIND TC, 2004, J AM SOC INFORMATION, V55. BAILEY CW, SCHOLARLY ELECT PUBL. BAILEY CW, 1996, SCHOLARLY ELECT PUBL. BARILAN J, 2004, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V55, P980. CARNEGLUTTI T, 1999, LASIE, V30, P88. CASSERLY MF, 2003, COLL RES LIBR, V64, P300. CASSERLY MF, 2003, PORTAL-LIBR ACAD, V3, P615. CHATMAN EA, 1996, J AM SOC INFORM SCI, V47, P193. CHOINSKI E, 2003, PORTAL-LIBR ACAD, V3, P563. COVI LM, 2000, J AM SOC INFORM SCI, V51, P1284. DAVIS PM, 2001, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V52, P309. DAVIS PM, 2002, COLL RES LIBR, V63, P53. DAVIS PM, 2003, PORTAL-LIBR ACAD, V3, P41. DAVIS PM, 2004, PORTAL-LIBR ACAD, V4, P379. DERVIN B, 1998, J KNOWLEDGE MANAGEME, V2, P36. DERVIN B, 2003, SENSE MAKING METHODO. DEVIN B, 1992, QUALITATIVE RES INFO, P61. FINEMAN Y, 2003, PORTAL-LIBR ACAD, V3, P219. FOX EA, 2000, SUCCESSES FAILURES D, P12. GOLDSMITH UIA, 2002, THESIS LUISIANA STAT. GREEN BL, 1997, THESIS U N CAROLINA. HARTER SP, 1998, J AM SOC INFORM SCI, V49, P507. HERRING SD, 2002, COLL RES LIBR, V63, P334. HUOTARI ML, 2001, LIBR INFORM SCI RES, V23, P351. JENKINS PO, 2002, COLL RES LIB NEWS, V63, P164. KENNEDY S, RESOURCE SHELF. KOEHLER W, 2002, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V53, P162. KUSHKOWSKI JD, 2003, PORTAL-LIBR ACAD, V3, P459. LAWRENCE S, 2001, COMPUTER, V34, P26. LAWRENCE S, 2003, COMMUN ACM, V46, P71. MACCOLL J, 2002, ARIADNE, V32. MALONE D, 1997, RES STRATEGIES, V15, P151. MARCONDES CH, 2003, INT INF LIBR REV, V35, P265. MCMILLAN G, 2003, AM LIB ASS MIDW C PH. MCMILLAN G, 2003, E COMMUNICATION 0326. OKRENT N, 2001, THESIS U N CAROLINA. REICH V, 2001, D LIB MAGAZINE, V7. SULEMAN H, 2001, D LIB MAGAZINE SEP, V7. TEPER TH, 2002, COLL RES LIBR, V63, P61. THOMPSON LA, 2001, SCI TECH LIBR, V20, P87. UBOGU FN, 2000, INT INFORMATION LIB, V33, P249. ZHANG Y, 1998, J INFORM SCI, V24, P241. ZHANG Y, 2001, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V52, P628. ZHANG Y, 2001, NAT ONL M 2001 P 22, P555. ZHANG Y, 2001, ONLINE INFORM REV, V25, P370. From Steven.A.Morris at OKSTATE.EDU Fri May 20 09:36:39 2005 From: Steven.A.Morris at OKSTATE.EDU (Steven. A. Morris) Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 08:36:39 -0500 Subject: Models for author per paper distribution Message-ID: I am looking for models for the author per paper distribution of literatures. I would be especially interested to participate in a discussion about this with anyone who has looked into the topic.. I have done quite a bit of searching in Scientometrics and related journals, but the authors per paper distribution is usually discussed as a side topic in papers about collaboration It is kind of hard to find such asides, since the literature on collaboration is so huge. My idea is that "little science" specialties, , i.e., specialties that don't exhibit "hyperauthorship", exhibit an authors per paper distribution that approximates a 1-shifted Poisson distribution. This is the same as saying that the distribution of the number of secondary authors on papers is Poisson distributed. I am interested in finding evidence in the literature that either supports or refutes the "1-shifted Poisson" claim. I am aware that there are some specialties, like high energy physics, that have authors per paper distributions with power-law tails. Those are outside of the scope of what I'm looking at. I've found only two papers [1,2] that discuss the author per paper distribution in detail: Beaver asserts that the secondary authors per paper distribution is Poisson, and while not presenting any data as evidence, states that the Poisson fits especially well to specialties up until the beginning of 1900, but that as collaboration increased through the 20th century, the tail of the distribution tended to deviate, while the body of the distribution remained firmly Poisson. Beaver's justification of the Poisson distribution is made from random networks theory- in a network of papers connected by randomly occuring common author links the distribution of degree of links would be a Poisson distribution. In a later paper, (more like notes from a presentation), Beaver reassserts that the distribution is Poisson and states that some fields are moving toward a power law distribution for authors per paper. Ajiferuke et al, in a very nice 1988 paper which was mentioned on this list last week, presents a table of authors per paper from Library Science Abstracts and discusses several possible distributions, 1-shifted Poisson, 1-shifted binomial, and more. Ajiferuke's data, when plotted, approximates the 1-shifted Poisson distribution pretty well, though this is not discussed in the paper. Ajiferuke's interpretation of the mechanism generating the number of secondary authors is also believable: the number of secondary authors is number of researchers that the lead author consults with before the completion of paper. The usual arguments justifying a Poisson queuing process can be believably applied to such an interpretation. Among other papers on collaboration, Seglen and Aksnes show a plot of authors per paper in the field of microbiology and assert that the distribution well matches a 1-shifted Poisson distribution. I digitized the data from the figure in the paper and replotted it here . It seems to me that their data does indeed well-approximate a 1-shifted Poisson distribution. In another paper, Glanzel presents data from three fields, mathematics, chemistry, and biomedical research. Dr. Glanzel was kind enough to send me the original data from this study which is plotted here . It seems to me that this data also, shows that the author per paper distribution well approximates a 1-shifted Poisson distribution, though there appears to be a definite trend in biomedical sciences toward a distribution with a fatter tail. My own observations, based on data from 27 case studies covers a wide variety of fields is shown here . In many cases the data fits the 1-shifted Poisson distrbution very well, in other cases, particularly biomedical specialties, the fit is not that good. If anyone out there has any comments or ideas about the topic, I'd be very happy to hear from them. Thanks, Steve M. Oklahoma State U. [1] D. deB. Beaver, "Teamwork: A Step beyond Collaboration", George Sarton Centennial, Communication and Cognition, Ghent, Belgium, (1984) 449-452 [2]Ajiferuke, I. , Burrell, Q. & Tague, J. (1998). Collaborative >coefficient : A single measure of the degree of collaboration in >research. Scientometrics, 14(5-6), 421-433. -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Steven A. Morris, Ph.D steven.a.morris at okstate.edu Electrical and Computer Engineering office: 405-744-1662 202 Engineering So. mobile: 405-269-6576 Oklahoma State University Stillwater, Oklahoma, 74078, U.S.A -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From iajiferu at UWO.CA Fri May 20 10:11:54 2005 From: iajiferu at UWO.CA (Isola) Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 10:11:54 -0400 Subject: Models for author per paper distribution In-Reply-To: <428DE7E7.1060404@okstate.edu> Message-ID: Steve : My paper that followed our 1988 paper actually focussed exclusively on the models for the number of authors per paper, and considered data sets from various fields. Please see : Ajiferuke, I. (1991). A probabilistic model for the distribution of authorships. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42(4), 279-289. Cheers, Isola -- -- I.S.Y. Ajiferuke Faculty of Information and Media Studies North Campus Building, Rm. 257 University of Western Ontario London, Ontario Canada N6A 5B7 E-mail : iajiferu at uwo.ca ; iajife at hotmail.com Tel. : 1-519-661-2111 ext 81364(W) ; 1-519-438-9309 (H) Fax : 1-519-661-3506 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Steven.A.Morris at OKSTATE.EDU Fri May 20 16:04:46 2005 From: Steven.A.Morris at OKSTATE.EDU (Steven A. Morris) Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 15:04:46 -0500 Subject: Models for author per paper distribution In-Reply-To: <428DF02A.2080900@uwo.ca> Message-ID: Thank your very much. I noticed in your Scientometrics paper that it mentioned that you would be investigating the author per paper distribution. I guess the JASIST paper must be reporting the results of that research. I have located the JASIST paper and looked it over, but of course, since it takes some time and thinking to really read a paper, I won't be able to really look at it until later. I noticed that you had fitted a lot of different distributions to your results. I didn't try this, because I thought my data was so full of noise and 2nd order effects that it would not be possible to really discriminate between individual distributions, just families of distributions. In my mind I've been thinking that the author per paper distribution is either "Poisson-ish" or "Power-law-ish" and that it wasn't possible to model or measure any subtleties. I like you're author behevior model in Appendix B, and the models for 1-shifted Poisson and 1-shifted binomial in the Scientometrics paper. That's the kind of stuff I'm really after, proposed models of author behavior that generate the author per paper distribution. I'm attaching a draft paper on the topic that may interest you. It may appear in JASIST if it survives the review process. The author per paper model I'm thinking about is in Section 2.6 (page 13, lines 19-32). Of course, I'd be very happy to hear any comments you have about that model or about the paper in general. Thanks again, Steven Morris Isola wrote: > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html Steve : > > My paper that followed our 1988 paper actually focussed exclusively > on the models for the number of authors per paper, and considered data > sets from various fields. Please see : > > Ajiferuke, I. (1991). A probabilistic model for the distribution of > authorships. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, > 42(4), 279-289. > > > Cheers, > > Isola > >-- >-- > >I.S.Y. Ajiferuke >Faculty of Information and Media Studies >North Campus Building, Rm. 257 >University of Western Ontario >London, Ontario >Canada N6A 5B7 > >E-mail : iajiferu at uwo.ca ; iajife at hotmail.com >Tel. : 1-519-661-2111 ext 81364(W) ; 1-519-438-9309 (H) >Fax : 1-519-661-3506 > > > -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Steven A. Morris, Ph.D samorri at okstate.edu Electrical and Computer Engineering Office: 405-744-1662 202 Engineering So. Cell: 405-269-6576 Oklahoma State University Stillwater, Oklahoma 74078 http://samorris.ceat.okstate.edu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: author_rev4.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 727937 bytes Desc: not available URL: From David.Watkins at SOLENT.AC.UK Mon May 23 07:26:53 2005 From: David.Watkins at SOLENT.AC.UK (David Watkins) Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 12:26:53 +0100 Subject: SIGMETRICS Digest - 19 May 2005 to 20 May 2005 - Special issue (#2005-77) Message-ID: Authors per Paper I'm all for modelling this, but we need also to understand the social processess going on which cause differences. Some of these are interesting and complex, but cross sectional analysis can mask them First, there are national differences in the way in which authors are allocated credit in publications. Since the implementation of the RAE in the UK there is quite a lot of anecdotal evidence that otherwise 'unproductive' staff are added to papers so they get beyond the personal productivity threshold for inclusion in institutional returns. This is done to maximise departmental / institutional income. Second, some of the differences between fields are artefacts of disciplinary maturity. In 'small science' (and academic non-science) it may be that individual interests drive early work, with collaboration following later at a rate determined by the expanding interest - if any - the new field generates. Some time ago (1994/5) I looked at the origins of small business / entrepreneurship research in the UK [Small Business and Enterprise Development 1 (3) 28-31 and 2 (1) 59-66] at a time before the field could sustain specialised journals, so that research was reported in edited books based on a selection of best papers from annual conferences. Historically this is an important developmental route for new areas in social science and humanities. The trend from single to multiple authorship was clear. Over a ten year period the mean rose from 1.63 to 2.16; the mode went from 1 to 2. At least initially much of this collaboration was inter-institutional since there was not yet a critical mass in any one university and lone (lonely?) researchers felt the need to reach out for reassurance that they were not commiting career suicide to kindred spirits elsewhere. My guess would be that the mode is still 2 - certainly not more than 3 - but that the mean has risen and that collaborations are now much more focused within rather than between institutions. I'd be interested in similar studies, particularly in the social sciences. ************************************************ Professor David Watkins Postgraduate Research Centre Southampton Business School East Park Terrace Southampton SO14 0RH David.Watkins at solent.ac.uk 023 80 319610 (Tel) +44 23 80 31 96 10 (Tel) 02380 33 26 27 (fax) +44 23 80 33 26 27 (fax) From fabio.casati at HP.COM Mon May 23 08:37:24 2005 From: fabio.casati at HP.COM (Casati, Fabio) Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 05:37:24 -0700 Subject: ICSOC call for paper Message-ID: Dear Colleague, we encourage you to send your contributions to and participate in ICSOC'05. As you will notice from the CFP and the Web site, this year ICSOC includes several innovations in the ongoing effort to further improve the quality and attractiveness of what was already a very stimulating conference. The main goal of ICSOC'05 is to foster integration among scientific communities working in the service-oriented computing area. Sumbission information and other details are available at: www.icsoc.org Cheers, Fabio Fabio Casati Hewlett-Packard 1501 Page Mill Rd, MS 1142 Palo Alto, CA, 94304 USA Tel: +1 650 236 8437 email: fabio.casati at hp.com From notsjb at LSU.EDU Mon May 23 11:22:10 2005 From: notsjb at LSU.EDU (Stephen J Bensman) Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 10:22:10 -0500 Subject: Open Acces News Item Message-ID: (E (Embedded image moved to file: pic21425.gif) (Embedded image moved ( mb The Wall Street Journal to file: E ed pic10555.gif) m de (Embedded image moved b d to file: e im pic03434.gif) d ag d e e mo d ve i d m to a fi g le e : m pi o c1 v 65 e 49 d .g t if o ) f i l e : p i c 0 7 4 4 1 . g i f ) May 23, 2005 (Embedded image moved to file: pic12529.gif) PAGE ONE (Embedded image moved to file: pic05786.gif) (Embedded image moved to file: pic12263.gif) (Embedded image moved to file: pic04313.gif) (Embedded image moved to file: pic24355.gif) DOW JONES REPRINTS (Embedded image moved to file: pic31185.gif) (Embedded image moved to file: pic20053.gif) (Embedded image moved to file: pic00912.gif)This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. To order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers, use the Order Reprints tool at the bottom of any article or visit: www.djreprints.com. ??See a sample reprint in PDF format. ??Order a reprint of this article now. Peer Pressure Scholarly Journals' Premier Status Is Diluted by Web More Research Is Free Online Amid Spurt of Start-Ups; Publishers' Profits at Risk A Revolt on UC's Campuses By BERNARD WYSOCKI JR. Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL May?23,?2005;?Page?A1 BERKELEY, Calif. -- From a stool at Yali's caf?, near the University of California campus, Michael Eisen is loudly trashing the big players in academic publishing. Hefty subscription fees for journals are blocking scientific progress, he says, and academics who think they have full access to timely literature are kidding themselves. "They're just wrong," Dr. Eisen says. He suggests scholarly journals be free and accessible to everyone on the Web. This may sound like the ranting of a campus radical, but Dr. Eisen is a well known computational biologist at a nearby national laboratory and a Berkeley faculty member. He is also a co-founder of a nonprofit startup called the Public Library of Science, which produces its own scholarly journals, in competition with established publishers, distributed free online. It's a campus twist on a raging Internet-era debate about who should control information and what it should cost. For decades, traditional scholarly journals have held an exalted and lucrative position as arbiters of academic excellence, controlling what's published and made available to the wider community. These days, research is increasingly available on free university Web sites and through start-up outfits. Scholarly journals are finding their privileged position under attack. (Embedded image moved to file: pic10808.gif)[Price of Knowledge] The 10-campus University of California system has emerged as a hotbed of insurgency against this $5 billion global market. Faculty members are competing against publishers with free or inexpensive journals of their own. Two UC scientists organized a world-wide boycott against a unit of Reed Elsevier -- the Anglo-Dutch giant that publishes 1,800 periodicals -- protesting its fees. The UC administration itself has jumped into the fray. It's urging scholars to deposit working papers and monographs into a free database in addition to submitting them for publication elsewhere. It has also battled with publishers, including nonprofits, to lower prices. "We have to take back control from the publishers," says Daniel Greenstein, associate vice provost for the UC system, which spends $30 million a year on scholarly periodicals. The clash between academics and publishers was exacerbated last year when the taxpayer-funded National Institutes of Health proposed that articles resulting from NIH grants be made available free online. That prompted protests from Reed Elsevier, John Wiley & Sons Inc. and several nonprofit publishers such as the American Diabetes Association, which argued such a move would hurt their businesses. The NIH retreated and in February made the program voluntary. It now asks authors to post on an NIH Web site any articles based on NIH grants within 12 months of publication. The debate comes at a time when it's easier than ever to find scholarly articles by using simple Internet tools such as Google. In late 2004, Google Inc., in Mountain View, Calif., launched Google Scholar, a free service that can search for peer-reviewed articles as well as theses, abstracts and other scholarly material, much of it in scientific fields. Traditional publishers argue that the expensive process of selecting and editing journals is a necessary filter to help scholars sift through vast amounts of research. The nonprofit publisher of the prestigious Science magazine makes content available free after 12 months. Other publishers note that with a combination of free abstracts, free distribution to the developing world and public-library subscriptions, much of the globe already has access to what they produce. "The vast majority -- 90% of researchers in the world -- have access online to our material," says Karen Hunter, senior vice president at Elsevier, the science and medical division of Reed Elsevier that publishes the company's journals. Elsevier's scholarly journals bring in about $1.6 billion in annual revenue with an operating-profit margin of about 30%. Publishers have been entrenched in academia for decades. One big concern, the U.K.'s Taylor & Francis Group, now part of T&F Informa PLC, was founded in the 18th century. The venerable nonprofit Science was founded in the 1880s by Thomas Edison. The industry became firmly established in the 1950s and 1960s in the wake of the Soviet space program, whose success spurred a wave of scientific publishing. Although learned societies such as the American Physical Society hold sway at the top of the prestige pyramid, commercial publishers have created a second tier, producing thousands of niche periodicals from Addictive Behaviors to Zoology, both Elsevier titles. Scholars are generally grateful that publishers take the risk of starting new titles, which often take years to break even. The publishers' prestige derives from the rigorous system of peer review, in which a journal's editorial board will select experts in a field to vet articles. At some top scholarly journals, less than 10% of submitted articles make it into a publication. In turn, the peer-review system lends authority to a scholar's work, and has long been a springboard to academic advancement. Aaron Edlin, a UC Berkeley professor of law and economics, is a co-founder of Berkeley Electronic Press, publisher of 25 online scholarly journals. His playbook is simple: undercut giant rivals with lower prices -- around $300 -- faster turnaround and Internet-only distribution. Yet when Dr. Edlin helped write a paper on game theory recently, he submitted it to the competition, the Journal of Economic Theory, published by Elsevier. The reason: Professor Edlin's co-author on the paper is striving to win tenure at the California Institute of Technology and needs exposure in big-name journals. "He thought it was important. I respected his decision," says Prof. Edlin. The peer-review system has many defenders. "There's too much stuff out there, and we are all way too busy," says Lee Miller, a retired professor of ecology at Cornell University and editor emeritus of the nonprofit journal Ecology, published by the Ecological Society of America. "Anything that saves you time and leads you to the most important work is helpful." In the 1990s, the commercial industry consolidated. The biggest publishers began buying or building new journals and raising prices. That edifice only began to be challenged with the rise of the Internet, which cut distribution costs and triggered a wave of experimentation in what is called "open access" publishing. In London, a for-profit startup called BioMed Central publishes more than 100 scholarly journals available free to the public via the Internet. BioMed Central charges individual authors a processing charge of about $850 but doesn't charge it for authors affiliated with member institutions. BioMed Central says it has 527 institutional members, including British and American universities, which pay between $1,700 and $8,600 a year to belong. In the U.S. a powerful open-access advocate has been Harold Varmus, a Nobel laureate, former UC scholar and former NIH director. He's now head of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York. He co-founded Public Library of Science with Berkeley's Dr. Eisen, backed by a $9 million grant from a private foundation. Charging authors a fee of $1,500, the group launched its first peer-reviewed journal, PLoS Biology, in 2003, and also distributes its contents free on the Internet. In the late 1990s, Dr. Eisen was studying the yeast genome, a booming field that has a large overlap with the human genome and 200 journals publishing related research. He wanted all these journal articles freely available at his fingertips, an impossible request because many are behind subscription barriers. Some scholars think publishing should operate like the Linux computer operating system, where programmers build on each other's work in an ongoing, collaborative project. In the scholarly realm, a database called arXiv -- pronounced "archive," as if the "x" were the Greek letter "chi" -- has become a repository of scholarship in the physics field. It's owned and operated by Cornell University and partially supported by the National Science Foundation. If the UC administration has its way, something like that would be the norm throughout academia. To experienced publishers, much of the open-access talk seems naive. "A lot of this is self-righteous talk," says Alan Leshner, executive publisher of Science and chief executive of its nonprofit parent, the American Association for the Advancement of Science. He says giving away content isn't a viable business model because of the tremendous costs of putting out reputable journals. He notes that Science gets 12,000 submissions and publishes 800 articles a year on a $10 million editorial budget. That averages more than $10,000 per published article, a high number because of the costs associated with handling the unusually large number of submissions the journal receives. Industry experts say typical per-article costs are between $3,000 and $4,000. If open access takes off, information will flow faster, but publishers will make less money. Among those who would be hurt is Reed Elsevier. Sami Kassab, analyst at investment house Exane BNP Paribas in London, estimates that such a movement could sharply cut the company's profit margin on periodicals to between 10% and 15% of revenue, from the current 30% or more. Currently, the open-access movement makes up between 1% and 2% of the market, experts say. While that number seems small, the concept is assuming an important role channeling academic discontent. "There's a lot of sentiment that work is being taken advantage of by the commercial publishers," says Alessandro Lizzeri, associate professor of economics at New York University and editor of Elsevier's Journal of Economic Theory. He says that while editors get little compensation for their work, authors and reviewers -- aside from prestige -- usually get nothing or just a nominal fee. Prof. Lizzeri says that two of the 40 members of his editorial board resigned recently because the journal isn't free to readers. "If half the board resigns I'm in trouble," he says. These rumblings hit the University of California early on. In October 2003, faculty members made a rare display of solidarity with the university administration. Two scientists at the University of California at San Francisco staged a protest over a $91,000 bill from Elsevier's Cell Press unit for one year's access to six biology journals. The two professors called for a world-wide boycott, urging fellow scholars at UC and beyond to refuse to serve as authors, editors or peer reviewers at the six periodicals in question. Their timing couldn't have been better for the university administration, which was just about to begin negotiations with the Reed Elsevier unit over a new contract. In the late 1990s, all UC campuses had banded together into a single buying consortium. In 2002, the university hired Dr. Greenstein, a history professor turned expert on digital libraries. With the state of California's budget crisis forcing him to trim library spending to $62 million a year, Dr. Greenstein wanted to take a hard line. "It was the opening shot, really, in struggling head-on with this world of scientific publishing," says Keith Yamamoto, executive vice dean at UCSF medical school and one of the boycott's leaders. The university was paying Elsevier $10.3 million a year for print and online subscriptions to most of its 1,800 journals. The university demanded a 25% reduction and at one point threatened to walk away from the table. As the negotiations grew tense, faculty at other UC campuses started to chime in sympathetically. The UC Santa Cruz faculty senate passed a resolution urging faculty to boycott Elsevier journals by refusing to submit articles or to serve on periodical boards. "That alarmed us," says a Reed Elsevier spokeswoman in Amsterdam. More than 100 UC faculty members serve as senior editors of Elsevier journals and about 1,000 serve on editorial boards. The publisher fanned out across the campuses, drumming up support among friendly faculty with breakfasts and other meetings. The spokeswoman says the company concluded that most UC faculty members didn't know about the boycott call or didn't support it. The negotiations dragged on for two months and grew testy. In late 2003, the university won a 25% price reduction to $7.7 million a year for 1,200 Elsevier periodicals. Elsevier agreed to throw the six biology journals into the deal. "They got a very, very good deal," acknowledges Reed Elsevier's Ms. Hunter. She says the company got some concessions, too. UC gave up access to several hundred periodicals, for example. UC says Elsevier unilaterally added the titles into the arrangement before negotiations started and says it doesn't care about their removal. Suddenly, the UC negotiation was the buzz of the academic library world and an inspiration for others to follow suit. One UC librarian, Catherine Candee, says a university negotiator elsewhere "called us up and said, 'Thank you, you saved us $1 million.'?" Write to Bernard Wysocki Jr. at bernie.wysocki at wsj.com1 URL for this article: http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB111680539102640247,00.html Hyperlinks in this Article: (1) mailto:bernie.wysocki at wsj.com (Embedded image moved to file: pic01832.gif) Copyright 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved (Embedded image moved to file: pic20945.gif) This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. Distribution and use of this material are governed by our Subscriber Agreement and by copyright law. For non-personal use or to order multiple copies, please contact Dow Jones Reprints at 1-800-843-0008 or visit www.djreprints.com. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: pic21425.gif Type: image/gif Size: 4923 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: pic10555.gif Type: image/gif Size: 547 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: pic03434.gif Type: image/gif Size: 1624 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: pic16549.gif Type: image/gif Size: 45 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: pic07441.gif Type: image/gif Size: 45 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: pic12529.gif Type: image/gif Size: 45 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: pic05786.gif Type: image/gif Size: 45 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: pic12263.gif Type: image/gif Size: 45 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: pic04313.gif Type: image/gif Size: 45 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: pic24355.gif Type: image/gif Size: 45 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: pic31185.gif Type: image/gif Size: 45 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: pic20053.gif Type: image/gif Size: 45 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: pic00912.gif Type: image/gif Size: 258 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: pic10808.gif Type: image/gif Size: 9518 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: pic01832.gif Type: image/gif Size: 45 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: pic20945.gif Type: image/gif Size: 45 bytes Desc: not available URL: From eugene.garfield at THOMSON.COM Mon May 23 12:54:21 2005 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSON.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 12:54:21 -0400 Subject: FW: [CHMINF-L] STS RESEARCH FORUM at ALA Conference Message-ID: STS RESEARCH FORUM Sunday, June 26th from 4:00-6:00 Palmer House Hilton, Salon IV Two papers were selected by the Research committee based on the criteria of timeliness, evidence of scholarship, research methodology and relevance to the field of science and technology librarianship. The papers selected for presentation are: "Electronic Usage Statistics and Citation Analysis" by John McDonald, Acquisitions Librarian, California Institute of Technology A recent research project analyzed the statistical relationship between three measures of use of STM journals and local citations rates at the California Institute of Technology. The author used Poisson and negative binomial regression analysis to examine the relationship between locally recorded use measures (print usage and web server transaction log analysis) and publisher-provided use statistics to citation rates by institutional authors. Two subsequent analyses examined the citation rate changes before and after two local service enhancements were released: provision of local online journal versions and deployment of an OpenURL link resolver. The study showed each enhancement resulted in a statistically significant increase in citations for the full dataset, with some subject differences present. A full description of the statistical methods used will be presented along with results of the statistical analysis on a full dataset of STM journals. The study was designed to answer a few basic questions about usage statistics: What is the relationship between usage measures and citation measures? Are there journal types, publisher, or subject differences in these relationships? What are local changes that may affect usage and citation of journals? The study's importance lies in its ability to draw together current methodologies (electronic journal usage statistics) and past methodologies (citation analysis). In addition, examining multiple measures of electronic journal usage allows librarians to estimate missing data, predict future data, and validate data not collected locally. This study also showed the significant effect of online journals and OpenURL resolvers on citation rates. ~ and ~ "Proteomics: Measuring the Emergence of a New Scientific Discipline by Bibliographic Means" by Frederick W. Stoss, Science and Engineering Library, Arts and Sciences Libraries, and Rosemarie Maldonado, Department of Library and Information Studies (graduate student),School of Informatics, University at Buffalo, State University of New York Advances in molecular biology and structural genetics have spawned new disciplines in biology and chemistry. Bioinformatics, genomics, and proteomics are the core of this "New Biology." Sequencing of the human and other species' genomes increases the pool of genetic sequences and their associated coding proteins for which new agricultural, clinical, and therapeutic applications are being actively investigated and developed. Proteomics first appears in the literature in 1995 and includes research for detecting, isolating and sequencing all of the proteins in an organism encoded by its genome. It is rapidly emerging as a distinct sub-discipline, which is often used to investigate the biological mechanisms associated with protein function and structure at the molecular level. This paper provides a quantitative means to measure the growth of this sub-discipline through research represented in the scientific, technical, and medical (STM) literature. The output of several bibliographic databases (Chemical Abstracts via SciFinder Scholar, MEDLINE, BIOSIS Previews, and the Science Citation Index via the Web of Science) plotted the growth of the proteomics literature base over a period of more than ten years, and examined its emergence from a larger body of literature for protein chemistry and biology. The results indicate the establishment of a concentration of research in an evolving core of journal literature (Bradford Law of Scattering), the exponential growth of proteomics literature in STM journals, and demonstrate the means to plot the emergence and evolution of a new field of scientific inquiry. Julie Hurd, Science Librarian and Coordinator of Digital Library Planning at the University of Illinois at Chicago and Editor of Science and Technology Libraries, will serve as the Guest Responder, providing expert feedback to the authors on their research and presentations helping the authors to further their research and hopefully develop their presentations for future publication. From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Mon May 23 15:32:29 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 15:32:29 -0400 Subject: Guimera R, Uzzi B, Spiro J, Amaral LAN :"Team assembly mechanisms determine collaboration network structure and team performance" SCIENCE 308 (5722): 697-702 APR 29 2005 Message-ID: LAN Amaral : E-mail Addresses: amaral at northwestern.edu Title: Team assembly mechanisms determine collaboration network structure and team performance Author(s): Guimera R, Uzzi B, Spiro J, Amaral LAN Source: SCIENCE 308 (5722): 697-702 APR 29 2005 Document Type: Article Language: English Cited References: 31 Times Cited: 1 Abstract: Agents in creative enterprises are embedded in networks that inspire, support, and evaluate their work. Here, we investigate how the mechanisms by which creative teams self-assemble determine the structure of these collaboration networks. We propose a model for the self-assembly of creative teams that has its basis in three parameters: team size, the fraction of newcomers in new productions, and the tendency of incumbents to repeat previous collaborations. The model suggests that the emergence of a large connected community of practitioners can be described as a phase transition. We find that team assembly mechanisms determine both the structure of the collaboration network and team performance for teams derived from both artistic and scientific fields. Addresses: Amaral LAN (reprint author), Northwestern Univ, Dept Biol & Chem Engn, Evanston, IL 60208 USA Northwestern Univ, Dept Biol & Chem Engn, Evanston, IL 60208 USA Northwestern Univ, JL Kellogg Grad Sch Management, Evanston, IL 60208 USA Northwestern Univ, Dept Sociol, Evanston, IL 60208 USA Stanford Univ, Grad Sch Business, Stanford, CA 94305 USA E-mail Addresses: amaral at northwestern.edu Publisher: AMER ASSOC ADVANCEMENT SCIENCE, 1200 NEW YORK AVE, NW, WASHINGTON, DC 20005 USA IDS Number: 922BO ISSN: 0036-8075 Cited References: ALBERT R, 2002, REV MOD PHYS, V74, P47. AMARAL LAN, 2000, P NATL ACAD SCI USA, V97, P11149. AMARAL LAN, 2004, EUR PHYS J B, V38, P147. BARABASI AL, 1999, SCIENCE, V286, P509. BARABASI AL, 2002, PHYSICA A, V311, P590. BARSADE SG, 2001, ADMIN SCI QUART, V46, P174. BORNER K, 2004, P NATL ACAD SCI U S1, V101, P5266. BROWN JR, 2000, SCIENCE, V290, P1701. BURT RS, 2004, AM J SOCIOL, V110, P349. EDMONDSON A, 1999, ADMIN SCI QUART, V44, P350. ETZKOWITZ H, 1994, SCIENCE, V266, P51. GLADWELL M, 2000, TIPPING POINT LITTLE. GRANOVETTER MS, 1973, AM J SOCIOL, V78, P1360. GREEN S, 1996, BROADWAY MUSICALS SH. HARRISON DA, 1998, ACAD MANAGE J, V41, P96. JEHN KA, 1999, ADMIN SCI QUART, V44, P741. KATZENBACK JR, 1993, WISDOM TEAMS. LARSON JR, 1996, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V71, P315. MERTON RK, 1973, SOCIOLOGY SCI. NEWMAN MEJ, 2001, P NATL ACAD SCI USA, V98, P404. NEWMAN MEJ, 2003, SIAM REV, V45, P167. NEWMAN MEJ, 2004, P NATL ACAD SCI U S1, V101, P5200. PRICE DJD, 1963, LITTLE SCI BIG SCI. RAMASCO JJ, 2004, PHYS REV E 2, V70. REAGANS R, 2001, ORGAN SCI, V12, P502. SIMAS R, 1988, MUSICALS NO ONE CAME. STASSER G, 1995, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V31, P244. STAUFFER D, 1992, INTRO PERCOLATION TH. UZZI B, IN PRESS AM J SOCIOL. WATTS DJ, 1998, NATURE, V393, P440. ZIMAN JM, 1994, PROMETHEUS BOUND. From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Mon May 23 16:41:57 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 16:41:57 -0400 Subject: Yu, GA; Yu, DR; Li, YJ "A simulation study of the periodicals' publication delay control process" SCIENTOMETRICS 63 (1). APR 2005. p.25-38 SPRINGER, Dordrecht Message-ID: E-mail Addresses: yuguang at lib.hit.edu.cn TITLE: A simulation study of the periodicals' publication delay control process (Article, English) AUTHOR: Yu, GA; Yu, DR; Li, YJ SOURCE: SCIENTOMETRICS 63 (1). APR 2005. p.25-38 SPRINGER, DORDRECHT ABSTRACT: According to the discrete model of periodical publication process, recurrence formulae of parameters of the process are gained and the initial conditions of control process parameters from one steady state to another are deduced. Using the variable separation approach, which is used generally to solve the partial differential equation, the recurrence computing formula of the publication probability function is deduced. First the publication delay increasing process caused by the accepted contribution flux increase is simulated, and then the publication delay decreasing processes under four different control means are simulated too. Finally it is demonstrated that the periodical publishing process is a strong inertia system and it is found that reducing the quantity of deposited contributions can shorten the publication delay. AUTHOR ADDRESS: GA Yu, Harbin Inst Technol, Sch Management, 17 Silin St, Heilongjiang 150001, Peoples R China Harbin Inst Technol, Sch Management, Heilongjiang, 150001 Peoples R China Harbin Inst Technol, Sch Energy, Harbin, Peoples R China Publisher: SPRINGER, VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS Subject Category: COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS; INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE IDS Number: 917HT ISSN: 0138-9130 Cited References: EGGHE L, 2000, J AM SOC INFORM SCI, V51, P158. FAN YL, 2001, MATLAB SIMULATION AP. GARFIELD E, 1999, CAN MED ASSOC J, V161, P979. LIANG HB, 1998, ADV CYBERNETICS. LIANG K, 1998, METHODS MATH PHYS. LUWEL M, 1998, SCIENTOMETRICS, V41, P26. MARCHI MD, 2001, SCIENTOMETRICS, V51, P395. TRIVEDI PK, 1993, J APPL ECONOM, V8, P93. YU G, 1996, J CHINA SOC SCI TECH, V15, P146. YU G, 1998, J CHINA SOC SCI TECH, V17, P74. YU G, 2000, INFORM PROCESS MANAG, V36, P401. YU G, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS, V60, P121. From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Mon May 23 16:48:24 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 16:48:24 -0400 Subject: Frandsen TF "Geographical concentration - The case of economics journals" Scientometrics 63(1):69-85 April 2005. Message-ID: T.F. Frandsen : E-mail Addresses: kk02tofa at db.dk Title: Geographical concentration - The case of economics journals Author(s): Frandsen TF Source: SCIENTOMETRICS 63 (1): 69-85 APR 2005 Document Type: Article Language: English Cited References: 28 Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether geographical concentration can act as a supplement to the Journal Impact Factor (JIF). The results indicate that the use of a geographical concentration measure opens up new possibilities for analyses of the development of geographic diversion over time. In contrast to measures used in earlier studies the precise strength of the geographical concentration index as a measure of diversion is that it represents diversion as a single value that can be followed over time. The results show wider geographic distribution of European economics journals in the 1980s compared to the American economics journals whereas there seems to be no difference in geographic dispersion in the 1990s. Addresses: Frandsen TF (reprint author), Royal Sch Lib & Informat Sci, Birketinget 6, Copenhagen, DK-2300 Denmark Royal Sch Lib & Informat Sci, Copenhagen, DK-2300 Denmark E-mail Addresses: kk02tofa at db.dk Publisher: SPRINGER, VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS Subject Category: COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS; INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE IDS Number: 917HT ISSN: 0138-9130 Cited References: BARRETT CB, 2000, APPL ECON, V32, P239. BEED C, 1996, J POST KEYNESIAN EC, V18, P369. BONNEVIE E, 2003, J INFORM SCI, V29, P11. BRAUNINGER M, 2001, PERSPEKTIVEN WIRTSCH, V2, P185. CHRISTENSEN FH, 1997, SCIENTOMETRICS, V40, P529. DANELL R, 2000, SCIENTOMETRICS, V49, P23. DANELL R, 2001, INT HOMOGENISATION B. DAVIS JB, 1998, AM ECON, V42, P59. DORBAN M, 1991, SCIENTOMETRICS, V25, P149. ELLIOTT C, 1998, EUR ECON REV, V42, P201. FRANDSEN TF, 2005, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V56, P58. FREY BS, 1993, J ECON PERSPECT, V7, P185. GLANZEL W, 2003, SCIENTOMETRICS, V57, P197. HODGSON GM, 1999, ECON J, V109, P165. HUDSON J, 1996, J ECON PERSPECT, V10, P153. KALAITZIDAKIS P, 2001, IN PRESS EUROPEAN EC. KOCHER MG, 2001, ECON J, V111, P405. KORTELAINEN TAM, 2001, SCIENTOMETRICS, V51, P133. LABAND DN, 1994, J ECON LIT, V32, P640. LABAND DN, 2002, LABOUR ECON, V9, P125. MCCAIN KW, 1991, J AM SOC INFORM SCI, V42, P290. PORTES R, 1987, EUROPEAN EC REV, V31, P1329. ROUSSEAU R, 2002, LIBR TRENDS, V50, P418. ROWLANDS I, 2002, ASLIB PROC, V54, P77. SUTTER M, 2001, EVALUATION REV, V25, P555. SUTTER M, 2001, SCIENTOMETRICS, V51, P405. WEINSTOCK D, 1982, ANTITRUST B, P285. WORMELL I, 1998, J DOC, V54, P584. From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Tue May 24 13:42:27 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 13:42:27 -0400 Subject: Jeannin P, Devillard J "Implementing relevant disciplinary evaluations in the social sciences - National vs international interactions in scientific communities" SCIENTOMETRICS 63 (1): 121-144 APR 2005 Message-ID: E-mail Addresses: limaginatif at free.fr Title: Implementing relevant disciplinary evaluations in the social sciences - National vs international interactions in scientific communities Author(s): Jeannin P, Devillard J Source: SCIENTOMETRICS 63 (1): 121-144 APR 2005 Document Type: Article Language: English Cited References: 55 Times Cited: 0 Abstract: This paper addresses the issue of relevancy when tackling the problem of the evaluation of research published in Social Science journals. This evaluation initialy relies on a critical selection of the databases scientists use. To implement relevant disciplinary evaluations, the method also needs to be scientific, ethical, replicable, comprehensive, flexible, transparent, accessible, incentive, productive, updatable and "internationalizable". This qualitative approach takes into account the current global environment of research. Our method - introducing these criteria - consists in selecting the bases (either bases from the Institute for Scientific Information or not) scientists favour, in crossing them to elaborate new lists of journals, in testing them, in launching a life-size survey among scientists. This method stands as a prerequisite for further applications. Beyond this rather constructivist approach, such evaluations of research can benefit to all the actors participating in the process of the dissemination of knowledge. The need for an international cooperation in coming up with relevant evaluation criteria and indexes is put forward when implementing these sets of evaluation. The appendix presents a case study on French sociology. Addresses: Jeannin P (reprint author), Univ Toulouse 1, LEREPS, GRES, 1 Rue Lautreamont,BP 1624, Tarbes, F-65016 France Univ Toulouse 1, LEREPS, GRES, Tarbes, F-65016 France IUT Tarbes, Tarbes, France Univ Toulouse 3, LERASS, MICS, Toulouse, France E-mail Addresses: limaginatif at free.fr Publisher: SPRINGER, VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS IDS Number: 917HT ISSN: 0138-9130 Cited References: *CNER, 2003, EV RECH PUBL EST PUB. *OCDE, 1997, P OECD WORKSH EV BAS. ANDERSEN H, 2000, J DOC, V56, P674. AVERY C, 1999, AM ECON REV, V89, P564. BOUDON R, 2001, REV EUR SCI SOCIALES, V39, P5. CALLON M, 1993, SCIENTOMETRIE. CHARTRON G, 2000, B BIBLIOTHEQUES FRAN, V45, P32. CHENU A, 2002, ACTES RECHERCHE MAR, P46. COLLINS HM, 2001, SOC STUD SCI, V32, P235. COMBES PP, 2001, ANN EC STAT, V62, P5. DELOOZE MA, 1996, SCIENTOMETRICS, V36, P167. DEMUNAGORRI EC, 1998, REV TRIMESTRIELLE DR, P247. FREVILLE Y, 2001, RAPPORT INFORMATION. FREY BS, 2001, J EC METHODOLOGY, V8, P41. GIBBONS M, 1994, NEW PRODUCTION KNOWL. GIORGI L, 2000, 407 ICCR. GLANZEL W, 1996, SCIENTOMETRICS, V35, P167. GLANZEL W, 1996, SCIENTOMETRICS, V35, P291. GLANZEL W, 1999, INFORM PROCESS MANAG, V35, P31. GODELIER M, 2002, ETAT SCI HOMME SOC F. GODIN B, 2000, SCI SOC, V49, P11. GOODMAN D, 2000, ONLINE INFORM REV, V24, P357. GOODSON LP, 1999, PS POLITICAL SCI JUN, P9. GUEDON JC, 2001, ARL M TOR. HARNAD S, 1998, NATURE NOV. HICKS D, 1999, SCIENTOMETRICS, V44, P193. HUBBARD R, 1992, AM ECON, V36, P29. INGWERSEN P, 2001, J DOC, V57, P715. JEANNIN P, 1989, SOC SCI INFORM, V28, P705. JEANNIN P, 1994, SCIENTOMETRICS, V30, P83. JEANNIN P, 2002, ISSC WORKSH BERL BER. JEANNIN P, 2002, SCI SOC, V55, P189. KATZ JS, 1999, BIBLIOMETRIC INDICAT. KIEFFER F, 2001, WORKSH EV SCI PROD H. LAFOLLETTE MC, 1992, STEALING PRINT. LATOUR B, 2001, PROJET, V268, P91. LECOINTE M, 1997, ENJEUX EVALUATION. LEYDESDORFF L, 1996, SCI PUBL POLICY, V23, P279. LUWEL M, 1999, INDICATORS RES PERFO. MARTIN O, 2000, SOCIOLOGIE SCI. MUSSELIN C, 2000, ANNEE SOCIOLOGIQUE, V50, P521. MUSTAR P, 2002, RES POLICY, V31, P55. OLLE JM, 2001, DIOGENE OCT, P104. PAPON P, 1998, RES POLICY, V27, P771. PERRET B, 2000, EUR EV SOC C LAUS OC. PUECH C, 2000, BBF, V45, P96. RAGOUET P, 1997, SOC SCI INFORM, V36, P749. RUSSELL JM, 2001, UNESO, V168, P297. SOCHACKI L, 1994, REV SCI LEURS PUBLIC, V3, P25. SUPIOT A, 2001, POLITIQUE SCI HOMME. THOENIG JC, 2000, EVALUATION, V6, P217. VANLEEUWEN TN, 2001, RES EVALUAT, V10, P195. VINCK D, 1995, SOCIOLOGIE SCI. VINKLER P, 1996, SCIENTOMETRICS, V35, P237. WILTS A, 2000, RES POLICY, V29, P767. From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Tue May 24 17:49:25 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 17:49:25 -0400 Subject: Glenisson P, Glanzel W, Persson O "Combining full-text analysis and bibliometric indicators. A pilot study" SCIENTOMETRICS 63 (1): 163-180 APR 2005 Message-ID: E-mail Addresses: Patrick.Glenisson at econ.kuleuven.ac.be Title: Combining full-text analysis and bibliometric indicators. A pilot study Author(s): Glenisson P, Glanzel W, Persson O Source: SCIENTOMETRICS 63 (1): 163-180 APR 2005 Document Type: Article Language: English Cited References: 39 Times Cited: 0 Abstract: In the present study full-text analysis and traditional bibliometric methods are combined to improve the efficiency of the individual methods in the mapping of science. The methodology is applied to map research papers from a special issue of Scientometrics. The outcomes substantiate that such hybrid methodology can be applied to both research evaluation and information retrieval. The subject classification given by the guest-editors of the special issue is used for validation purposes. Because of the limited number of papers underlying the study the paper is considered a pilot study that will be extended in a later study on the basis of a larger corpus. Addresses: Glenisson P (reprint author), Katholieke Univ Leuven, Steunpunt O&O Stat, Dekenstr 2, Louvain, B-3000 Belgium Katholieke Univ Leuven, Steunpunt O&O Stat, Louvain, B-3000 Belgium Hungarian Acad Sci, Inst Res Policy Studies, Budapest, Hungary Umea Univ, Dept Sociol, Inforsk, Umea, Sweden E-mail Addresses: Patrick.Glenisson at econ.kuleuven.ac.be Publisher: SPRINGER, VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS IDS Number: 917HT ISSN: 0138-9130 Cited References: BAEZAYATES R, 1999, MODERN INFORMATION R. BEAVER DD, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS, V60, P399. BRAAM RR, 1991, J AM SOC INFORM SCI, V42, P233. BRAAM RR, 1991, J AM SOC INFORM SCI, V42, P252. CALLON M, 1991, SCIENTOMETRICS, V22, P155. EGGHE L, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS, V60, P497. GLANZEL W, 1999, INFORM PROCESS MANAG, V35, P31. GLANZEL W, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS, V60, P281. GLANZEL W, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS, V60, P511. GLENISSON P, 2003, P 8 ANN PAC S BIOC, V8, P240. GLENISSON P, 2003, SIGKDD EXPLORATIONS, V5, P101. HAVEMANN F, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS, V60, P283. JAIN A, 1988, ALGORITHMS CLUSTERIN. KOSTOFF RN, 2001, TECHNOL FORECAST SOC, V68, P223. KOSTOFF RN, 2003, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V54, P984. KOSTOFF RN, 2004, INT J MED INFORM, V73, P515. LAMIREL JC, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS, V60, P445. LARSEN B, 2002, SIGIR 02 AUG 11 15 T. LOSEE RM, 1996, INFORM PROCESS MANAG, V32, P747. MANNING CD, 2000, FDN STAT NATURAL LAN. MARKUSOVA VA, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS, V60, P365. MOED HF, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS, V60, P295. MULLINS N, 1988, HDB QUANTITATIVE STU, P81. NEGISHI M, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS, V60, P333. NOYONS ECM, 1994, SCIENTOMETRICS, V30, P157. PERSSON O, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS, V60, P421. PORTER MF, 1980, PROGRAM, V14, P130. QIU JP, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS, V60, P463. SCHOEPFLIN U, 2001, SCIENTOMETRICS, V50, P301. SHAN S, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS, V60, P523. SHELTON RD, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS, V60, P353. SMALL H, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS, V60, P305. SNIZEK WE, 1991, SCIENTOMETRICS, V20, P25. TANG R, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS, V60, P475. VAUGHAN LW, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS, V60, P487. WU YS, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS, V60, P385. YOSHIKANE F, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS, V60, P433. YUE WP, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS, V60, P317. ZITT M, 1994, SCIENTOMETRICS, V30, P333. From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Tue May 24 18:03:29 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 18:03:29 -0400 Subject: Nicolaisen, J "The social act of citing: Towards new horizons in citation theory" ASIST 2003: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 66TH ASIST ANNUAL MEETING, VOL 40, 2003 40. 2003. p.12-20 - HUMANIZING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY: FROM IDEAS TO BITS AND BACK 40: 12-20, 2003 Message-ID: Jeppe Nicolaisen : jni at db.dk Powerpoint presentation available at : http://www.db.dk/jni/presentations/PresentationASIST2003.ppt TITLE: The social act of citing: Towards new horizons in citation theory (Article, English) AUTHOR: Nicolaisen, J SOURCE: ASIST 2003: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 66TH ASIST ANNUAL MEETING, VOL 40, 2003 40. 2003. p.12-20 INFORMATION TODAY INC, MEDFORD - HUMANIZING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY: FROM IDEAS TO BITS AND BACK 40: 12-20, 2003 Book Series: PROCEEDINGS OF THE ASIST ANNUAL MEETING Editor(s): Bryans JB Document Type: Article Language: English Cited References: 45 Conference Information: 66th Annual Meeting of the American-Society-for-Information-Science-and-Technology Long Beach, CA, OCT 19-22, 2003 Amer Soc Informat Sci & Technol Abstract: The paper draws together central research on scientific problem solving and scientific documentation from a number of fields an demonstrates its latent potential for a general theory of citing. Specifically, two philosophical works on scientific problem solving facilitate the clarification of how research traditions work as solution constrainers. The interdisciplinary field of diffusion research is shown to deal with issues related to the issue concerning scientists, choice of problems, theories, and methods. A number of empirical composition studies dealing with the act of citing are examined and shown to contradict the mentalist assumption that scientific documentation is an act of private consciousness. The paper concludes with a preliminary outline of a general theory of citing and suggestions for further developments. Addresses: Nicolaisen J (reprint author), Royal Sch Lib & Informat Sci, Birketinget 6, DK-2300 Copenhagen, Denmark Royal Sch Lib & Informat Sci, DK-2300 Copenhagen, Denmark Publisher: INFORMATION TODAY INC, 143 OLD MARLTON PIKE, MEDFORD, NJ 08055 USA IDS Number: BBZ20 ISSN: 0044-7870 ISBN: 1-57387-197-4 Cited References: BAZERMAN C, 1988, SHAPING WRITTEN KNOW BELNAP N, 1976, LOGIC QUESTIONS ANSW BORNSTEIN RF, 1991, BEHAV BRAIN SCI, V14, P138 BROWNELL G, 1989, IEEE COMPUTER APPL P, V2, P31 CASE DO, 2000, J AM SOC INFORM SCI, V51, P635 CHUBIN DE, 1975, SOC STUD SCI, V5, P426 COLE S, 1992, MAKING SCI NATURE SO COLLINS HM, 1986, CHANGING ORDER REPLI COLLINS HM, 1994, GOLEM WHAT EVERYONE CRANE D, 1972, INVISIBLE COLL DIFFU CRONIN B, 1984, CITATION PROCESS ROL FAIGLEY L, 1986, COLL ENGL, V48, P527 GARFIELD E, 1983, CURRENT CONTENTS, V45, P5 GARFIELD E, 1985, CURRENT CONTENTS, V43, P3 GARFIELD E, 1997, J AM SOC INFORM SCI, V48, P962 GIERYN TF, 1978, SOCIOL INQ, V48, P96 GILBERT GN, 1977, SOC STUD SCI, V7, P113 GRAFTON A, 1997, FOOTNOTE CURIOUS HIS HARGENS LL, 2000, AM SOCIOL REV, V65, P846 HARGENS LL, 2000, WEB KNOWLEDGE FESTSC, P497 HJORLAND B, 1997, INFORMATION SEEKING HJORLAND B, 2002, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V53, P257 HYLAND K, 2000, DISCIPLINARY DISCOUR KUHN TS, 1970, STRUCTURE SCI REVOLU LATOUR B, 1987, SCI ACTION FOLLOW SC LAUDAN L, 1977, PROGR ITS PROBLEMS T LAUDAN L, 1996, POSITIVISM RELATIVIS MERTON RK, 1970, SCI TECHNOLOGY SOC MUSTELIN O, 1988, BOGER BIBLIOTEKER ME, P105 NICKLES T, 1981, SYNTHESE, V47, P85 NICOLAISEN J, 2002, J DOC, V58, P383 NYSTRAND M, 1993, WRIT COMMUN, V10, P267 ROGER EM, 1995, DIFFUSION INNOVATION SHAPIN S, 1995, ANNU REV SOCIOL, V21, P289 SMALL H, 1987, SCIENTOMETRICS, V12, P339 SMALL HG, 1978, SOC STUD SCI, V8, P327 SWALES JM, 1981, ASPECTS ARTICLE INTR SWALES JM, 1990, GENRE ANAL ENGLISH A TABAH AN, 1999, ANNU REV INFORM SCI, V34, P249 VANRAAN AFJ, 1998, SCIENTOMETRICS, V43, P421 WHITLEY R, 1974, SOCIAL PROCESSES SCI, P69 WOOLGAR S, 1981, SOC STUD SCI, V11, P365 WOOLGAR SW, 1976, SOC STUD SCI, V6, P395 ZUCKERMAN H, 1978, SOCIOL INQ, V48, P65 ZUCKERMAN H, 1987, SCIENTOMETRICS, V12, P329 From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Tue May 24 18:14:24 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 18:14:24 -0400 Subject: Marion, LS; Garfield, E; Hargens, LL; Lievrouw, LA; White, HD; Wilson, CS "Social network analysis and citation network analysis: Complementary approaches to the study of scientific communication" Message-ID: lsmarion at acs3.net TITLE: Social network analysis and citation network analysis: Complementary approaches to the study of scientific communication (SIG MET) (Article, English) AUTHOR: Marion, LS; Garfield, E; Hargens, LL; Lievrouw, LA; White, HD; Wilson, CS SOURCE: ASIST 2003: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 66TH ASIST ANNUAL MEETING, VOL 40, 2003 40. 2003. p.486-487 INFORMATION TODAY INC, MEDFORD ABSTRACT: The study of networks is gaining prominence in many disciplines as well as in the popular press. Information scientists, however, have studied networks for decades. This session will explore the potential of using citation network analysis and social network analysis to provide structural assessments of scientific communication. Panelists will discuss their research and highlight the advantages and challenges of using these methods to derive a comprehensive portrait of the diffusion of scientific knowledge. AUTHOR ADDRESS: LS Marion, Drexel Univ, Coll Informat Sci & Technol, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA Cited References: LIEVROUW LA, 1987, SOC NETWORKS, V9, P217 SANDSTROM PE, 1998, THESIS INDIANA U WELLMAN B, 1988, SOCIAL STRUCTURES NE WHITE HD, 2002, DOES CITATION REFLEC From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Wed May 25 15:12:57 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 15:12:57 -0400 Subject: Gilgun JF "Lighten up: The citation dilemma in qualitative research" QUALITATIVE HEALTH RESEARCH 15 (5): 721-724 MAY 2005 Message-ID: Jane F. Gilgun : jgilgun at tc.umn.edu Title: Lighten up: The citation dilemma in qualitative research Author(s): Gilgun JF Source: QUALITATIVE HEALTH RESEARCH 15 (5): 721-724 MAY 2005 Document Type: Editorial Material Language: English Cited References: 7 Times Cited: 0 Abstract: The balance between what we learn from research and what others have said about similar topics can pose dilemmas for qualitative researchers. How many citations are enough? How much allegiance do we owe to other scholars and how much to informants' lived experiences, our theoretical analyses, and the lessons we draw about methods and methodologies from our own experience as researchers? The various reasons we use or do not use citations in writing tip results and writing about methods are the topics of this article. Author Keywords: qualitative research methods; writing qualitative research; research reports; deductive qualitative analysis Addresses: Gilgun JF (reprint author), Univ Minnesota Twin Cities, St Paul, MN USA Univ Minnesota Twin Cities, St Paul, MN USA Publisher: SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC, 2455 TELLER RD, THOUSAND OAKS, CA 91320 USA IDS Number: 917YQ ISSN: 1049-7323 Cited References: BELENKY MF, 1986, WOMENS WAYS KNOWING. GILGUN JF, BRIT J SOCIAL WORK. GILGUN JF, EMERGING APPROACHES. GILGUN JF, SOURCEBOOK FAMILY TH. GILGUN JF, 2000, VICT CHILDR YOUTH IN. GILGUN JF, 2004, DOING QUALITATIVE RE. GILGUN JF, 2004, QUAL INQ, V10, P691. From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Wed May 25 17:09:02 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 17:09:02 -0400 Subject: Fox MF "Gender, family characteristics, and publication productivity among scientists" SOCIAL STUDIES OF SCIENCE 35 (1): 131-150 FEB 2005 Message-ID: Mary Frank Fox : e-mail: mary.fox at publicpolicy.gatech.edu Title: Gender, family characteristics, and publication productivity among scientists Author(s): Fox MF Source: SOCIAL STUDIES OF SCIENCE 35 (1): 131-150 FEB 2005 Document Type: Article Language: English Cited References: 30 Times Cited: 0 Abstract: This paper concentrates upon the relationship between marriage, parental status, and publication productivity for women in academic science, with comparisons to men. Findings indicate that gender, family characteristics, and productivity are complex considerations that go beyond being married or not married, and the presence or absence of children. For women particularly, the relationship between marriage and productivity varies by type of marriage: first compared with subsequent marriage, and occupation of spouse (in scientific compared with non-scientific occupation). Further, type of family composition is important: women with preschool children have higher productivity than women without children or with school-age children. Women with preschool children are found to be a socially selective group in their characteristics, particularly in their allocations of time. Author Keywords: children; family; gender; household; productivity; scientists EXCERPT : SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS: In summary, gender, productivity, and family characteristics are complex considerations that go beyond being married or not married, and the presence or absence of children. For women, particularly, the relationship between marriage and productivity varies by type of marriage: that is, subsequent compared with first marriage, and occupation of spouse. Women in subsequent marriages have higher productivity than women in first marriages. This relates to their greater likelihood to be married to another scientist; and when married to a scientist, the effects for productivity are positive. In family composition, the predominant pattern for women scientists is that of "no children", found among 52% of women (compared with 21% of men). Among types of family compositions, however, the productivity of women with preschool children is higher than that of women without children or those with school-aged children. In pursuing factors that may be associated with this anomalous pattern, women scientists who have preschool children show signs of being a socially selective group in marriage and family patterns, research interests, and allocations of time. In a multivariate model of productivity for women, allocations of more time in research-related activity and less in non-research-related activity are the most significant factors, among those considered. The data do not indicate particular policies and practices in the work environments of the women scientists. At issue, for example, are the implications for productivity of flexible-time policies on campus or programs of parental leave and child-care. It may - or may not- be the case that women with preschool children are apt to be in settings with such policies or programs. In addition, it is important to emphasize that these data do not indicate that marriage and young children have no effect upon women in science. Marriage and young children have a multitude of effects in personal sacrifices as well as rewards, and extraordinary arrangements of accommodation (Grant et al., 2000). What these data show is that marriage and young children are not associated with depressed publication productivity among women who do hold academic positions in science. In the interpretation of the data on marriage, parenthood, and productivity, it is important to point out this: these data are based upon women who have survived a rigorous and demanding process of scrutiny, selection, and evaluation in science. Family demands may take their toll along the way, through graduate school and early career, so that a proportion of women are eliminated from scientific careers and do not even fall into such cross-sectional data or professional, employed scientists (see Long, 1987). Thus, in continuing steps, we need to understand more about the way that productivity and productivity differences unfold over time and in relationship to family and household characterists - with implications for sustained participation and performance in science" Addresses: Fox MF (reprint author), Georgia Inst Technol, Sch Publ Policy, Atlanta, GA 30332 USA Georgia Inst Technol, Sch Publ Policy, Atlanta, GA 30332 USA E-mail Addresses: mary.fox at pubpolicy.gatech.edu Publisher: SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD, 1 OLIVERS YARD, 55 CITY ROAD, LONDON EC1Y 1SP, ENGLAND IDS Number: 915WG ISSN: 0306-3127 Cited References: *NAT AC SCI, 1995, RESH GRAD ED SCI ENG. ASTIN HS, 1985, SCHOLARLY WRITING PU, P147. ASTIN HS, 1997, ACAD COUPLES PROBLEM, P128. BLACKBURN R, 1996, FACULTY WORK. BRUER JT, 1984, SCI TECHNOL, V9, P3. CLARK MJ, 1985, RES HIGH EDUC, V23, P256. COLE JR, 1984, ADV MOTIVATION ACHIE, V2. COLE JR, 1987, SCI AM, V256, P119. COLE JR, 1991, OUTER CIRCLE WOMEN S, P277. CREAMER E, 1998, ASHEERIC HIGHER ED R, V26. CREAMER EG, 1999, J HIGH EDUC, V70, P261. CRESWELL JW, 1985, 4 ASHEERIC. FOX MF, 1985, SOCIOL QUART, V26, P537. FOX MF, 1992, SOCIOL EDUC, V65, P293. GRANT L, 2000, WOMENS STUDIES Q, V28, P62. HELMREICH RL, 1980, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V39, P896. KYVIK S, 1990, SOC STUD SCI, V20, P149. LONG JS, 1987, WOMEN THEIR UNDERSTA, P157. LONG JS, 1990, SOC FORCES, V68, P1297. LONG JS, 1992, SOC FORCES, V71, P159. LOTKA A, 1926, J WASHINGTON ACAD SC, V26, P317. LUUKKONENGRONOW T, 1983, ACTA SOCIOL, V26, P267. MERTON RK, 1973, SOCIOLOGY SCI. MULLINS NC, 1973, SCI SOME SOCIOLOGICA. PEARSON W, 1994, WILL DO SCI ED NEXT. PELZ D, 1976, SCI ORGANIZATIONS. PRICE D, 1963, LITTLE SCI BIG SCI. RESKIN BF, 1978, AM J SOCIOL, V83, P1235. SONNERT G, 1995, GENDER DIFFERENCES S. ZUCKERMAN H, 1991, OUTER CIRCLE WOMEN S. From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Thu May 26 13:39:19 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 13:39:19 -0400 Subject: Plumper T. "Publications and citation of German political science departments in international journals, 1990-2002: A bibliometric analysis" POLITISCHE VIERTELJAHRESSCHRIFT 44 (4): 529-544 DEC 2003 Message-ID: E-mail: Thomas Plumper : thomas.pluemper at uni-konstanz.de Title: Publications and citation of German political science departments in international journals, 1990-2002: A bibliometric analysis Author(s): Plumper T Source: POLITISCHE VIERTELJAHRESSCHRIFT 44 (4): 529-544 DEC 2003 Document Type: Article Language: German Cited References: 8 Times Cited: 1 Addresses: Plumper T (reprint author), Univ Konstanz, Fachbereich Politik & Verwaltungswissensch, D 86, Constance, D-78457 Germany Univ Konstanz, Fachbereich Politik & Verwaltungswissensch, Constance, D-78457 Germany Publisher: WESTDEUTSCHER VERLAG GMBH, POSTFACH 5829, W-6200 WIESBADEN, GERMANY IDS Number: 772YA CITED REFERENCES: HDB U FACHHOCHSCHULE 2002, AUFGABEN KRITERIEN V 2002, EMPFEHLUNG STARKUNG BAUWENS L, 2002, RANKING EUROPEAN EC BOMMER R, 1998, Z WIRTSCHAFTS SOZIAL, V118, P1 COMBES PP, 2002, MEASURING RANKING EC HIX S, 2003, GLOBAL RANKING POLIT URSPRUNG H, 2003, SCHNEEWITTCHEN LAND From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Thu May 26 14:02:06 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 14:02:06 -0400 Subject: Dornik E, Vidmar G, Zumer M. "Nursing education in Slovenia and its impact on nurses publishing in their professional journal" NURSE EDUCATION TODAY 25 (3): 197-203 APR 2005 Message-ID: E-mail Addresses: Dornik E ema.dornik at mf.uni-lj.si Vidmar G gaj.vidmar at mf.uni-lj.si Zumer M maja.zumer at ff.uni-lj.si Title: Nursing education in Slovenia and its impact on nurses publishing in their professional journal Author(s): Dornik E, Vidmar G, Zumer M Source: NURSE EDUCATION TODAY 25 (3): 197-203 APR 2005 Document Type: Article Language: English Cited References: 10 Abstract: The paper describes development of nursing education in Slovenia (from Associate Degree to Diploma level, with BSN programme of brief duration) and discusses its impact on structure and contents of the Journal of the Slovenian Nursing Association (JSNA). Extensive bibliometric analysis was performed on all scientific and technical papers published in the JSNA between 1976 and 2001. Statistical analyses were carried out to study characteristics and inter-relations of authorship, article type, cited references and subject classification. A positive impact of improved and extended education of nurses on quantity and quality of their publications was confirmed. Nevertheless, further steps in terms of education and research are needed fully to establish nursing as an independent profession in Slovenia, and there is still much room for improving the standard of the articles in the JSNA. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. EXCERPT : 'CONCLUSION: An extensive bibliometric analysis was performed on all the scientific and technical papers published in the Journal of the Slovenian Nursing Association between 1976 and 2001. We demonstrated that higher educational level of nurses leads to their more frequent publishing in the journal under investigation. One of the reasons for this is that any university-level study provides them with at least basic training in scientific and technical writing. The number of foreign authors is small, so the editorial board should strive for more international cooperation. At the same time, it is reasonable to expect that noteworthy results arising from Slovenian researchers in the field of nursing working together with their colleagues from abroad achieve publication in internationally renowned journals, rather than in the JSNA. An increasing trend in the number of cited references per article over time was confirmed, but the average age of cited references was not found to differ significantly between 2-year periods. Furthermore, the increasing share of nurses with university degree among the authors, together with the growth in the number of cited references, did not bring about a rise in the percentage of cited foreign-language journal articles. When analysing article type, we found that almost one third of the research articles were contributed by nurses with a Bachelor degree. Among the health professionals, MDs were the most frequent authors of review articles, while AD-level nurses contributed the largest percentage of technical articles. Subject classification structure varies notably over 2-year periods and indicates that nurses are increasingly involved in research in their field. A significant role in this process can be attributed to nurses with university-level degree, since in addition to nursing practice, health education topics prevail among the research articles (co) authored by nurses. In conclusion, it should be stressed that nurses in Slovenia are still struggling for the right to study for a university degree in their own field. Research is the basis of any proession, and dissemination of new findings and existing knowledge in the field of nursing should be encouraged as the basis for further development of theory and practice of nursing." Addresses: Dornik E (reprint author), Univ Ljubljana, Fac Med, Inst Biomed Informat, Vrazov Trg 2, Ljubljana, SI-1000 Slovenia Univ Ljubljana, Fac Med, Inst Biomed Informat, Ljubljana, SI-1000 Slovenia Univ Ljubljana, Dept Lib & Informat Sci & Book Studies, Fac Arts, Ljubljana, SI-1000 Slovenia E-mail Addresses: ema.dornik at mf.uni-lj.si, gaj.vidmar at mf.uni-lj.si, maja.zumer at ff.uni-lj.si Publisher: CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE, JOURNAL PRODUCTION DEPT, ROBERT STEVENSON HOUSE, 1-3 BAXTERS PLACE, LEITH WALK, EDINBURGH EH1 3AF, MIDLOTHIAN, SCOTLAND IDS Number: 916GX ISSN: 0260-6917 Cited References: *SLOV NURS ASS, 2000, J SLOVENIAN NURSING, V34, P90. *VIS ZDRAVSTV SOL, 2001, VODN STUD STUD LET 2. DORNIK E, 1997, THESIS PEDAGOSKA FAK. DORNIK E, 2002, THESIS FILOZOFSKA FA. KALISCH B, 1988, NURSING TODAYS WORLD, P25. LONGSTAFF TA, 2002, RISK ANAL, V22, P1. MICETICTURK D, 1999, VISOKA ZDRAVSTVENA S, V7, P8. PAHOR M, 1988, THESIS FAKULTETA SOZ. PAHOR M, 1989, ZDRAVSTVENI OBZORNIK, V23, P43. WITT B, 1992, J NURS EDUC, V31, P149. From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Thu May 26 15:27:12 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 15:27:12 -0400 Subject: McWilliams A, Siegel D, Van Fleet DD "Scholarly journals as producers of knowledge: Theory and empirical evidence based on data envelopment analysis" ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH METHODS 8 (2): 185-201 APR 2005 Message-ID: Abagail McWilliams : abby at uic.edu Authors need Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) which includes SSCI and JCR impact factors to rank 40 journals in management science. Rank vs Performance Title: Scholarly journals as producers of knowledge: Theory and empirical evidence based on data envelopment analysis Author(s): McWilliams A, Siegel D, Van Fleet DD Source: ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH METHODS 8 (2): 185-201 APR 2005 Document Type: Article Language: English Cited References: 35 \ Abstract: There have been numerous studies that rank journals based on relative quality. These have generally failed to address some important theoretical and empirical issues relating to productivity. As an alternative, the authors outline a theoretical framework in which an academic journal is considered to be a "producer" of intellectual output. Using the field of management as an example, the authors specify the inputs and outputs of the production process and estimate the relative efficiency of journals using Data Envelopment Analysis. The derived measures of relative productivity are then used to develop a productivity ranking of journals. To explain why some journals use inputs more efficiently than others, the authors regress the estimates of relative efficiency on a set of managerial factors and suggest means to increase relative efficiency. The authors find that increasing the size of the editorial board and reducing both the subscription price and the acceptance rate will enhance the relative performance of an academic journal. Addresses: McWilliams A (reprint author), Univ Illinois, Coll Business Adm, Chicago, IL USA Univ Illinois, Coll Business Adm, Chicago, IL USA Rensselaer Polytech Inst, Dept Econ, Troy, NY 12181 USA Arizona State Univ W, Phoenix, AZ 85069 USA Publisher: SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC, 2455 TELLER RD, THOUSAND OAKS, CA 91320 USA IDS Number: 909YW ISSN: 1094-4281 Cited References: BANKER RD, 1984, MANAGE SCI, V30, P1078. BANKER RD, 1986, MANAGE SCI, V32, P30. BANKER RD, 1994, DATA ENVELOPMENT ANA, P97. BESSENT A, 1982, MANAGE SCI, V28, P1355. BOWLIN WF, 1985, ANN OPER RES, V2, P113. BURTON MP, 1995, ECON J, V105, P361. CABELL D, 1994, CABELLS DIRECTORY PU. CHARNES A, 1978, EUROPEAN J OPERATION, V2, P429. CHARNES A, 1994, DATA ENVELOPMENT ANA. COBB CW, 1928, AM ECON REV, V18, P139. COELLI T, 1996, 9608 CEPA. COELLI T, 1998, INTRO EFFICIENCY PRO. FARE R, 1985, APPL ECON, V17, P205. GANLEY J, 1992, PUBLIC SECTOR EFFICI. GARFIELD E, 1972, SCIENCE, V178, P471. GOMEZMEJIA LR, 1992, ACAD MANAGE J, V35, P921. HOWARD LW, 1993, ACAD MANAGE J, V36, P882. JOHNES G, 1993, OXFORD ECON PAP, V45, P332. KACMAR KM, 2000, ORGAN RES METHODS, V3, P392. KUSBIANTRO B, 1985, THESIS U PENNSYLVANI. LEWIN AY, 1982, OMEGA, V10, P401. LIEBOWITZ SJ, 1984, J ECON LIT, V22, P77. LOCKETT A, IN PRESS J MANAGEMEN. LOVELL CAK, 1994, DATA ENVELOPMENT ANA, P329. MACKINNON J, 1985, J ECONOMETRICS, V19, P305. MAJUMDAR SK, 2001, ACAD MANAGE J, V44, P170. NUNAMAKER TR, 1983, HEALTH SERV RES, V18, P183. SHERMAN HD, 1984, MED CARE, V22, P922. SHERMAN HD, 1984, SLOAN MANAGE REV, V25, P11. STIGLER GJ, 1975, J POLITICAL EC, V83, P477. STIGLER SM, 1994, STAT SCI, V9, P94. TAHAI A, 1999, STRATEGIC MANAGE J, V20, P279. THANASSOULIS E, 1993, J OPER RES SOC, V44, P1129. THOMAS RR, 1998, INT J RES MARK, V15, P487. VANFLEET DD, 2000, J MANAGE, V26, P839. From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Thu May 26 16:18:45 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 16:18:45 -0400 Subject: Jacobs G, Ip B. "Ring fenced research: the case of computer-assisted learning in health sciences" BRITISH JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY 36 (3): 361-377 MAY 2005 Message-ID: Gabriel Jacobs : g.c.jacobs at swan.ac.uk Title: Ring fenced research: the case of computer-assisted learning in health sciences Author(s): Jacobs G, Ip B Source: BRITISH JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY 36 (3): 361-377 MAY 2005 Document Type: Article Language: English Cited References: 21 Abstract: Interdisciplinary research is being promoted in many quarters as the way forward, but "research islands" still persist. Taking computer-assisted learning (CAL) within health sciences as a case in point, this paper describes a detailed study of the references to source material within papers published in general medical, specific nursing and general information and communications technology journals as pointing to papers published either in the same category of journal or journals of other categories. The results show that research within this area exhibits a disquieting inbred approach. Furthermore, there is clear evidence of a tendency amongst the papers examined to cite research published in journals with broadly the same impact factors as the journal in which the papers themselves are published. A discussion of the value of journal impact factors, which are a crude but useful index of the quality of journal, and their possible effect on the future of research in CAL within health sciences is embedded in the paper. Addresses: Jacobs G (reprint author), Univ Coll Swansea, Sch Management, Swansea, W Glam SA2 8PP Wales Univ Coll Swansea, Sch Management, Swansea, W Glam SA2 8PP Wales E-mail Addresses: g.c.jacobs at swan.ac.uk Publisher: BLACKWELL PUBL LTD, 108 COWLEY RD, OXFORD OX4 1JF, OXON, ENGLAND IDS Number: 914DF ISSN: 0007-1013 Cited References: BRINN T, 2000, OMEGA-INT J MANAGE S, V28, P237. CHANG CY, 2001, J COMPUT ASSIST LEAR, V17, P263. COLMAN AM, 1995, SCIENTOMETRICS, V35, P49. DENNY M, 2003, NURSE ED PRACTICE, V3, P80. DONOHUE JM, 2000, OMEGA-INT J MANAGE S, V28, P17. HOLT RIG, 2001, CLIN ENDOCRINOL, V55, P537. IWAMASA GY, 2002, CLIN PSYCHOL REV, V22, P931. JACOBS G, 2001, ASS LEARNING TECHNOL, V9, P2. JONES MJ, 1996, OMEGA-INT J MANAGE S, V24, P597. JONES MJ, 1996, OMEGA-INT J MANAGE S, V24, P607. JONES MJ, 1999, OMEGA-INT J MANAGE S, V27, P397. ORMEROD RJ, 1997, OMEGA-INT J MANAGE S, V25, P599. PALLANT J, 2001, SPSS SURVIVAL MANUAL. REISMAN A, 1995, OPER RES, V43, P731. SIMPSON E, 2002, INT J NURSING PRACTI, V8, P89. TAVAKOLI M, 2000, J EVAL CLIN PRACT, V6, P111. TZORTZIDOU S, 2001, TECHNOLOGIES, V6, P177. VANFLEET DD, 2000, J MANAGE, V26, P839. VASTAG G, 2002, OMEGA-INT J MANAGE S, V30, P109. VONTUNZELMANN N, 2003, EFFECTS SIZE RES PER. WINKER K, 1983, J CRIM JUST, V11, P369. From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Thu May 26 16:51:16 2005 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 16:51:16 -0400 Subject: Hilmer, CE; Hilmer MJ. "How do journal quality, co-authorship, and author order affect agricultural economists' salaries?" AMERICAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS 87 (2): 509-523 MAY 2005 Message-ID: Title: How do journal quality, co-authorship, and author order affect agricultural economists' salaries? Author: Hilmer, CE; Hilmer MJ. Source: AMERICAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS 87 (2): 509-523 MAY 2005 Document Type: Article Language: English Cited References: 40 Abstract: Utilizing an original data set containing annual salaries and peer-reviewed publication histories for 326 faculty members from top-ranked Ph.D.-granting programs, we examine the labor market for academic agricultural economists. The results suggest that higher quality publications have a greater impact on annual earnings, that sole authored articles have a higher return than multi-authored articles, and that no wage premium exists for being the lead author of a non-alphabetic article. Addresses: Hilmer CE (reprint author), Virginia Tech, Dept Agr & Appl Econ, Blacksburg, VA USA Virginia Tech, Dept Agr & Appl Econ, Blacksburg, VA USA Publisher: BLACKWELL PUBLISHERS, 350 MAIN STREET, STE 6, MALDEN, MA 02148 USA IDS Number: 915LF ISSN: 0002-9092 Cited References: 2001, PETERSONS GUIDE GRAD, P33. ASHENFELTER O, 2002, AM ECON REV, V92, P957. BARNETT AH, 1988, REV ECON STAT, V70, P539. BARRETT CB, 1999, AGR RESOURCE EC REV, V28, P1. BEILOCK R, 1988, AM J AGR ECON, V70, P403. CHENEY LM, 2000, REV AGR ECON, V22, P17. DIAMOND AM, 1986, J HUM RESOUR, V21, P200. DUSANSKY R, 1998, J ECON PERSPECT, V12, P157. ENGERS M, 1999, J POLIT ECON, V107, P859. FORMBY JP, 1993, ECON INQ, V31, P128. GORDON NM, 1974, AM ECON REV, V64, P419. GRAVES PE, 2002, ECON EDUC REV, V21, P491. HAMERMESH DS, 1982, SO EC J, V49, P472. HERBERTZ H, 1995, SCIENTOMETRICS, V33, P117. HOFFMAN EP, 1976, AM ECON REV, V66, P196. HOLLIS A, 2001, LABOUR ECON, V8, P503. KATZ JS, 1997, SCIENTOMETRICS, V40, P541. KINNUCAN HW, 1994, AGR RES EC REV, V23, P194. LABAND DN, 2002, LABOUR ECON, V9, P125. LIEBOWITZ SJ, 1984, J ECON LIT, V22, P77. LINDLEY JT, 1992, SOUTH ECON J, V59, P241. LINER GH, 2002, ECON INQ, V40, P138. MCDOWELL JM, 1983, REV ECON STAT, V65, P155. MCDOWELL JM, 2001, IND LABOR RELAT REV, V54, P224. MEIN DG, 2002, APPL ECON LETT, V9, P809. MOORE WJ, 1998, J LABOR ECON, V16, P352. MOORE WJ, 2001, ECON INQ, V39, P663. OFFUTT S, 2002, EXCHANGE NEWSLETTER, V25, P1. PERRY GM, 1999, RANKING MS PHD GRADU. RANSOM MR, 1993, AM ECON REV, V83, P221. RICH J, 1999, ECONOMICA, V66, P509. SAUER RD, 1998, J POLITICAL EC, V96, P856. SCOTT LC, 1996, ECON INQ, V34, P378. SIEGFRIED JJ, 2001, J HUM RESOUR, V36, P364. SIMPSON JR, 1985, AM J AGR ECON, V67, P325. SINGELL LD, 1996, J HUM RESOUR, V31, P429. THILMANY DD, 2000, REV AGR ECON, V22, P23. TOUTKOUSHIAN RK, 1999, Q REV EC FINANCE, V39, P679. WARD ME, 2001, SCOT J POLIT ECON, V48, P283. ZEPEDA L, 1998, REV AGR ECON, V20, P406. From bernies at UILLINOIS.EDU Tue May 31 13:27:51 2005 From: bernies at UILLINOIS.EDU (Sloan, Bernie) Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 12:27:51 -0500 Subject: Bibliometric analsysis of the development of a given subject area? Message-ID: Can someone recommend a few exemplary papers dealing with the bibliometric analysis of the development of the literature in a given subject area? I'd like to take an historical look at the development of the literature in an area that has only really been around for 15 years or so, with most of the publication occurring in the past ten years, especially the past five years. And I'd specifically like to do it using data from the ISI databases. Sorry to sound so vague, but it's only a general idea for me right now. I'd just like to see what others have done with other subject areas. Thanks! Bernie Sloan Senior Library Information Systems Consultant, ILCSO University of Illinois Office for Planning and Budgeting 616 E. Green Street, Suite 213 Champaign, IL 61820 Phone: (217) 333-4895 Fax: (217) 265-0454 E-mail: bernies at uillinois.edu From Chaomei.Chen at CIS.DREXEL.EDU Tue May 31 14:54:00 2005 From: Chaomei.Chen at CIS.DREXEL.EDU (Chaomei Chen) Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 14:54:00 -0400 Subject: Bibliometric analsysis of the development of a given subject area? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: CiteSpace could be useful for you. It is freely available software (pure Java). It takes data in ISI Export format as input and generates networks of cited papers and terms based on how you slice a time interval. http://cluster.cis.drexel.edu/~cchen/citespace/ Best wishes, Chaomei Chen ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics wrote on 05/31/2005 01:27:51 PM: > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > Can someone recommend a few exemplary papers dealing with the > bibliometric analysis of the development of the literature in a given > subject area? > > I'd like to take an historical look at the development of the literature > in an area that has only really been around for 15 years or so, with > most of the publication occurring in the past ten years, especially the > past five years. And I'd specifically like to do it using data from the > ISI databases. > > Sorry to sound so vague, but it's only a general idea for me right now. > I'd just like to see what others have done with other subject areas. > > Thanks! > > Bernie Sloan > Senior Library Information Systems Consultant, ILCSO > University of Illinois Office for Planning and Budgeting > 616 E. Green Street, Suite 213 > Champaign, IL 61820 > > Phone: (217) 333-4895 > Fax: (217) 265-0454 > E-mail: bernies at uillinois.edu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: