From isidro at CINDOC.CSIC.ES Fri Nov 4 03:44:50 2005 From: isidro at CINDOC.CSIC.ES (Isidro F. Aguillo) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2005 09:44:50 +0100 Subject: New paper in Cybermetrics: Baeza Yates et al., Characteristics ofthe Web of Spain In-Reply-To: <200009251706.NAA30175@infomed.sld.cu> Message-ID: Characteristics of the Web of Spain Ricardo Baeza-Yates, Carlos Castillo, Vicente L?pez E-mail: ricardo.baeza at upf.edu Cybermetrics, Vol. 9 (2005): Issue 1. Paper 3 http://www.cindoc.csic.es/cybermetrics/articles/v9i1p3.html The Web is a massive and interlinked collection of documents, built using a decentralized design to encourage the participation of many authors who publish information through a huge number of Web sites. Its characteristics are the result of the interaction between many organizations and individuals, and those interactions generate a large amount of diversity. This diversity means that several different topics are represented on the Web, and at the same time that the overall quality of pages and Web sites is very variable. The Web is very dynamic and is growing at a very fast pace, and even when some of its properties have been studied, there are several characteristics of it that are still not fully known. This article reports the results of an in-depth study over a large collection of Web pages. On September and October 2004 we downloaded more than 16 million Web pages from about 300,000 Web sites from the Web of Spain. We show the characteristics of this collection at three different granularity levels: Web pages, sites and domains. For each level, we analyze contents, links, and technologies, and present statistics and models. We found that some of the characteristics of this collection resemble the ones of the Web at large, while others are specific to the Web of Spain, or have not been studied in the past. *************************************** Isidro F. Aguillo isidro at cindoc.csic.es Ph:(+34) 91-5635482 ext. 313 InternetLab. CINDOC-CSIC Joaquin Costa, 22 28002 Madrid. SPAIN http://www.webometrics.info http://www.cindoc.csic.es/cybermetrics http://internetlab.cindoc.csic.es **************************************** From eugene.garfield at THOMSON.COM Tue Nov 8 12:17:23 2005 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSON.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 12:17:23 -0500 Subject: Moed HF "Statistical relationships between downloads and citations at the level of individual documents within a single journal " JASIST 56(10):1088-1097, August 2005 Message-ID: Henk F. Moed : moed at cwts.leidenuniv.nl Author(s): Moed, HF Title: Statistical relationships between downloads and citations at the level of individual documents within a single journal Source: JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 56 (10): 1088-1097 AUG 2005 Language: English Document Type: Article Abstract: Statistical relationships between downloads from ScienceDirect of documents in Elsevier's electronic journal Tetrahedron Letters and citations to these documents recorded in journals processed by the Institute for Scientific Information/Thomson Scientific for the Science Citation Index (SCI) are examined. A synchronous approach revealed that downloads and citations show different patterns of obsolescence of the used materials. The former can be adequately described by a model consisting of the sum of two negative exponential functions, representing an ephemeral and a residual factor, whereas the decline phase of the latter conforms to a simple exponential function with a decay constant statistically similar to that of the downloads residual factor. A diachronous approach showed that, as a cohort of documents grows older, its download distribution becomes more and more skewed, and more statistically similar to its citation distribution. A method is proposed to estimate the effect of citations upon downloads using obsolescence patterns. It was found that during the first 3 months after an article is cited, its number of downloads increased 25% compared to what one would expect this number to be if the article had not been cited. Moreover, more downloads of citing documents led to more downloads of the cited article through the citation. An analysis of 1,190 papers in the journal during a time interval of 2 years after publication date revealed that there is about one citation for every 100 downloads. A Spearman rank correlation coefficient of 0.22 was found between the number of times an article was downloaded and its citation rate recorded in the SCI. When initial down loads-defined as downloads made during the first 3 months after publication-were discarded, the correlation raised to 0.35. However, both outcomes measure the joint effect of downloads upon citation and that of citation upon downloads. Correlating initial downloads to later citation counts, the correlation coefficient drops to 0.11. Findings suggest that initial downloads and citations relate to distinct phases in the process of collecting and processing relevant scientific information that eventually leads to the publication of a journal article. Addresses: Leiden Univ, Ctr Sci & Technol Studies, NL-2300 RB Leiden, Netherlands Reprint Address: Moed, HF, Leiden Univ, Ctr Sci & Technol Studies, POB 9555, NL-2300 RB Leiden, Netherlands. E-mail Address: moed at cwts.leidenuniv.nl Cited References: BRODY T, 2002, HT 02 13 ACM C HYP. GARFIELD E, 1979, CITATION INDEXING. GARVEY WD, 1971, AM PSYCHOL, V26, P349. HARNAD S, 2003, MANDATED ONLINE RAE. HICKMAN I, 2000, MINING SOCIAL LIFE E. HITCHCOCK S, 2002, OPEN CITATION LINKIN. HITCHCOCK S, 2003, IMPACT OAI BASED SEA. MOED HF, 1998, J DOC, V54, P387. PARKER RH, 1982, J AM SOC INFORM SCI, V33, P129. Times Cited: 0 Publisher: JOHN WILEY & SONS INC Publisher Address: 111 RIVER ST, HOBOKEN, NJ 07030 USA ISSN: 1532-2882 ISI Document Delivery No.: 946WK From eugene.garfield at THOMSON.COM Tue Nov 8 12:38:54 2005 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSON.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 12:38:54 -0500 Subject: Vaughan L. Shaw D. "Web citation data for impact assessment: A comparison of four science disciplines " JASIST 56(10): 1075-1087, Aug. 2005. Message-ID: Author(s): Vaughan, L; Shaw, D Title: Web citation data for impact assessment: A comparison of four science disciplines Source: JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 56 (10): 1075-1087 AUG 2005 Language: English Document Type: Article Abstract: The number and type of Web citations to journal articles in four areas of science are examined: biology, genetics, medicine, and multidisciplinary sciences. For a sample of 5,972 articles published in 114 journals, the median Web citation counts per journal article range from 6.2 in medicine to 10.4 in genetics. About 30% of Web citations in each area indicate intellectual impact (citations from articles or class readings, in contrast to citations from bibliographic services or the author's or journal's home page). Journals receiving more Web citations also have higher percentages of citations indicating intellectual impact. There is significant correlation between the number of citations reported in the databases from the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI, now Thomson Scientific) and the number of citations retrieved using the Google search engine (Web citations). The correlation is much weaker for journals published outside the United Kingdom or United States and for multidisciplinary journals. Web citation numbers are higher than ISI citation counts, suggesting that Web searches might be conducted for an earlier or a more fine-grained assessment of an article's impact. The Web- evident impact of non-UK/USA publications might provide a balance to the geographic or cultural biases observed in ISI's data, although the stability of Web citation counts is debatable. Addresses: Univ Western Ontario, Fac Informat & Media Studies, London, ON N6A 5B7, Canada; Indiana Univ, Sch Lib & Informat Sci, Bloomington, IN 47405 USA Reprint Address: Vaughan, L, Univ Western Ontario, Fac Informat & Media Studies, London, ON N6A 5B7, Canada. E-mail Address: lvaughan at uwo.ca; shawd at indiana.edu Cited References: *THOMPS SCI, 2002, J CIT REP. *THOMPS SCI, 2005, ISI J CIT REP TUT VE. *UNISIST, 1971, STUD REP FEAS WORLD. ACKERSON LG, COLL RES LIB, V64, P468. BAIGET T, 2004, VALPARAISO DECLARATI. BARILAN J, 2001, P 8 INT C SCIENT INF, P63. BARILAN J, 2004, ANNU REV INFORM SCI, V38, P231. BORGMAN CL, 2002, ANNU REV INFORM SCI, V36, P3. BOWKER RR, 2004, ULRICHS PERIODICAL D. BROWNSYED C, 1999, EHITS TENURE OPEN LI. CETINA KK, 1999, EPISTEMIC CULTURES S. CRONIN B, 1998, J AM SOC INFORM SCI, V49, P1319. CRONIN B, 1999, J AM SOC INFORM SCI, V50, P953. CRONIN B, 2001, J INFORM SCI, V27, P1. CRONIN B, 2003, M ASS RES LIB WASH D. EGGHE L, 2000, J INFORM SCI, V26, P329. GARFIELD E, 2001, NATURE, V411, P522. GARVEY WD, 1972, INFORMATION STORAGE, V8, P123. GIBBS WW, 1995, SCI AM, V273, P92. HYLAND K, 2000, DISCIPLINARY DISCOUR. HYLAND K, 2003, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V54, P251. KLING R, 1997, TYPOLOGY ELECT J CHA. KLING R, 2000, J AM SOC INFORM SCI, V51, P1306. KLING R, 2004, ANNU REV INFORM SCI, V38, P591. KRETSCHMER H, 2004, COLLNET 1, P150. LATOUR B, 1986, LAB LIFE CONSTRUCTIO. NISONGER TE, 2004, COLL RES LIBR, V65, P152. NOTESS GR, 2003, SEARCH ENGINE STAT R. OGLES J, 2004, KERRY GOOGLE BOMBED. ROUSSEAU R, 2002, DAILY TIME SERIES CO. SINHA S, 2001, ANN LIB SCI DOCUMENT, V47, P63. SLOAN B, 2001, PERSONAL CITATION IN. SMITH AG, 2004, WEB LINKS ANALOGUES. SNYDER H, 1999, J DOC, V55, P375. SUBER P, 2004, TIMELINE OPEN ACCESS. SULLIVAN D, 2003, MAJOR SEARCH ENGINES. THELWALL M, 2001, RESPONSIVENESS SEARC. THELWALL M, 2003, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V54, P594. THELWALL M, 2003, ONLINE INFORM REV, V27, P333. THELWALL M, 2004, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V55, P149. THELWALL M, 2005, REV INF SCI TECHNOLO, V39, P81. VAN KD, 2003, ESIS PUBL, V31, P3. VANLEEUWEN TN, 2001, SCIENTOMETRICS, V51, P335. VAUGHAN L, 2002, ASLIB PROC, V54, P356. VAUGHAN L, 2003, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V54, P1313. VAUGHAN L, 2003, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V54, P29. VAUGHAN L, 2004, INFORM PROCESS MANAG, V40, P677. VAUGHAN L, 2004, P ANN M AM SOC INF S, P516. WELLER AC, 1996, PRINT ELECT TRANSFOR, P35. WILSON T, 2002, WEB CITATION POSTING. Cited Reference Count: 50 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: JOHN WILEY & SONS INC Publisher Address: 111 RIVER ST, HOBOKEN, NJ 07030 USA ISSN: 1532-2882 ISI Document Delivery No.: 946WK From eugene.garfield at THOMSON.COM Tue Nov 8 13:57:59 2005 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSON.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 13:57:59 -0500 Subject: Lehrl S. "The citation frequency for prominent researchers in German otorhinolaryngology over 10 years " HNO, 53 (5): 415-422 MAY 2005 Message-ID: E-mail : S. Lehrl : siegfried.lehrl at psych.imed.uni-erlangen.de Author(s): Lehrl, S Title: The citation frequency for prominent researchers in German otorhinolaryngology over 10 years Source: HNO, 53 (5): 415-422 MAY 2005 Language: German Document Type: Review Cited Reference Count: 27 Times Cited: 0 Abstract: Background. In 1995, 18 scientists involved in research on otorhinolaryngology in Germany (median of age 55 years; one woman) entered the Who is Who of German medical research because of their top citation rates in the worldwide Science Citation Index (SCI). Their publications were cited about 12 times as often as those colleagues with an habilitation or professorship. Are their publications equally important in International research activity 10 years later? Methods. Investigations were carried out using SCI 2002. Results. Seventeen if the former stars still publish from Germany. Their total citation rate has remained almost unchanged. Conclusions: The stability and the large individual differences in citation rates indicate that a personal dimension is present, here called "research talent", i.e. the ability to produce research of high quality. Internationally highly successful researchers research their maximum productivity at about 40 years of age and maintain it even after official retirement. Therefore, there is little risk in promoting them and their projects. Moreover, they serve as examples for their colleagues and the rising scientific generation on how to do internationally successful research. Addresses: Univ Erlangen Nurnberg, Klin Psychiat & Psychotherapie, Bereich Med Psychol & Med Soziol, D-91054 Erlangen, Germany Reprint Address: Lehrl, S, Univ Erlangen Nurnberg, Klin Psychiat & Psychotherapie, Bereich Med Psychol & Med Soziol, Schwabachanlage 6, D- 91054 Erlangen, Germany. E-mail Address: siegfried.lehrl at psych.imed.uni-erlangen.de Cited References: *DTSCH HOCHSCH, 2001, HOCHSCH, V1. *FOCUS, 1993, 1000 BEST ARZT. *HOCH, 1994, HOCHSCH VERZ, V1. *I SCI INF, SCI CIT IND SCI. ACKERMAN PL, 1996, INTELLIGENCE, V22, P227. CALLAHAM M, 2002, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V287, P2447. CANO V, 1991, SCIENTOMETRICS, V22, P297. COLE JR, 2001, SOCIAL STRATIFICATIO. DESOLLA PD, 1974, LITTLE SCI BIG SCI. ELL C, 1997, Z GASTROENTEROL, V35, P23. ENDLER NS, 1987, CANAD PSYCHOL PSYCHO, V28, P148. KING J, 1987, J INFORM SCI, V13, P261. LAWANI SM, 1986, SCIENTOMETRICS, V9, P13. LEE JD, 2003, SCIENTOMETRICS, V56, P223. LEHRL S, 1993, FORSCHUNGSQUALITAT D. LEHRL S, 1995, FUHRENDEN MEDIZINFOR. LEHRL S, 1995, FUHRENDEN MEDIZINFOR, S12. LEHRL S, 1997, MED PUBLIZISTIK PROB, S108. MAIER H, 1999, J GERONTOL B-PSYCHOL, V54, P44. MAY RM, 1997, SCIENCE, V275, P793. MEENEN NM, 1997, UNFALLCHIRURG, V23, P128. MORAVCSIK MJ, 1975, SOC STUD SCI, V5, P86. NEDERHOF AJ, 1987, SCIENTOMETRICS, V11, P333. PLOMP R, 1994, SCIENTOMETRICS, V29, P377. RENZULLI JS, 1978, PHI DELTA KAPPAN, V60, P180. SEGLEN PO, 1994, J AM SOC INFORM SCI, V45, P1. STEPHAN PE, 1996, J ECON LIT, V34, P1199. Publisher: SPRINGER Publisher Address: 233 SPRING STREET, NEW YORK, NY 10013 USA ISSN: 0017-6192 ISI Document Delivery No.: 930FA From Christina.Pikas at JHUAPL.EDU Tue Nov 8 14:03:00 2005 From: Christina.Pikas at JHUAPL.EDU (Pikas, Christina K.) Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 14:03:00 -0500 Subject: Newbie/outsider question on software available to assist visualization of co-citation? Message-ID: Hi All- I find that I'm unable to sit quietly and lurk on the list so I hope you'll forgive this question (and maybe answer it!). I'm trying to visualize who's citing whom between two specific organizations (not within a topic). I've searched on addresses in WoS and retrieved relevant records and I've been playing with Dr. Chaomei Chen's CiteSpace program to visualize the results. My questions: 1) should it take ~hours to download 100 records with all the options checked? 2) is there another program I should try to compare (freely available and no programming required)? 3) can I do this between organizations, or only between people? In other words, I've got two files in the folder, one from University A, one from University B. The results are displayed, but I either have to recognize the names or ? Ideally, I'd like to see the citation relationships between authors belonging to about 10 institutions. Does this make sense? Do I have to learn to program and make my own? Is this the wrong forum for this question? Thanks, Christina K. Pikas, MLS (and Doctoral student, University of Maryland) From Chaomei.Chen at CIS.DREXEL.EDU Tue Nov 8 15:23:08 2005 From: Chaomei.Chen at CIS.DREXEL.EDU (Chaomei Chen) Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 15:23:08 -0500 Subject: Newbie/outsider question on software available to assist visualization of co-citation? Message-ID: Hi Christina, CiteSpace gives you co-citation, co-term, co-author, etc. meaning both X and Y are cited by some Z, both X and Y appear as authors of an article, both terms appear in the same abstract, ... These concepts are different from X cites Y. Gene Garfield's HistCite gives you directed citing graphs, which sound what you want. You should be able to download 100 records less than a couple of minutes. Best wishes, Chaomei Chen Drexel University > >Hi All- >I find that I'm unable to sit quietly and lurk on the list so I hope >you'll forgive this question (and maybe answer it!). > >I'm trying to visualize who's citing whom between two specific >organizations (not within a topic). I've searched on addresses in >WoS >and retrieved relevant records and I've been playing with Dr. >Chaomei >Chen's CiteSpace program to visualize the results. > >My questions: >1) should it take ~hours to download 100 records with all the >options >checked? >2) is there another program I should try to compare (freely >available >and no programming required)? >3) can I do this between organizations, or only between people? In >other words, I've got two files in the folder, one from University >A, >one from University B. The results are displayed, but I either have >to >recognize the names or ? Ideally, I'd like to see the citation >relationships between authors belonging to about 10 institutions. > > >Does this make sense? Do I have to learn to program and make my >own? >Is this the wrong forum for this question? > >Thanks, > >Christina K. Pikas, MLS (and Doctoral student, University of >Maryland) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET Wed Nov 9 02:37:21 2005 From: loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET (Loet Leydesdorff) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 08:37:21 +0100 Subject: Newbie/outsider question on software available to assist visualization of co-citation? In-Reply-To: <934BB0B6D8A02C42BC6099FDE8149CCD05F911@aplesjustice.dom1.jhuapl.edu> Message-ID: Dear Christina, You may wish to look at Pajek, a (freeware) visualization program made by colleagues at the University of Ljubljana. You can feed the citation matrix into the program and get a graph (but not a bi-drectional one, that is, with two arrows). However, Chaomei Chen's program is probably superior to this. I use Pajek for other purposes (at http://www.leydesdorff.net/jcr04 ). There is another program called Tobler's flow mapping freely available on the internet that allows for drawing bi-directional graphs from asymmetrical matrices. I haven't explored it. The results seem very precisely what one would like to have. The download itself is a piece of cake. The parsing processing of the files thereafter into a citation matrix may a bit more difficult. With best wishes, Loet _____ Loet Leydesdorff 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/ The Knowledge-Based Economy: Modeled, Measured, and Simulated The Self-Organization of the Knowledge-Based Society; The Challenge of Scientometrics > -----Original Message----- > From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics > [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Pikas, Christina K. > Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2005 8:03 PM > To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU > Subject: [SIGMETRICS] Newbie/outsider question on software > available to assist visualization of co-citation? > > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > Hi All- > I find that I'm unable to sit quietly and lurk on the list so > I hope you'll forgive this question (and maybe answer it!). > > I'm trying to visualize who's citing whom between two > specific organizations (not within a topic). I've searched on > addresses in WoS and retrieved relevant records and I've been > playing with Dr. Chaomei Chen's CiteSpace program to > visualize the results. > > My questions: > 1) should it take ~hours to download 100 records with all the > options checked? > 2) is there another program I should try to compare (freely > available and no programming required)? > 3) can I do this between organizations, or only between > people? In other words, I've got two files in the folder, > one from University A, one from University B. The results > are displayed, but I either have to recognize the names or ? > Ideally, I'd like to see the citation relationships between > authors belonging to about 10 institutions. > > > Does this make sense? Do I have to learn to program and make my own? > Is this the wrong forum for this question? > > Thanks, > > Christina K. Pikas, MLS (and Doctoral student, University of Maryland) > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JWS at DB.DK Wed Nov 9 03:24:58 2005 From: JWS at DB.DK (Jesper Wiborg Schneider) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 09:24:58 +0100 Subject: SV: [SIGMETRICS] Newbie/outsider question on software available t o assist visualization of co-citation? Message-ID: Dear Christina; Olle Persson's Bibexcel software is able to perform the tasks you want. You can download it www.umu.se/inforsk/Bibexcel/ You can use the "Citation among docs" command in the "Analyze" menu of the program. There is a help file that will explain the procedure. Please feel free to contact me off the the SIGMETRICS list if you have any problems. Kind Regards - Jesper ********************************************** Jesper Wiborg Schneider, PhD, Assistant Professor Department of Information Studies Royal School of Library & Information Science Sohng?rdsholmsvej 2, DK-9000 Aalborg, DENMARK Tel. +45 98773041, Fax. +45 98151042 E-mail: jws at db.dk Homepage:http://www2.db.dk/jws/home_dk.htm ********************************************** -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: Pikas, Christina K. [mailto:Christina.Pikas at JHUAPL.EDU] Sendt: 8. november 2005 20:03 Til: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Emne: [SIGMETRICS] Newbie/outsider question on software available to assist visualization of co-citation? Hi All- I find that I'm unable to sit quietly and lurk on the list so I hope you'll forgive this question (and maybe answer it!). I'm trying to visualize who's citing whom between two specific organizations (not within a topic). I've searched on addresses in WoS and retrieved relevant records and I've been playing with Dr. Chaomei Chen's CiteSpace program to visualize the results. My questions: 1) should it take ~hours to download 100 records with all the options checked? 2) is there another program I should try to compare (freely available and no programming required)? 3) can I do this between organizations, or only between people? In other words, I've got two files in the folder, one from University A, one from University B. The results are displayed, but I either have to recognize the names or ? Ideally, I'd like to see the citation relationships between authors belonging to about 10 institutions. Does this make sense? Do I have to learn to program and make my own? Is this the wrong forum for this question? Thanks, Christina K. Pikas, MLS (and Doctoral student, University of Maryland) From subbiah_a at YAHOO.COM Wed Nov 9 11:19:50 2005 From: subbiah_a at YAHOO.COM (Subbiah Arunachalam) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 16:19:50 +0000 Subject: Fifty years of citation indexing - Current Science Message-ID: Friends: Subject: Special Section in Current Science on 50 years of Citation Indexing Current Science dated 10th November 2005 has come out (saw it on the web about an hour back) and contains a Special Section on "50 Years of Citation Indexing". You can see it on the web at http://www.ias.ac.in/currsci/nov102005/contents.htm It contains ten articles on various aspects of citation indexing, its origins, present status, WOS and its competitiors and a colour advertisement on WOS. The articles are interesting not only to know the developments of WOS, Garfield's views on various issues pertaining to indexing and his seminal papers published in 1955 in "Science". Arun, a long-time friend and associate of Gene Garfield, who put together this special section, has contributed a short introduction ("In this issue"). Please spread the word. Happy reading. With best wishes A Ratnakar New Delhi ___________________________________________________________ How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com From suarezbc03 at YAHOO.ES Wed Nov 9 11:39:43 2005 From: suarezbc03 at YAHOO.ES (Carlos Suarez) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 17:39:43 +0100 Subject: Newbie/outsider question on software available to assist visualization of co-citation? In-Reply-To: <934BB0B6D8A02C42BC6099FDE8149CCD05F911@aplesjustice.dom1.jhuapl.edu> Message-ID: Dear Christina - in addition to the suggestions that you have already received, perhaps you could find useful the SITKIS tool (freeware) from Henri Schildt, Helsinki University of Technology (http://users.tkk.fi/%7Ehschildt/sitkis/) best regards Carlos "Pikas, Christina K." escribi?: Hi All- I find that I'm unable to sit quietly and lurk on the list so I hope you'll forgive this question (and maybe answer it!). I'm trying to visualize who's citing whom between two specific organizations (not within a topic). I've searched on addresses in WoS and retrieved relevant records and I've been playing with Dr. Chaomei Chen's CiteSpace program to visualize the results. My questions: 1) should it take ~hours to download 100 records with all the options checked? 2) is there another program I should try to compare (freely available and no programming required)? 3) can I do this between organizations, or only between people? In other words, I've got two files in the folder, one from University A, one from University B. The results are displayed, but I either have to recognize the names or ? Ideally, I'd like to see the citation relationships between authors belonging to about 10 institutions. Does this make sense? Do I have to learn to program and make my own? Is this the wrong forum for this question? Thanks, Christina K. Pikas, MLS (and Doctoral student, University of Maryland) 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. 3995 | 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 gwhitney at UTK.EDU Thu Nov 10 20:53:06 2005 From: gwhitney at UTK.EDU (Gretchen Whitney) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 20:53:06 -0500 Subject: authors read national literatures? Message-ID: greetings all, I have a vague recollection that a study (or studies) reported, perhaps by analysis of lists of references in documents, that scientists primarily read their national literatures, and did not stray frequently into the literatures of other countries. Is there any evidence of this? Does this sound familiar to anyone? What might I have read? This could be as old as some studies out of psychology in the 1970s. I'm doing a study of a subset of MEDLINE through DIALOG, and I'd like to be able to assert that the values in the CP (country of publication) field reflect what scientists in a given country READ, and the values in the CS (author affiliation) field reflect what they experiment with and WRITE. By analysis of these fields and titles/subjects, this assertion seems to be supported because there is consitency in values regarding therapies explored/supported/promoted from both fields. In other words, there is consistency in both that enable me to assert that country x is exploring y therapy, as opposed to country w exploring z therapy. Is there literature out there that supports the idea that scientists, particularly physicians, read their national literatures predominantly, and write in those intellectual domains? I've already tried Tenopir/King, and it wasn't them. Any help would be greatly appreciated. --gw <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> Gretchen Whitney, PhD tel 865.974.7919 School of Information Sciences fax 865.974.4967 University of Tennessee, Knoxville TN 37996 USA gwhitney at utk.edu http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/ jESSE:http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/jesse.html SIGMETRICS:http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> From harnad at ECS.SOTON.AC.UK Mon Nov 14 08:19:18 2005 From: harnad at ECS.SOTON.AC.UK (Stevan Harnad) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 13:19:18 +0000 Subject: DASER II Summit: Institutional Repositories and Open Access Message-ID: ** Apologies for multiple posting ** DASER-2's theme is: Open Access and Institutional Repositories http://www.daser.org/program.html University of Maryland, College Park MD 2-4 December 2005 Below is the summary of my own presentation: Institutional Repository (IR) Models: What Works (for Open Access, OA) and What Doesn't Stevan Harnad Canada Research Chair Universit? de Qu?bec ? Montr?al and University of Southampton, UK SUMMARY: Born under the influence of the Open Access (OA) movement, Institutional Repositories (IRs) for digital content are now all the rage; but whether or not they work depends on their raison d'etre. There are many things one can do with an IR. One can use it for content management, preservation, internal data-sharing, record-keeping; the content itself can be anything digital, whether courseware, "gray literature," multimedia, in-house publishing, or even bought-in 3rd-party content. None of this has anything whatsoever to do with OA, however. OA is about maximizing accessibility to institutional peer-reviewed research output in order to maximize its research impact (25%-250% of it lost if non-OA), thereby maximizing institutional research productivity and progress (and prestige and research revenue). OA content in IRs is so far very low (averaging less than 15% of annual research output) -- partly because OA has been eclipsed by the many other items on the IR wish-list, partly because even where it is the only item, wishing is not enough: not if librarians wish it, not even if researchers wish it. The two international UK JISC surveys have shown clearly exactly what is needed to fill IRs with their annual OA content: An extension of institutions' and research funders' "publish or perish" mandate to: "publish but also self-archive in your IR". The 5 institutions that so far have such a mandate (CERN, U. Southampton ECS, U. Minho, Queensland U. Tech, and U. Zurich) are well on their way to 100% OA. After a crashing failure by NIH to mandate immediate OA self-archiving, and a halting half-step by the Wellcome Trust (6-month embargo), Research Councils UK (RCUK) looks poised to do the right thing at last, and once it does, the rest of the world's research funders and institutions will follow suit. The race is now to the swift, the battle to the strong, for the 25%-250% OA impact advantage is partly a competitive advantage. JISC Surveys: http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/11005/ OA Impact Advantage: http://www.crsc.uqam.ca/lab/chawki/graphes/EtudeImpact.htm Institutional Policies: http://www.eprints.org/openaccess/policysignup/ Institutional Archives: http://archives.eprints.org/ (offline because of fire) RCUK Policy Proposal: http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/access/index.asp Prior AmSci Threads: "EPrints, DSpace or ESpace?" (started Feb 2003) http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/2671.html http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/2838.html http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/2855.html http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/3211.html http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/3598.html http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/4516.html Stevan Harnad AMERICAN SCIENTIST OPEN ACCESS FORUM: A complete Hypermail archive of the ongoing discussion of providing open access to the peer-reviewed research literature online (1998-2005) is available at: http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/ To join or leave the Forum or change your subscription address: http://amsci-forum.amsci.org/archives/American-Scientist-Open-Access-Forum.html Post discussion to: american-scientist-open-access-forum at amsci.org UNIVERSITIES: If you have adopted or plan to adopt an institutional policy of providing Open Access to your own research article output, please describe your policy at: http://www.eprints.org/signup/sign.php UNIFIED DUAL OPEN-ACCESS-PROVISION POLICY: BOAI-1 ("green"): Publish your article in a suitable toll-access journal http://romeo.eprints.org/ OR BOAI-2 ("gold"): Publish your article in a open-access journal if/when a suitable one exists. http://www.doaj.org/ AND in BOTH cases self-archive a supplementary version of your article in your institutional repository. http://www.eprints.org/self-faq/ http://archives.eprints.org/ http://openaccess.eprints.org/ From loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET Wed Nov 16 01:52:51 2005 From: loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET (Loet Leydesdorff) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 07:52:51 +0100 Subject: The Chronicle, 18 November 2005 Message-ID: Journals maps and local impact factors Comment on: Richard Monastersky, The Number That's Devouring Science, Chronicle of Higher Education, October 14, 2005 Monasterky's article lists a number of problems with the ISI-impact factor. However, he fails to mention that the average impact factors vary among fields of science. For example, impact factors in toxicology are considerably lower than in immunology. This may be contributing to the concern over the use of these types of measures. Furthermore, Bensman recently showed that more than with the impact factor faculty usage and appreciation of journals correlates with the total citations given to a journal. Citations can be considered a measure of a journal's prestige, while the impact factors follow the development of the fields at the frontiers of research. A fix to these problems might be a discipline-specific impact factor. However, unambiguous clustering of the aggregated journal-journal citation matrix into disciplines and specialties is impossible because the various subsets overlap for very different reasons such as communalities in the subject matter, methods, nationality, language, type of publisher or purpose. Each journal has its own unique environment created in the acts of citing and being-cited. Journals also differ in terms of their within-journal ("self-citation") rates. These challenges recently led me to take a different tact. Using ISI's Journal Citation Reports, I created the raw materials to make maps of the citation neighborhoods of all the journals. The freeware program Pajek can be used for the visualization. Clustering algorithms are available within Pajek for differently colouring the visualizations; the input files are available at http://users.fmg.uva.nl/lleydesdorff/jcr04 . The contributions to the total number of citations in this local environment can be considered as a local impact factor. This local impact can additionally be corrected for within-journal citations. I used the horizontal axis of the node for this corrected local impact, while the vertical axis is used for the local impact including self-citations. All values are expressed as percentages in order to control for differences in citation behaviour among fields. The advantages of this local impact factor are that (1) the normalization on the total citations in the relevant citation environment is more indicative of the intellectual status of a journal than an average normalized over the number of publications like the impact factor of ISI; (2) the evaluation can be made for each journal in the ISI-set and related to the journal's specific citation environment; (3) the correction for within-journal citations is available both numerically and from the visualizations. Furthermore, this information is freely available on the internet. _____ Loet Leydesdorff 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/ The Knowledge-Based Economy: Modeled, Measured, and Simulated The Self-Organization of the Knowledge-Based Society; The Challenge of Scientometrics -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Christina.Pikas at JHUAPL.EDU Wed Nov 16 08:48:26 2005 From: Christina.Pikas at JHUAPL.EDU (Pikas, Christina K.) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 08:48:26 -0500 Subject: Newbie/outsider question on software available to assist visualization of co-citation? Message-ID: I just wanted to thank everyone again for all of the suggestions! I'm trying the various programs and learning a lot. Thank you also for making your programs available on the web. What a great community! Christina Pikas Administrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html Hi All- I find that I'm unable to sit quietly and lurk on the list so I hope you'll forgive this question (and maybe answer it!). I'm trying to visualize who's citing whom between two specific organizations (not within a topic). I've searched on addresses in WoS and retrieved relevant records and I've been playing with Dr. Chaomei Chen's CiteSpace program to visualize the results. My questions: 1) should it take ~hours to download 100 records with all the options checked? 2) is there another program I should try to compare (freely available and no programming required)? 3) can I do this between organizations, or only between people? In other words, I've got two files in the folder, one from University A, one from University B. The results are displayed, but I either have to recognize the names or ? Ideally, I'd like to see the citation relationships between authors belonging to about 10 institutions. Does this make sense? Do I have to learn to program and make my own? Is this the wrong forum for this question? Thanks, Christina K. Pikas, MLS (and Doctoral student, University of Maryland) From notsjb at LSU.EDU Wed Nov 16 09:41:31 2005 From: notsjb at LSU.EDU (Stephen J Bensman) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 08:41:31 -0600 Subject: The Chronicle, 18 November 2005 Message-ID: Since Loet has cited me, I should like to make some comments on Monastersky's article and some of my findings on impact factor. Monastersky interviewed me for that article, and, luckily for me, he did not directly quote me on some of the things I had to say about impact factor and academic evaluations. In general, I found his article to be unfair, since he concentrated on the shenanigans that are being played with impact factor and supposed errors of ISI in constructing impact factor. This makes for good copy but bad science. Even the title of his article is that of a grade B horror film like "The Blob That Ate New York." There are difficulties with impact factor, but these are not the result of editor's shenanigans and ISI mistakes. This would be obvious to anybody who has correlated ISI citations with other measures of importance such as peer ratings of academic programs. I have obtained correlations in the 0.9 range, showing that ISI citations are virtually the equivalent of peer ratings and have all the social biases of these ratings. ISI citations are not hard measures of quality but, in many respects, fuzzy outward manifestations of a social stratification system operative in the human mind. In using any citation measure you should be absolutely clear as to your goal in using them. Journal importance is a multifaceted phenomenon, and different citation measures will capture different facets of this importance. For example, I have always obtained much higher correlations of ISI total citations with expert ratings of journals, because both these measures are multidimensional and unlimited by elements of size and time. Therefore, ISI total citations captures the historical importance of journals, which is usually what scientists rate when asked to rank journals by importance. However, if I were to measure current importance, then I probably would use some form of impact factor within strictly defined journal types and disciplines so that, for example, chemistry research journals would be compared to chemistry research journals and chemistry review journals would be compared to chemistry review journals. As another example, if I were convinced that review articles are the epitome of scientific writing, then I would use the standard impact factor. One must always keep in mind that there facets of journal importance that cannot be captured by any citation measure but can be captured by other measures such as library use, number of library holdings, or surveys of users. In one respect Monastersky was right. The use of impact factor for purposes of academic evaluation is absolute madness as is any attempt to construct a single citation measure that would capture precisely all facets of journal importance. No citation measure should be used unless its characteristics have been explored by correlations with the results of opinion surveys of those persons whom the citation measure concerns. To do otherwise is dictatorial. I have ended my sermon for today. Steve B. Loet Leydesdorff @LISTSERV.UTK.EDU> on 11/16/2005 12852:51 AM Please respond to ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics Sent by: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU cc: (bcc: Stephen J Bensman/notsjb/LSU) Subject: [SIGMETRICS] The Chronicle, 18 November 2005 Journals maps and local impact factors Comment on: Richard Monastersky, The Number That?s Devouring Science, Chronicle of Higher Education, October 14, 2005 Monasterky?s article lists a number of problems with the ISI-impact factor. However, he fails to mention that the average impact factors vary among fields of science. For example, impact factors in toxicology are considerably lower than in immunology. This may be contributing to the concern over the use of these types of measures. Furthermore, Bensman recently showed that more than with the impact factor faculty usage and appreciation of journals correlates with the total citations given to a journal. Citations can be considered a measure of a journal?s prestige, while the impact factors follow the development of the fields at the frontiers of research. A fix to these problems might be a discipline-specific impact factor. However, unambiguous clustering of the aggregated journal-journal citation matrix into disciplines and specialties is impossible because the various subsets overlap for very different reasons such as communalities in the subject matter, methods, nationality, language, type of publisher or purpose. Each journal has its own unique environment created in the acts of citing and being-cited. Journals also differ in terms of their within-journal (?self-citation?) rates. These challenges recently led me to take a different tact. Using ISI?s Journal Citation Reports, I created the raw materials to make maps of the citation neighborhoods of all the journals. The freeware program Pajek can be used for the visualization. Clustering algorithms are available within Pajek for differently colouring the visualizations; the input files are available at http://users.fmg.uva.nl/lleydesdorff/jcr04 . The contributions to the total number of citations in this local environment can be considered as a local impact factor. This local impact can additionally be corrected for within-journal citations. I used the horizontal axis of the node for this corrected local impact, while the vertical axis is used for the local impact including self-citations. All values are expressed as percentages in order to control for differences in citation behaviour among fields. The advantages of this local impact factor are that (1) the normalization on the total citations in the relevant citation environment is more indicative of the intellectual status of a journal than an average normalized over the number of publications like the impact factor of ISI; (2) the evaluation can be made for each journal in the ISI-set and related to the journal?s specific citation environment; (3) the correction for within-journal citations is available both numerically and from the visualizations. Furthermore, this information is freely available on the internet. Loet Leydesdorff 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/ The Knowledge-Based Economy: Modeled, Measured, and Simulated The Self-Organization of the Knowledge-Based Society; The Challenge of Scientometrics From bernies at UILLINOIS.EDU Wed Nov 16 16:57:24 2005 From: bernies at UILLINOIS.EDU (Sloan, Bernie) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 15:57:24 -0600 Subject: The Chronicle, 18 November 2005 Message-ID: Just curious as to whether Steve and/or Loet are sending their reactions to the Chronicle? Bernie Sloan -----Original Message----- From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Stephen J Bensman Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 8:42 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] The Chronicle, 18 November 2005 Since Loet has cited me, I should like to make some comments on Monastersky's article and some of my findings on impact factor. Monastersky interviewed me for that article, and, luckily for me, he did not directly quote me on some of the things I had to say about impact factor and academic evaluations. In general, I found his article to be unfair, since he concentrated on the shenanigans that are being played with impact factor and supposed errors of ISI in constructing impact factor. This makes for good copy but bad science. Even the title of his article is that of a grade B horror film like "The Blob That Ate New York." There are difficulties with impact factor, but these are not the result of editor's shenanigans and ISI mistakes. This would be obvious to anybody who has correlated ISI citations with other measures of importance such as peer ratings of academic programs. I have obtained correlations in the 0.9 range, showing that ISI citations are virtually the equivalent of peer ratings and have all the social biases of these ratings. ISI citations are not hard measures of quality but, in many respects, fuzzy outward manifestations of a social stratification system operative in the human mind. In using any citation measure you should be absolutely clear as to your goal in using them. Journal importance is a multifaceted phenomenon, and different citation measures will capture different facets of this importance. For example, I have always obtained much higher correlations of ISI total citations with expert ratings of journals, because both these measures are multidimensional and unlimited by elements of size and time. Therefore, ISI total citations captures the historical importance of journals, which is usually what scientists rate when asked to rank journals by importance. However, if I were to measure current importance, then I probably would use some form of impact factor within strictly defined journal types and disciplines so that, for example, chemistry research journals would be compared to chemistry research journals and chemistry review journals would be compared to chemistry review journals. As another example, if I were convinced that review articles are the epitome of scientific writing, then I would use the standard impact factor. One must always keep in mind that there facets of journal importance that cannot be captured by any citation measure but can be captured by other measures such as library use, number of library holdings, or surveys of users. In one respect Monastersky was right. The use of impact factor for purposes of academic evaluation is absolute madness as is any attempt to construct a single citation measure that would capture precisely all facets of journal importance. No citation measure should be used unless its characteristics have been explored by correlations with the results of opinion surveys of those persons whom the citation measure concerns. To do otherwise is dictatorial. I have ended my sermon for today. Steve B. Loet Leydesdorff @LISTSERV.UTK.EDU> on 11/16/2005 12852:51 AM Please respond to ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics Sent by: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU cc: (bcc: Stephen J Bensman/notsjb/LSU) Subject: [SIGMETRICS] The Chronicle, 18 November 2005 Journals maps and local impact factors Comment on: Richard Monastersky, The Number That's Devouring Science, Chronicle of Higher Education, October 14, 2005 Monasterky's article lists a number of problems with the ISI-impact factor. However, he fails to mention that the average impact factors vary among fields of science. For example, impact factors in toxicology are considerably lower than in immunology. This may be contributing to the concern over the use of these types of measures. Furthermore, Bensman recently showed that more than with the impact factor faculty usage and appreciation of journals correlates with the total citations given to a journal. Citations can be considered a measure of a journal's prestige, while the impact factors follow the development of the fields at the frontiers of research. A fix to these problems might be a discipline-specific impact factor. However, unambiguous clustering of the aggregated journal-journal citation matrix into disciplines and specialties is impossible because the various subsets overlap for very different reasons such as communalities in the subject matter, methods, nationality, language, type of publisher or purpose. Each journal has its own unique environment created in the acts of citing and being-cited. Journals also differ in terms of their within-journal ("self-citation") rates. These challenges recently led me to take a different tact. Using ISI's Journal Citation Reports, I created the raw materials to make maps of the citation neighborhoods of all the journals. The freeware program Pajek can be used for the visualization. Clustering algorithms are available within Pajek for differently colouring the visualizations; the input files are available at http://users.fmg.uva.nl/lleydesdorff/jcr04 . The contributions to the total number of citations in this local environment can be considered as a local impact factor. This local impact can additionally be corrected for within-journal citations. I used the horizontal axis of the node for this corrected local impact, while the vertical axis is used for the local impact including self-citations. All values are expressed as percentages in order to control for differences in citation behaviour among fields. The advantages of this local impact factor are that (1) the normalization on the total citations in the relevant citation environment is more indicative of the intellectual status of a journal than an average normalized over the number of publications like the impact factor of ISI; (2) the evaluation can be made for each journal in the ISI-set and related to the journal's specific citation environment; (3) the correction for within-journal citations is available both numerically and from the visualizations. Furthermore, this information is freely available on the internet. Loet Leydesdorff 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/ The Knowledge-Based Economy: Modeled, Measured, and Simulated The Self-Organization of the Knowledge-Based Society; The Challenge of Scientometrics From eugene.garfield at THOMSON.COM Wed Nov 16 17:50:26 2005 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSON.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 17:50:26 -0500 Subject: Duque, RB; Ynalvez, M; Sooryamoorthy, R; Mbatia, P; Dzorgbo, DBS; Shrum, W "Collaboration paradox: Scientific productivity, the Internet, and problems of research in developing areas" Social Studies of Science , 35 (5): 755-785 OCT 2005 Message-ID: E-mail Address: R.B. Duque : rduque1 at lsu.edu M. Ynalvez : mynalv1 at lsu.edu R. Sooryamoorthy: sooryamoorthyr at ukzn.ac.za P.M. Batia : pmbatia2002 at yahoo.com DBS Dzorgbo : ddzorgbo at yahoo.co.uk W. Shrum : shrum at lsu.edu Author(s): Duque, RB; Ynalvez, M; Sooryamoorthy, R; Mbatia, P; Dzorgbo, DBS; Shrum, W Title: Collaboration paradox: Scientific productivity, the Internet, and problems of research in developing areas Source: SOCIAL STUDIES OF SCIENCE, 35 (5): 755-785 OCT 2005 Abstract: We examine the ways in which the research process differs in developed and developing areas by focusing on two questions. First, is collaboration associated with productivity? Second, is access to the Internet (specifically use of email) associated with reduced problems of collaboration? Recent analyses by Lee & Bozeman (2005) and Walsh & Maloney (2003) suggest affirmative answers to these questions for US scientists. Based on a comparative analysis of scientists in Ghana, Kenya, and the State of Kerala in south-western India (N 918), we find that: (1) collaboration is not associated with any general increment in productivity; and (2) while access to email does attenuate research problems, such difficulties are structured more by national and regional context than by the collaborative process itself. The interpretation of these results suggests a paradox that raises issues for future studies: those conditions that unsettle the relationship between collaboration and productivity in developing areas may undermine the collaborative benefits of new information and communication technologies. Reprint Address: Duque, RB, Louisiana State Univ, Dept Sociol, Baton Rouge, LA 70803 USA. E-mail Address: rduque1 at lsu.edu; mynalv1 at lsu.edu; sooryamoorthyr at ukzn.ac.za; pmbatia2002 at yahoo.com; ddzorgbo at yahoo.co.uk; shrum at lsu.edu Cited References: *EPW RES FDN, 1994, ECON POLIT WEEKLY, V29, P1300. ABBATE J, 1999, INVENTING INTERNET. ABELS EG, 1996, J AM SOC INFORM SCI, V47, P146. ADAM L, 1999, J INFORM SCI, V25, P307. BARKAN JD, 1998, J DEMOCR, V9, P32. BEAVER DD, 1978, SCIENTOMETRICS, V1, P64. BONACCORSI A, 2003, SCIENTOMETRICS, V58, P49. BORDONS M, 1996, SCIENTOMETRICS, V37, P279. BORDONS M, 2000, WEB KNOWLEDGE FESTSC, P197. BOUAS KS, 1996, COMPUTER SUPPORTED C, V4, P153. CAMPION P, 2004, SCI TECHNOL HUM VAL, V29, P459. CASTELS M, 2000, RISE NETWORK SOC. CLARKE M, 2003, 7 WORLD I DEV EC RES. DAVIDSON T, 2002, INTERNET EVERYDAY LI, P496. DESOLLA PDJ, 1963, LITTLE SCI BIG SCI. DIMAGGIO P, 2001, ANNU REV SOCIOL, V27, P307. DING Y, 1998, INT FORUM INFORM DOC, V23, P3. DZORGBO DBS, 2001, GHANA SEARCH DEV CHA. EHIKHAMENOR FA, 2003, J INFORM SCI, V29, P107. EISEMON TO, 1982, SCI PROFESSION 3 WOR. EISEMON TO, 1992, J ASIAN AFR STUD, V27, P68. ELLIS JJ, 2000, FOUNDING BROTHERS AM. ESCOBAR A, 1994, CURR ANTHROPOL, V35, P211. FINHOLT TA, 1997, PSYCHOL SCI, V8, P28. FRAME JD, 1979, SOC STUD SCI, V9, P481. FRANKE RW, 1994, KERALA RADICAL REFOR. GAILLARD J, 1991, SCI 3 WORLD. GAILLARD J, 1992, SCIENTOMETRICS, V23, P57. GALIMBERTI C, 2001, CYBERPSYCHOL BEHAV, V4, P131. GARG KC, 2000, SCIENTOMETRICS, V49, P359. GOEL K, 2002, SCIENTOMETRICS, V55, P243. GUPTA BM, 1999, SCIENTOMETRICS, V45, P269. IYER SR, 2000, SOCIAL DEV KERALA IL. JEFFREY R, 1992, POLITICS WOMEN WELL. JEONG HW, 1996, WORLD AFF, V159, P64. KATZ J, 1996, RES POLICY, V26, P1. KIESLER S, 2002, DISTRIBUTED WORK, P57. KING JL, 2002, DISTRIBUTED WORK, P3. KOKU E, 2001, AM BEHAV SCI, V44, P1752. KOKU EF, 2002, DESIGNING VIRTUAL CO, P299. KRISHNA VV, 1997, SCI COMMUNITIES DEV, P236. LEE S, 2005, SOC STUD SCI, V35, P673. MATHEW ET, 1995, ECON POLIT WEEKLY, V30, P325. MBARIKA V, 2002, COMMUN ACM, V45, P17. MELIN G, 2000, RES POLICY, V29, P31. MRUTHYUNJAYA, 1998, WORLD DEV, V26, P1089. MULLINS N, 1970, THEORIES THEORY GROU. PARAYIL G, 1996, THIRD WORLD Q, V17, P941. PARTHASARATHY A, 2001, HINDU 0827, P5. PRPIC K, 2002, SCIENTOMETRICS, V55, P27. QUANHAASE A, 2004, SOCIAL CAPITAL INFOR, P113. ROGERS EM, 1995, DIFFUSION INNOVATION. SHRUM W, 1997, KNOWLEDGE POLICY, V9, P62. SHRUM W, 1997, SCIENTOMETRICS, V40, P215. SHRUM W, 2000, SCI TECHNOLOGY SOC, V5, P1. SHRUM W, 2000, SOC STUD SCI, V30, P95. SHRUM W, 2005, SOC STUD SCI, V35, P723. UIMONEN P, 2001, TRANSNATIONAL DYNAMI. WALSH JP, 2003, UNPUB PROBLEMS SCI C. Times Cited: 2 Publisher: SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD Publisher Address: 1 OLIVERS YARD, 55 CITY ROAD, LONDON EC1Y 1SP, ENGLAND ISSN: 0306-3127 ISI Document Delivery No.: 974NI __________________________________________________ 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 From loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET Thu Nov 17 02:34:46 2005 From: loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET (Loet Leydesdorff) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 08:34:46 +0100 Subject: The Chronicle, 18 November 2005 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > Just curious as to whether Steve and/or Loet are sending > their reactions to the Chronicle? > > Bernie Sloan Sure, Bernie: it is a letter to the Editor which was printed in this week's issue. With best wishes, Loet ________________________________ Loet Leydesdorff 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/ From notsjb at LSU.EDU Thu Nov 17 12:22:13 2005 From: notsjb at LSU.EDU (Stephen J Bensman) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 11:22:13 -0600 Subject: The Chronicle, 18 November 2005 Message-ID: Not me. I have been engaged in writing review and research aritcles on impact factor over the last year as well as refereeing such articles, and I have been up to my eyeballs in impact factor battles. I do not need another one. Moreover, I do not like writing negative criticisms, although this is impossible when one is discussing how impact factor is being utilized. Unfortunately I have not been able to follow my mama's dictum: if you don't have anything good to say about somebody or something, don't say it. SB "Sloan, Bernie" @LISTSERV.UTK.EDU> on 11/16/2005 03:57:24 PM Please respond to ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics Sent by: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU cc: (bcc: Stephen J Bensman/notsjb/LSU) Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] The Chronicle, 18 November 2005 Just curious as to whether Steve and/or Loet are sending their reactions to the Chronicle? Bernie Sloan -----Original Message----- From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Stephen J Bensman Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 8:42 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] The Chronicle, 18 November 2005 Since Loet has cited me, I should like to make some comments on Monastersky's article and some of my findings on impact factor. Monastersky interviewed me for that article, and, luckily for me, he did not directly quote me on some of the things I had to say about impact factor and academic evaluations. In general, I found his article to be unfair, since he concentrated on the shenanigans that are being played with impact factor and supposed errors of ISI in constructing impact factor. This makes for good copy but bad science. Even the title of his article is that of a grade B horror film like "The Blob That Ate New York." There are difficulties with impact factor, but these are not the result of editor's shenanigans and ISI mistakes. This would be obvious to anybody who has correlated ISI citations with other measures of importance such as peer ratings of academic programs. I have obtained correlations in the 0.9 range, showing that ISI citations are virtually the equivalent of peer ratings and have all the social biases of these ratings. ISI citations are not hard measures of quality but, in many respects, fuzzy outward manifestations of a social stratification system operative in the human mind. In using any citation measure you should be absolutely clear as to your goal in using them. Journal importance is a multifaceted phenomenon, and different citation measures will capture different facets of this importance. For example, I have always obtained much higher correlations of ISI total citations with expert ratings of journals, because both these measures are multidimensional and unlimited by elements of size and time. Therefore, ISI total citations captures the historical importance of journals, which is usually what scientists rate when asked to rank journals by importance. However, if I were to measure current importance, then I probably would use some form of impact factor within strictly defined journal types and disciplines so that, for example, chemistry research journals would be compared to chemistry research journals and chemistry review journals would be compared to chemistry review journals. As another example, if I were convinced that review articles are the epitome of scientific writing, then I would use the standard impact factor. One must always keep in mind that there facets of journal importance that cannot be captured by any citation measure but can be captured by other measures such as library use, number of library holdings, or surveys of users. In one respect Monastersky was right. The use of impact factor for purposes of academic evaluation is absolute madness as is any attempt to construct a single citation measure that would capture precisely all facets of journal importance. No citation measure should be used unless its characteristics have been explored by correlations with the results of opinion surveys of those persons whom the citation measure concerns. To do otherwise is dictatorial. I have ended my sermon for today. Steve B. Loet Leydesdorff @LISTSERV.UTK.EDU> on 11/16/2005 12852:51 AM Please respond to ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics Sent by: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU cc: (bcc: Stephen J Bensman/notsjb/LSU) Subject: [SIGMETRICS] The Chronicle, 18 November 2005 Journals maps and local impact factors Comment on: Richard Monastersky, The Number That's Devouring Science, Chronicle of Higher Education, October 14, 2005 Monasterky's article lists a number of problems with the ISI-impact factor. However, he fails to mention that the average impact factors vary among fields of science. For example, impact factors in toxicology are considerably lower than in immunology. This may be contributing to the concern over the use of these types of measures. Furthermore, Bensman recently showed that more than with the impact factor faculty usage and appreciation of journals correlates with the total citations given to a journal. Citations can be considered a measure of a journal's prestige, while the impact factors follow the development of the fields at the frontiers of research. A fix to these problems might be a discipline-specific impact factor. However, unambiguous clustering of the aggregated journal-journal citation matrix into disciplines and specialties is impossible because the various subsets overlap for very different reasons such as communalities in the subject matter, methods, nationality, language, type of publisher or purpose. Each journal has its own unique environment created in the acts of citing and being-cited. Journals also differ in terms of their within-journal ("self-citation") rates. These challenges recently led me to take a different tact. Using ISI's Journal Citation Reports, I created the raw materials to make maps of the citation neighborhoods of all the journals. The freeware program Pajek can be used for the visualization. Clustering algorithms are available within Pajek for differently colouring the visualizations; the input files are available at http://users.fmg.uva.nl/lleydesdorff/jcr04 . The contributions to the total number of citations in this local environment can be considered as a local impact factor. This local impact can additionally be corrected for within-journal citations. I used the horizontal axis of the node for this corrected local impact, while the vertical axis is used for the local impact including self-citations. All values are expressed as percentages in order to control for differences in citation behaviour among fields. The advantages of this local impact factor are that (1) the normalization on the total citations in the relevant citation environment is more indicative of the intellectual status of a journal than an average normalized over the number of publications like the impact factor of ISI; (2) the evaluation can be made for each journal in the ISI-set and related to the journal's specific citation environment; (3) the correction for within-journal citations is available both numerically and from the visualizations. Furthermore, this information is freely available on the internet. Loet Leydesdorff 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/ The Knowledge-Based Economy: Modeled, Measured, and Simulated The Self-Organization of the Knowledge-Based Society; The Challenge of Scientometrics From harnad at ECS.SOTON.AC.UK Sun Nov 20 10:40:28 2005 From: harnad at ECS.SOTON.AC.UK (Stevan Harnad) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 15:40:28 +0000 Subject: Interoperable repositories: usage statistics (fwd) Message-ID: ** forwarding: apologies for cross-posting ** ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 06:47:43 -0000 From: Alma Swan To: AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM at LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG Subject: Interoperable repositories: usage statistics A major study is underway now to develop a pilot service to collect, analyse and feed back usage statistics for interoperable repositories worldwide. The project is funded by JISC in the UK, and is led by Dr Les Carr at Southampton University, in partnership with the University of Tasmania, Long Island University and Key Perspectives Ltd. The project outline is as follows: download data are being logged by every repository as a by-product of the Web requests they receive. These raw data are being turned into useful download statistics for individual papers and users by a few institutional repositories (e.g. University of Tasmania, Southampton University), thematic repositories (e.g. RePEc) and OAI services (e.g. Citebase). However, there is no consensus over what data need to be collected, what filtering mechanisms are appropriate, and what analyses are useful for academics in various disciplines. To create effective research statistics services, an interoperable usage statistics service will be created for all OAI-PMH-compliant repositories. This project will investigate the requirements for UK and international stakeholders and build generic collection and distribution software for all IRs. The approach will be demonstrated by a pilot statistics analysis service modelled as an OAI service provider. Working with partners experienced in analysis of usage statistics for electronic documents, and an international consultative committee of key OAI archive and service managers, the principal deliverables will be: - An API for gathering download data implemented for common IR platforms - A set of agreed standards defining the basis for measuring and reporting usage of materials deposited in IRs and aggregated with data from other sources where such materials can be found. The research to establish user requirements for the new service is just approaching completion. It has consisted of a series of focus groups and individual interviews with researchers and repository managers around the world and will provide the basic spec upon which the software is developed. Before this phase is finally wound up, I would be interested in hearing from any researchers, repository managers, gateway managers or service providers who have views on what kind of usage statistics would be useful to them or their constituency. Replies on or off list would be very welcome. Alma Swan Key Perspectives Ltd Truro, UK From P.Zhou at UVA.NL Mon Nov 21 02:05:04 2005 From: P.Zhou at UVA.NL (Ping Zhou) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 15:05:04 +0800 Subject: A Comparison between the China Scientific and Technical Papers and Citations Database and the Science Citation Index in terms of journal hierarchies and inter-journal citation relations Message-ID: ** apologies for cross-posting ** Title: A Comparison between the China Scientific and Technical Papers and Citations Database and the Science Citation Index in terms of journal hierarchies and inter-journal citation relations Authors: Ping Zhou; Loet Leydesdorff Available at: http://users.fmg.uva.nl/lleydesdorff/cstpcd/index.htm Abstract The journal structures in the China Scientific and Technical Papers and Citations Database (CSTPC) can be analysed from three perspectives: the database level, the specialty level and the institutional level (i.e., university journals and journals from Chinese Academy of Sciences). The results of these analyses are compared with those for (Chinese) journals included in the Science Citation Index. The frequency of journal-journal citation relations in the CSTPCD is an order of magnitude lower than in the SCI. Chinese journals, especially high-quality journals, prefer to cite international journals rather than domestic ones. However, Chinese journals do not get an equivalent reception from their international counterparts. The international visibility of Chinese journals is low, but varies among fields of science. Journals of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) have a better reception in the international scientific community than university journals. From loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET Tue Nov 22 03:11:11 2005 From: loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET (Loet Leydesdorff) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 09:11:11 +0100 Subject: JCRs of SCI and SoSCI combined Message-ID: Dear colleagues, As you may know, the JCR of the two databases (Science Citation Index and Social Science Citation Index) both contain citation information to the alternative file. In the context of a new project, I merged the data from the two JCRs for the purpose of the visualization of relevant citation environments and local impacts. The files can be found at http://www.leydesdorff.net/jcr04/cited and http://www.leydesdorff.net/jcr04/citing , respectively. The new files have advantages when one is interested in developments at the interfaces between the two domains. With best wishes, Loet _____ Loet Leydesdorff 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/ The Knowledge-Based Economy: Modeled, Measured, and Simulated The Self-Organization of the Knowledge-Based Society; The Challenge of Scientometrics -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eugene.garfield at THOMSON.COM Wed Nov 23 12:27:20 2005 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSON.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 12:27:20 -0500 Subject: Frandsen TF "Journal interaction - A bibliometric analysis of economics journals " JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, 61 (3): 385-401 2005 Message-ID: Tove Faber Frandsen : kkoztofa at db.dk Author(s): Frandsen, TF Title :Journal interaction - A bibliometric analysis of economics journals Source : JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, 61 (3): 385-401 2005 Language: English Document Type: Article Abstract: Purpose - Citation analysis is widely used as an evaluation method within sciences. The purpose of this paper is to use citation analyses to add insight into the interaction between economics journals. Design/methodology/approach - The paper presents a method of citation analysis using multiple linear regressions on both cited and citing economics journals. The proposed method controls for the different characteristics of the journals as well as for their degree of interaction. Findings - The paper shows some of the hidden structures within the science of economics that are determinants for the results from citation analysis. The analysis indicates several underlying factors within citation patterns in economics that should be accounted for when doing citation analysis for evaluation purposes. A journal is to a large extent self-supplying with citations but, when this is extracted from the data, journals are dependent on similar journals - with respect to sub-discipline, geography and JIF - to supply citations. Research limitations/implications - The analysis in this paper includes only a sub-set of the journals of the science of economics and other sciences may exhibit other patterns and thus other underlying factors. Practical implications - In an evaluation that takes place across a wide board of sciences an analysis of both cited and citing journals may help to determine which factors should be taken into account in the evaluation. Originality/value - This type of analysis enables one to analyse some of the characteristics that separate the sciences. Addresses: Royal Sch Lib & Informat Sci, Copenhagen, Denmark Reprint Address: Frandsen, TF, Royal Sch Lib & Informat Sci, Copenhagen, Denmark. Times Cited: 0 Publisher: EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LIMITED Publisher Address: 60/62 TOLLER LANE, BRADFORD BD8 9BY, W YORKSHIRE, ENGLAND ISSN: 0022-0418 Source Item Page Count: 17 ISI Document Delivery No.: 931NK Cited References: Cited Reference Count: 49 BALDI S - Normative versus social constructivist processes in the allocation of citations: A network-analytic model - AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW 63 : 829 1998 BALDI S - NETWORK APPROACH ANA : 1997 BARRETT CB -Subdiscipline-specific journal rankings: whither Applied Economics? - APPLIED ECONOMICS 32 : 239 2000 BAUMOL WJ - WHATS DIFFERENT ABOUT EUROPEAN ECONOMICS - KYKLOS 48 : 187 1995 BECKMANN M -The thirteen most cited journals in economics - SCIENTOMETRICS 42 : 267 1998 BEED C -Measuring the quality of academic journals: The case of economics - JOURNAL OF POST KEYNESIAN ECONOMICS 18 : 369 1996 BRAUNINGER M - PERSPEKTIVEN WIRTSCH - 2 : 185 2001 CHRISTENSEN FH- Online determination of the journal impact factor and its international properties - SCIENTOMETRICS 40 : 529 1997 DANELL R - 15 NORD C BUS STUD H : 2001 DANELL R - Stratification among journals in management research: A bibliometric study of interaction between European and American journals SCIENTOMETRICS 49 : 23 2000 DANELL R - THESIS UMEA U : 2001 DAVIS JB - AM ECON 42 : 59 1998 DORBAN M - SCIENTOMETRICS 25 : 149 1991 ELLIOTT C - Who's publishing who? The national composition of contributors to some core US and European journals - EUROPEAN ECONOMIC REVIEW 42 : 201 1998 ELLISON G - The slowdown of the economics publishing process - JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY 110 : 947 2002 FRANDSEN TF - FINANC MANAGE 33 : 133 2004 FRANSES PH - STAT NEERL 56 : 496 2002 FREY BS - AMERICAN AND EUROPEAN ECONOMICS AND ECONOMISTS JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES 7 : 185 1993 GLANZEL W - The decline of Swedish neuroscience: Decomposing a bibliometric national science indicator - SCIENTOMETRICS 57 : 197 2003 HJORLAND B - Domain analysis in information science - Eleven approaches - traditional as well as innovative -JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION 58 : 422 2002 HODGSON G - ECON J 109 : 165 1999 INGWERSEN P - Data sea isolation for bibliometric online analyses of research publications: Fundamental methodological issues JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE 48 : 205 1997 INGWERSEN P - WEB KNOWLEDGE FESTSC : 373 2000 KALAITZIDAKIS P - European economics: An analysis based on publications in the core journals - EUROPEAN ECONOMIC REVIEW 43 : 1150 1999 KALAITZIDAKIS P - European economics: An analysis based on publications in the core journals -EUROPEAN ECONOMIC REVIEW 43 : 1150 1999 KIRMAN A - ECONOMIC RESEARCH IN EUROPE -EUROPEAN ECONOMIC REVIEW 38 : 505 1994 KOCHER M - ECON J 111 : 405 2001 KRETSCHMER H - A new model of scientific collaboration Part 1. Theoretical approach - SCIENTOMETRICS 46 : 501 1999 KUNDRA R - A new model of scientific collaboration Part 2. Collaboration patterns in Indian medicine - SCIENTOMETRICS 46 : 519 1999 LBAND DN - THE RELATIVE IMPACTS OF ECONOMICS JOURNALS - 1970-1990 JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC LITERATURE 32 : 640 1994 LABAND DN - Contribution, attribution and the allocation of intellectual property rights: economics versus agricultural economics - LABOUR ECONOMICS 9 : 125 2002 LINER GH - Core journals in economics - ECONOMIC INQUIRY 40 : 138 2002 MCCAIN KW - MAPPING ECONOMICS THROUGH THE JOURNAL LITERATURE - AN EXPERIMENT IN JOURNAL COCITATION ANALYSIS - JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE 42 : 290 1991 MERTON RK - SOCIOLOGY SCI EPISOD : 1979 PIERCE SJ - ON THE ORIGIN AND MEANING OF BIBLIOMETRIC INDICATORS - JOURNALS IN THE SOCIAL-SCIENCES, 1886-1985 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE 43 : 477 1992 PORTES R - ECONOMICS IN EUROPE - EUROPEAN ECONOMIC REVIEW 31 : 1329 1987 SEGLEN PO - BRIT MED J 314 : 497 1997 SMALL H - Citations and consilience in science - Comments on theories of citation? - SCIENTOMETRICS 43 : 143 1998 SMITH R - BRIT MED J 314 : 461 1997 SUTTER M - Tools for evaluating research output - Are citation-based rankings of economics journals stable? - EVALUATION REVIEW 25 : 555 2001 SUTTER M - Power laws of research output. Evidence for journals of economics - SCIENTOMETRICS 51 : 405 2001 TRIVEDI PK - AN ANALYSIS OF PUBLICATION LAGS IN ECONOMETRICS - JOURNAL OF APPLIED ECONOMETRICS 8 : 93 1993 USDIKEN B - ORGANIZATIONAL ANALYSIS IN NORTH-AMERICA AND EUROPE - A COMPARISON OF COCITATION NETWORKS ORGANIZATION STUDIES 16 : 503 1995 VANDALEN HP- AM ECON 43 : S19 1999 VANDALEN HP - What makes a scientific article influential? The case of demographers - SCIENTOMETRICS 50 : 455 2001 VANRAAN AFJ - In matters of quantitative studies of science the fault of theorists is offering too little and asking too much - Comments on theories of citation? - SCIENTOMETRICS 43 : 129 1998 WALLENSTEIN I - OPEN SOCIAL SCI REPO : 1996 WHITLEY R - 204 MANCH BUS SCH : 1991 WHITLEY R - INTELLECTUAL SOCIAL : 2000 From eugene.garfield at THOMSON.COM Wed Nov 23 13:03:52 2005 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSON.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 13:03:52 -0500 Subject: Bui-Mansfield LT Message-ID: E-mail : L.T. Bui-Mansfield : E-mail Addresses: liem_mansfield at hotmail.com Title: Whatever happened to the 50 most frequently cited articles published in AJR? Author(s): Bui-Mansfield LT Source: AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY 185 (3): 597-601 SEP 2005 Document Type: Editorial Material Language: English Cited References: 12 Times Cited: 0 Addresses: Bui-Mansfield LT (reprint author), Brooke Army Med Ctr, Dept Radiol, 3851 Roger Brook Dr,FSH, Ft Sam Houston, TX 78234 USA Brooke Army Med Ctr, Dept Radiol, Ft Sam Houston, TX 78234 USA Uniformed Serv Univ Hlth Sci, Dept Radiol, Bethesda, MD 20814 USA Wake Forest Univ, Sch Med, Dept Radiol, Winston Salem, NC 27157 USA E-mail Addresses: liem_mansfield at hotmail.com Publisher: AMER ROENTGEN RAY SOC, 1891 PRESTON WHITE DR, SUBSCRIPTION FULFILLMENT, RESTON, VA 22091 USA IDS Number: 961GU ISSN: 0361-803X CITED REFERENCES : AM ROENTG RAY SOC AJR BUIMANSFIELD L AJR : 2004 BYDDER GM CLINICAL NMR IMAGING OF THE BRAIN - 140 CASES AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY 139 : 215 1982 CAFFEY J MULTIPLE FRACTURES IN THE LONG BONES OF INFANTS SUFFERING FROM CHRONIC SUBDURAL HEMATOMA AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY 56 : 163 1946 CHEW FS AJR - THE 50 MOST FREQUENTLY CITED PAPERS IN THE PAST 50 YEARS AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY 150 : 227 1988 COLLINS VP OBSERVATIONS ON GROWTH RATES OF HUMAN TUMORS AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY RADIUM THERAPY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE 76 : 988 1956 FERRUCCI JT DIAGNOSIS OF ABDOMINAL-MALIGNANCY BY RADIOLOGIC FINE-NEEDLE ASPIRATION BIOPSY AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY 134 : 323 1980 GERZOF SG PERCUTANEOUS CATHETER DRAINAGE OF ABDOMINAL ABSCESSES GUIDED BY ULTRASOUND AND COMPUTED-TOMOGRAPHY AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY 133 : 1 1979 GIANTURCO C MECHANICAL DEVICES FOR ARTERIAL-OCCLUSION AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY 124 : 428 1975 SHEEDY PF COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY OF BODY - INITIAL CLINICAL-TRIAL WITH EMI PROTOTYPE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY 127 : 23 1976 VEZINA JL PROLACTIN-SECRETING PITUITARY MICROADENOMAS - ROENTGENOLOGIC DIAGNOSIS AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY 120 : 46 1974 WOLFE JN BREAST PATTERNS AS AN INDEX OF RISK FOR DEVELOPING BREAST-CANCER AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY 126 : 1130 1976 Liem T. Bui-Mansfield1,2,3 1 Department of Radiology, Brooke Army Medical Center, 3851 Roger Brooke Dr., FSH, San Antonio, TX 78234. 2 Department of Radiology, USUHS, Bethesda, MD 20814-4799. 3 Department of Radiology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 27157-1088. Received February 10, 2005; accepted after revision February 16, 2005. Address correspondence to L. T. Bui-Mansfield (liem_mansfield at hotmail.com). Cited References - at the end. The opinions and assertions contained herein are those of the author and should not be construed as official or as representing the opinions of the Department of the Army or the Department of Defense. It has been nearly 20 years since the list of the 50 most frequently cited articles published in the American Journal of Roentgenology (AJR) was published [1]. What has happened in the ensuing time? Which articles have increased or decreased in ranking? These questions are not only of historical interest but also reveal the relevance of radiology in daily clinical practice. The objective of this article was to answer these questions. Materials and Methods The list of the 50 most frequently cited articles published in the AJR was obtained from Chew [1]. Using the Web of Science search engine (Institute for Scientific Information) [2], the number of citations for each article was obtained. A citation occurs when one scientific article (the citing article) lists another (the cited article) as a reference. The Science Citation Index is a reference text that lists cited articles along with their citing articles that were published in scientific journals. The database covers 1945 to the present. The articles were ranked based on the number of citations that they have received since 1945. In addition, the articles were classified according to subspecialty (e.g., abdominal imaging, basic science, breast imaging, chest imaging, gastrointestinal imaging, interventional radiology, neuroradiology, nuclear medicine, pediatric radiology, and radiation oncology), type of article (e.g., clinical application, complication, concept, technique, and treatment), clinical problem addressed, and types of imaging techniques or treatment (e.g., CT, MRI, radiography, sonography, and radiation therapy). The Institute for Scientific Information was commissioned to provide to the ARRS a current list of the 100 most cited articles published in the AJR as of September 30, 2004. Results The new ranking of Chew's list of 50 most frequently cited articles published in the AJR [1] is shown in Table 1. The number of citations ranges from 136 to 592, with a mean of 232. Three articles have not changed in ranking, 24 articles have dropped, and 23 articles have risen in ranking since 1987. The increase in ranking ranges from +1 to +34. The decrease in ranking ranges from -2 to -25. "Observations on growth rates of human tumors," "Clinical NMR imaging of the brain: 140 cases," and "Percutaneous catheter drainage of abdominal abscesses guided by ultrasound and CT" [3-5] did not change in their ranking since 1988. Discussion The articles that remain frequently cited have one common feature. They were about topics that appealed to a broad audience of physicians, not just to radiologists, and were of clinical importance. "Observations on growth rates of human tumors" [3] is of interest to radiologists, pathologists, oncologists, and surgeons. Research conducted on tumor growth in any medical discipline is likely to cite this article. For the last 2 decades, breast cancer screening and treatment has become an important public issue. Thus, research conducted by primary care physicians, surgeons, and radiologists frequently cited Wolfe's article [9]. Before Caffey's report [6], nonaccidental trauma was not well recognized in the medical literature. Subsequent research on this topic invariably cited his article. The trend of medicine is toward minimally invasive procedures. Consequently, radiologically guided fine-needle aspiration and biopsy of masses became popular because they are less invasive, safer for the patients, and less costly. Again, this topic would be appealing to a wide audience, some of whom would perform their own research that cited Ferrucci's article [10]. Conversely, the greatest decrease in ranking of some articles is due to the rapid advance of technology in radiology, which makes old technology obsolete, or to the development of a new technique. For example, "Prolactin- secreting pituitary microadenomas: roentgenologic diagnosis" [11] had the sharpest drop in ranking, from 9 to 34, because MRI has since replaced roentgenography as the imaging technique of choice for the diagnosis of pituitary masses. With each new generation of CT, it is less likely that "Computer tomography of the body: initial clinical trial with the EMI prototype" [8] would be cited. Interventional radiology, radiation oncology, abdominal imaging, and neuroradiology account for two thirds of the 50 most frequently cited articles published in AJR, reflecting the greatest growth in radiology in these subspecialties. CT is primarily responsible for the advancement in abdominal imaging and neuroradiology. A subspecialty that is conspicuously absent is musculoskeletal imaging. Not a single article about the musculoskeletal system was on the list. The most logical explanation is that the most recent advance in musculoskeletal imaging was the introduction of MRI, which did not come into widespread use until the 1990s, well after the publication of Chew's article [1]. The types of articles reflect both the types of research conducted in radiology and the emphasis of past AJR editors. AJR tended to publish articles with practical applications over basic science or early research in imaging. The 2003 AJR Subscriber Research Study has supported this observation. Ninety percent of respondents to the survey said that the scientific content in AJR is valuable to their day-to-day practice. More than half of the respondents rated the publication as informative (88%), easy to read (71%), practical (64%), and timely (54%) [12]. The clinical problems that were addressed in the most frequently cited articles published in AJR continue to be important disease processes of daily interest to general radiologists. They include effects of radiation exposure, Hodgkin's disease, gallbladder disease, liver mass, pituitary mass, abdominal abscess, adrenal mass, pulmonary embolism, nonaccidental trauma, and lung cancer. Again, this reflects the publishing philosophy of the AJR editorial office and the interest of AJR readers [12]. Despite the recent introduction of imaging techniques such as sonography, CT, and MRI, papers centered on radiography still accounted more than half of the most frequently cited articles published by AJR, more than all the articles combined that highlight new imaging techniques. This illustrates the established tradition of radiography in the diagnosis of diseases. Also, it takes time for the newer imaging techniques to be assimilated into the clinical practice of radiology and accepted by the rest of the medical community. When the number of citations that each article received was plotted against time at 5-year intervals, four typical patterns of curve were identified. Articles on clinical application of imaging techniques or technical procedures had similar curves. Both had a rapid rise and precipitous drop in citations within the first 10 years. This reflected the introduction of new imaging techniques and interventional techniques that made the imaging techniques less useful and the procedures less popular. After the first decade of publication, articles on technical procedures had a slower decrease in the number of citations than articles on imaging techniques. Articles about new concepts had two patterns of citations. The article by Collins et al. [3] has had a near constant number of citations over time since its publication. This probably reflects the general acceptance of this concept by the scientific and medical communities. On the other hand, Caffey's article [6] has had a gradual but steady increase in the number of citations since its publication. It had the highest number of citations in the 1980s and since then, the number of citations has stabilized in the 30s over time. This pattern suggests gradual acceptance of a new concept, which over time was supported by subsequent research in other fields of medicine. Because the database of the Institute for Scientific Information only went back to 1945, seminal articles published before 1945 may not be accurately represented. Although this is a valid argument, as long as the articles are cited beyond their publication date, the Institute for Scientific Information database will keep track of their number of citations. Therefore, it is highly unlikely that frequently cited articles published before 1945 were not duly recognized. The articles on Chew's list [1] continued to be frequently cited. Forty- four articles (88%) on Chew's list appeared on the current list of 100 most cited articles published in AJR, a list that will be published later [13]. Of the top 10 most cited AJR articles, eight came from Chew's list [1]. Since 1988, 94% of the 50 most frequently cited articles published in AJR have changed their ranking. The articles that remained frequently cited were about topics that appealed to a broad audience of physicians and were of clinical importance. The clinical problems that were addressed in the most frequently cited articles published in AJR continue to be important disease processes of daily interest to practicing radiologists. References Chew FS. AJR. The 50 most frequently cited papers in the past 50 years. AJR 1988;150 : 227-233[Medline] Web of Science Web site. Institute for Scientific Information. www.isinet.com. Accessed July 18, 2004 Collins VP, Loeffler RK, Tivey H. Observations on growth rates of human tumors. AJR 1956;76 : 988-1000 Bydder GM, Steiner RE, Young IR, et al. Clinical NMR imaging of the brain: 140 cases. AJR 1982;139 : 215-236[Medline] Gerzof SG, Robbins AH, Birkett DH, Johnson WC, Pugatch RD, Vincent ME. Percutaneous catheter drainage of abdominal abscesses guided by ultrasound and computer tomography. AJR 1979;133 : 1-8[Medline] Caffey J. Multiple fractures in the long bones of infants suffering from chronic subdural hematoma. AJR 1946;56 : 163-173 Gianturco C, Anderson JH, Wallace S. Mechanical devices for arterial occlusion. Am J Roentgenol Radium Ther Nucl Med 1975; 124:428 -435[Medline] Sheedy PF, Stephens DH, Hattery RR, Huhm JR, Hartman GW. Computed tomography of the body: initial clinical trial with the EMI prototype. AJR 1976; 127:23 -51[Medline] Wolfe JN. Breast patterns as an index of risk for developing breast cancer. AJR 1976;126 : 1130-1139[Medline] Ferrucci JT Jr, Wittenberg J, Mueller PR, et al. Diagnosis of abdominal malignancy by radiologic fine-needle aspiration biopsy. AJR 1980; 134:323 - 330[Medline] Vezina JL, Sutton TJ. Prolactin-secreting pituitary microadenomas: roentgenologic diagnosis. Am J Roentgenol Radium Ther Nucl Med 1974; 120:46 -54[Medline] American Roentgen Ray Society. AJR subscriber research study, conducted by the Sabatier Consulting Group Bui-Mansfield, L. 100 most cited articles published in AJR. Institute for Scientific Information, Philadelphia, PA. Conducted September 21, 2004 (in press, AJR) From Jonathan at LEVITT.NET Sun Nov 27 13:25:46 2005 From: Jonathan at LEVITT.NET (Jonathan Levitt) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 13:25:46 -0500 Subject: The purposes of bibliometric research (another newbie / outsider question) Message-ID: Hi All, Encouraged by the response that Christina Pikas received to her posting, I have decided to follow her example and posted a message. In common with Christina, I hope you'll forgive this question (and maybe answer it!). As part of my postgraduate research, I am conducting a three-stage investigation of the purposes of bibliometric research: Stage 1: I emailed a sample of bibliometric researchers asking ?What do you consider to be the main purposes of bibliometric research?? Stage 2: I collated these responses to form a set of purposes that contains all the purposes that I received in Stage 1. Stage 3: I plan to survey a larger sample of bibliometric researchers than in Stage 1 asking them to rate on a Likert scale my list of purposes. I have completed Stages 1 and 2 and, before implementing Stage 3, would be very grateful for feedback on my purposes of bibliometrics (for instance, purposes that I have omitted or revised wording of my purposes). I suggest (in alphabetical order) nine purposes: ?Bibliometric research seeks to develop and use tools for measuring and mapping: (a) Interrelationships between different branches of knowledge. (b) The development of knowledge. (c) The extent of internationalisation of research. (d) The extent of research collaboration. (e) The literature in research topics. (f) The research productivity of countries. (g) The research productivity of individuals. (h) The research productivity of teams. (i) The use of knowledge.? I would be very grateful to receive any feedback that cannot prejudice Stage 3 of my investigation (for instance, please don?t send your Likert scale rating of my purposes to this list). Thank you very much, Jonathan Levitt, Research Student, University College London. From isidro at CINDOC.CSIC.ES Mon Nov 28 02:02:59 2005 From: isidro at CINDOC.CSIC.ES (Isidro F. Aguillo) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 08:02:59 +0100 Subject: International Workshop on Webometrics, Informetrics and Scientometrics & Seventh COLLNET Meeting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: */2^nd Announcement /* * * *Call for Papers* */ /* *International Workshop on Webometrics, Informetrics and Scientometrics & Seventh COLLNET Meeting * * * in conjunction with the */ /* */Extra Session on Information Visualization for Webometrics, Informetrics and Scientometrics /* (Special information below) */ /* * * * 10-12 May, 2006* * * *LORIA-INIST* *Nancy**, France** * ** */Scope/* */ /* Quantitative aspects of science of science. Collaboration and communication in science and in technology. Science policy. Combination and integration of qualitative and quantitative approaches. Theoretical, methodological and applied aspects, for example: - Emerging issues in scientometrics/informetrics/webometrics and history - Quantitative analysis of S&T innovations - Informetric laws and distributions, mathematical models of communication or collaboration - Information retrieval - Nature and growth of science and its relation with technological output - Evaluation indicators - Collaboration in science and in technology from both quantitative and qualitative points of view - Information visualization for webometrics, informetrics and scientometrics (Special information below) Please, note that these examples listed above give a broad outline of the scope of the workshop theme but do not limit it. *Special Information about the* / / */Extra Session on Information Visualization for Webometrics, Informetrics and Scientometrics/* Information visualization involves the visual representation and exploration of abstract information. Non-physical information can advantageously be represented in a visual form, but such information has no obvious spatial property by itself. Information visualization is thus a computer-supported process which transforms data, information and knowledge into a form that relies on the human system to perceive the embedded meaning. It focuses on creating rich visual interfaces to help users navigate through complex information spaces and analyse abstract data. The development of this domain creates innovative graphical representations of information. This workshop aims at exploring and discussing the application of these methods and techniques for visualizing quantitative aspects of science, collaboration and communication in the domains of science and technology. */Scope/* Contributions should focus on one or more of the following topics: Methods and techniques such as: - Hyperbolic geometry - Graphs and networks as visual display - Clustering visualization - Using neural networks for visualization - Models for navigation and interactivity - Applications of these methods and techniques for: - Visualizing subspaces of the Web - Web log data visualization - Graphic representation of informetrics distributions - Maps of science The Extra Session will start with a specific tutorial on *XML and Metadata engineering, and their specific use in the context of Webometrics*. The specific call for papers is associated and made available for this workshop at the address: http://collnet.inist.fr . */LORIA and INIST/* */ /* Conducting research in the domain of Information and Communication Technologies, *LORIA* (Lorraine Laboratory in Computer Science and its Applications) is a joint research unit - UMR 7503 common to several establishments: CNRS (Centre National de Recherche Scientifique) National Center of Scientific Research, INPL (Institut National Polytechnique de Lorraine) National Polytechnic Institute of Lorraine, INRIA (Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et en Automatique) National Research Institute for Computer Science and Automation, UHP (Universit? Henri Poincar?, Nancy 1) Henri Poincar?, University, Nancy 1, Nancy 2 (Universit? Nancy 2) Nancy 2 University. *LORIA* is a laboratory of more than 450 persons including 150 scientific staff (full-time researchers or university professors or assistant professors), 150 doctoral students and post-docs and engineers, technical and administrative support staff, intern and visitors organized in research teams and supporting services. The main mission of *LORIA* is the fundamental and supplied research in the field of information and communication technologies. LORIA plays also a strategic role in the training of young researchers, in partnership with Universities and in the technology transfer via partnerships with industry and support in the creation of start-up companies The institute for Scientific and Technical Information (*INIST*) is a service unit of the French National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS). Its mission is to collect, analyze and disseminate the results and findings of worldwide research in science, technology, medicine, humanities, economics and social sciences. Please have a view at *LORIA* website at the address: http://www.loria.fr . *INIST *is the leading integrated scientific and technical information center in Europe and provides the major public research and academic institutions as well as the socio-economic sector with resources and services designed to improve dissemination of and access to international scientific and technical information (STI). Committed to the new information and communication technologies, *INIST* offers a whole range of access services to scientific and technical information on the Internet. *INIST* is not only the leading scientific and technical document supplier in France, but it is also the producer of two multilingual, multidisciplinary bibliographic databases containing over 17 million bibliographic records covering the core worldwide scientific literature. Please have a view at *INIST *website at http://www.inist.fr . */COLLNET and ISSI/* COLLNET is a global interdisciplinary research network of scholars who are concerned to study aspects of collaboration in science and in technology (see COLLNET web site at: http://www.collnet.de/). This network of interdisciplinary scholars was established in January 2000 in Berlin with Hildrun Kretschmer as coordinator. Since that time there have been 6 meetings: the first in Berlin, September 2000, the 2^nd in New Delhi, February 2001 and the 3^rd in Sydney (in association with the 8^th ISSI Conference), July 2001. The ISSI President Mari Davis has mentioned in the Newsletter, July 2003: Importantly, ISSI needs alliance with other groups, such as COLLNET, for broader reach among a range of interdisciplinary researchers and to encourage new thinking and perspectives on investigations in science and in technology. The 4^th COLLNET Meeting took place on August 29^th in 2003 in Beijing in conjunction with the 9^th International ISSI Conference. The International Workshop on Webometrics, Informetrics and Scientometrics and 5^th COLLNET Meeting in Roorkee, India, in May 2004. The 6^th COLLNET Meeting which took place in association with the 10^th ISSI Conference in Stockholm, Sweden, in July 2005. * * * * *Program Chairs: * Jean-Charles Lamirel, France Hildrun Kretschmer, Germany Claire Fran?ois, France Jacques Ducloy, France * * *Organizing Secretary: * Jean-Charles Lamirel LORIA France Claire Fran?ois, INIST France * * *Secretary: * Patricia Gauthier, INIST France Sabah Khalfa, LORIA France * * * * *Programme Committee: * Isidro Aguillo, Spain Petra Ahrweiler, India R. Ambuja, India Elise Bassecoulard, France Aparna Basu, India Donald deB. Beaver, USA Sujit Bhattacharya, India Maria Bordons, Spain Martina Brandt, Germany Linda Chan, Hong Kong St?phane Chaudiron, France Blaise Cronin, USA Robert Dalpe, Canada Mari Davis, Australia Jacques Ducloy, France Taoufiq Dkaki, France Leo C.J. Egghe, Belgium A. Hossein Farajpahlou, Iran Hubert Feger, Germany Claire Fran?ois, France Lars Fuglsang, Denmark Isabel Gomez, Spain Ulla Gro?e, Germany Brij Mohan Gupta, India Frank Hartmann, Germany Frank Havemann, Germany William W. Hood, Australia Marianne H?rlesberger, Austria Margriet Jansz, Netherlands C.R. Karisiddappa, India Sylvan Katz, UK Lidiya Kavunenko, Ukraine Mohsin U. Khan, India Ved Prakash Kharbanda, India Philippe Kislin, France Rajesh Kochhar, India Hildrun Kretschmer, Germany Karl-Theo Kretschmer, Germany Ramesh Kundra, India Jean-Charles Lamirel, France Alain Lelu, France Loet Leydesdorff, Netherlands Liming Liang, China Sof?a Liberman, Mexico Zeyuan Liu, China Bruno Maltr?s, Spain Valentina Markusova, Russia Martin Meyer, Finland Xavier Polanco, France ?lle Must, Estonia Ed Noyons, Netherlands Dennis Ocholla, South Africa Yoshiko Okubo, France Farideh Osareh, Iran Siew Hock Ow, Malaysia Koti S. Raghavan, India Ravichandra Rao, India Ronald Rousseau, Belgium Jane Russell, Mexico Shivappa Sangam, India Eric SanJuan, France Andrea Scharnhorst, Netherlands Annedore Schulze, Germany Divya Srivastava, India Johannes Stegmann, Germany Yuan Sun, Japan Dimiter Tomov, Bulgaria Walther Umstaetter, Germany Liwen Vaughan, Canada Yan Wang, China Caroline Wagner, USA Roland Wagner-D?bler, Germany Vera Wenzel, Germany Concepcion S. Wilson, Australia Paul Wouters, Netherlands Yishan Wu, China Michel Zitt, France * * * * *Please send your abstracts and papers to:* * * Jean-Charles Lamirel LORIA Campus Scientifique BP 239 54506 Vandoeuvre-l?s-Nancy CEDEX France Tel: +33-383592088 Fax: +33-383413079 Email: lamirel at loria.fr Please, send also a copy to: Hildrun Kretschmer Email: kretschmer.h at onlinehome.de Both abstracts and full papers will be peer reviewed by the Programme Committee. The accepted full papers will be published in the proceedings. *Important dates:* * * ? *22 January 2006: deadline for abstract submission,* ? *15 **February** **2006**: notification of acceptance,* ? *15 March 2006**: final paper (camera-ready version, maximum 10 pages including tables, figures, references) * * * *Conference Fees: * * * ? *Collnet members: 160 euros.* ? Non members: 200 euros. ? *Accompanying person: 50 euros.* Registration fees include coffee breaks and lunches, invited banquet and proceedings. For persons who are interested in, a special "Ecole de Nancy" Art Tour will be programmed the last day (with additional fees of 20 euros). * * * * *For more information please contact organizing secretary:* * * Patricia Gautier INIST-CNRS 2, all?e du Parc de Brabois 54514 Vandoeuvre-l?s-Nancy CEDEX France Tel: +33-383504670 Fax: +33-383504646 Email: gautier at inist.fr * * * * *Other important contact emails:* * * *Claire.Francois at inist.fr * *Jacques.Ducloy at inist.fr * *Sabah.Khalfa at inria.fr * -- *************************************** Isidro F. Aguillo isidro at cindoc.csic.es Ph:(+34) 91-5635482 ext. 313 InternetLab. CINDOC-CSIC Joaquin Costa, 22 28002 Madrid. SPAIN http://www.webometrics.info http://www.cindoc.csic.es/cybermetrics http://internetlab.cindoc.csic.es **************************************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: C:\DOCUME~1\isidroa\CONFIG~1\Temp\msohtml1\01\clip_image003.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 12133 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: C:\DOCUME~1\isidroa\CONFIG~1\Temp\msohtml1\01\clip_image004.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 14250 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Michel.Menou at WANADOO.FR Mon Nov 28 12:18:38 2005 From: Michel.Menou at WANADOO.FR (Michel J. Menou) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 18:18:38 +0100 Subject: The purposes of bibliometric research (another newbie / outsider question) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: There are other topics - effectiveness of research funding - interaction among stakeholders, in particular industry-academia - regional concentration and strengths (sub national level, e.g. the work of Dou) What is your e) ? Michel Jonathan Levitt wrote: >Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): >http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > >Hi All, > >Encouraged by the response that Christina Pikas received to her posting, I >have decided to follow her example and posted a message. In common with >Christina, I hope you'll forgive this question (and maybe answer it!). > >As part of my postgraduate research, I am conducting a three-stage >investigation of the purposes of bibliometric research: >Stage 1: I emailed a sample of bibliometric researchers asking ?What do you >consider to be the main purposes of bibliometric research?? >Stage 2: I collated these responses to form a set of purposes that contains >all the purposes that I received in Stage 1. >Stage 3: I plan to survey a larger sample of bibliometric researchers than >in Stage 1 asking them to rate on a Likert scale my list of purposes. > >I have completed Stages 1 and 2 and, before implementing Stage 3, would be >very grateful for feedback on my purposes of bibliometrics (for instance, >purposes that I have omitted or revised wording of my purposes). > >I suggest (in alphabetical order) nine purposes: >?Bibliometric research seeks to develop and use tools for measuring and >mapping: >(a) Interrelationships between different branches of knowledge. >(b) The development of knowledge. >(c) The extent of internationalisation of research. >(d) The extent of research collaboration. >(e) The literature in research topics. >(f) The research productivity of countries. >(g) The research productivity of individuals. >(h) The research productivity of teams. >(i) The use of knowledge.? > >I would be very grateful to receive any feedback that cannot prejudice >Stage 3 of my investigation (for instance, please don?t send your Likert >scale rating of my purposes to this list). > >Thank you very much, >Jonathan Levitt, >Research Student, >University College London. >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >Wanadoo vous informe que cet e-mail a ete controle par l'anti-virus mail. >Aucun virus connu a ce jour par nos services n'a ete detecte. > > > > > > > -- ================================================================= Dr. Michel J. Menou Consultant in ICT policies and Knowledge & Information Management Adviser of Somos at Telecentros board http://www.tele-centros.org Member of the founding steering committee of Telecenters of the Americas Partnership http://www.tele-centers.net/ B.P. 15 49350 Les Rosiers sur Loire, France Email: Michel.Menou at wanadoo.fr Phone: +33 (0)2 41511043 http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ciber/peoplemenou.php ================================================================== -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.13.8/184 - Release Date: 27/11/2005 From ruben at UCR.EDU Mon Nov 28 14:13:16 2005 From: ruben at UCR.EDU (Ruben Urbizagastegui) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 11:13:16 -0800 Subject: The purposes of bibliometric research (another newbie / outsider question) In-Reply-To: <438B3BEE.6070502@wanadoo.fr> Message-ID: Hello, First, I think you should try to answer questions like: * What Bibliometrics is? * Is it a discipline? If it is a discipline, What is its internal structure? How it is organized? * Is it a tool, a Method? * What makes it different from statistical tools or methods? The answer to this questions will give you insights to the purposes of bibliometric research. You will be surprise with the findings. Good luck. Ruben Urbizagastegui University of California, Riverside University Libraries P.O. Box 5900 Riverside, California 92517-5900 Jonathan Levitt wrote: >Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): >http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > >Hi All, > >Encouraged by the response that Christina Pikas received to her posting, I >have decided to follow her example and posted a message. In common with >Christina, I hope you'll forgive this question (and maybe answer it!). > >As part of my postgraduate research, I am conducting a three-stage >investigation of the purposes of bibliometric research: >Stage 1: I emailed a sample of bibliometric researchers asking 'What do you >consider to be the main purposes of bibliometric research?' >Stage 2: I collated these responses to form a set of purposes that contains >all the purposes that I received in Stage 1. >Stage 3: I plan to survey a larger sample of bibliometric researchers than >in Stage 1 asking them to rate on a Likert scale my list of purposes. > >I have completed Stages 1 and 2 and, before implementing Stage 3, would be >very grateful for feedback on my purposes of bibliometrics (for instance, >purposes that I have omitted or revised wording of my purposes). > >I suggest (in alphabetical order) nine purposes: >"Bibliometric research seeks to develop and use tools for measuring and >mapping: >(a) Interrelationships between different branches of knowledge. >(b) The development of knowledge. >(c) The extent of internationalisation of research. >(d) The extent of research collaboration. >(e) The literature in research topics. >(f) The research productivity of countries. >(g) The research productivity of individuals. >(h) The research productivity of teams. >(i) The use of knowledge." > >I would be very grateful to receive any feedback that cannot prejudice >Stage 3 of my investigation (for instance, please don't send your Likert >scale rating of my purposes to this list). > >Thank you very much, >Jonathan Levitt, >Research Student, >University College London. >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ >Wanadoo vous informe que cet e-mail a ete controle par l'anti-virus mail. >Aucun virus connu a ce jour par nos services n'a ete detecte. > > > > > > > -- ================================================================= Dr. Michel J. Menou Consultant in ICT policies and Knowledge & Information Management Adviser of Somos at Telecentros board http://www.tele-centros.org Member of the founding steering committee of Telecenters of the Americas Partnership http://www.tele-centers.net/ B.P. 15 49350 Les Rosiers sur Loire, France Email: Michel.Menou at wanadoo.fr Phone: +33 (0)2 41511043 http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ciber/peoplemenou.php ================================================================== -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.13.8/184 - Release Date: 27/11/2005 From Andrea.Scharnhorst at VKS.KNAW.NL Tue Nov 29 11:32:32 2005 From: Andrea.Scharnhorst at VKS.KNAW.NL (Andrea Scharnhorst) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 17:32:32 +0100 Subject: job positions in Amsterdam Message-ID: ** apologies for cross posting ** The Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW) is an independent body that advises the Dutch government on matters related to scientific research, promotes international scientific co-operation, assesses the quality of scientific research and is responsible for managing and defining the policy for 17 research institutes in the life sciences, humanities and social sciences. The Academy employs approximately 1,300 staff. The VKS is a new five year research programme of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences. It aims to support researchers in the humanities and social sciences in the Netherlands in the creation of new scholarly practices using state of the art information and communication technologies. The Studio also aims to analyse these new practices and the development of e-research in a variety of disciplines. A core feature of the Virtual Knowledge Studio is the integration of design and analysis in a close co-operation between social scientists, humanities researchers, information technology experts and information scientists. The VKS has three research themes: data & digital information, communication & collaboration, and virtual institutions. The VKS develops three new methodologies: virtual ethnography, simulation & modelling in the humanities & social sciences, and Web Archiving for research. The working language of the VKS is English. The VKS will start on January 1, 2006 and will be evaluated in the course of 2010, after which the KNAW will decide whether and in which form the VKS will be continued. To realise this exciting interdisciplinary programme, the VKS is currently seeking: one senior research fellow (38 hours a week vacancy number: PZ277) two senior researchers ( 38 hours a week vacancy number: PZ 298) one management assistant (30,4 hours a week vacancy number: PZ 279) The Senior Research Fellow will play an important role in leading and contributing to the empirical and theoretical development of the VKS research portfolio. The Senior Research Fellow will be a member of the VKS management team, and will be responsible for a theme as well as a methodological collaboratory. Appointment This position involves a tenure track appointment beginning with a temporary appointment for a maximum of 2 years. Given proven suitability for the job, the position will become permanent. Forms of secondment ('detachering') for candidates having tenured positions at a Dutch university can be considered. Candidates from the humanities and social sciences in the Netherlands are particularly encouraged to apply. Salary Depending on education and work experience, the maximum gross monthly salary with a full-time appointment will amount to ? 4.996,--, scale 13, Collective Agreement for Dutch Universities (CAO-Nederlandse Universiteiten), excluding 8% holiday pay and a year-end bonus. We offer an extensive package of fringe benefits. Work location Amsterdam The two Senior Researchers will play an important role in the empirical and theoretical development of the VKS research portfolio. Beside developing their own research and acquiring external funding in one of the VKS themes or methodological foci, they will have specific responsibilities within the team. One senior researcher will be responsible for the peer review process of the VKS, the other senior researcher will organise one of the VKS collaboratories. Appointment This position involves a tenure track appointment beginning with a temporary appointment for a maximum of 2 years. Given proven suitability for the job, the position will become permanent. Forms of secondment ('detachering') for candidates having tenured positions at a Dutch university can be considered. Candidates from the humanities and social sciences in the Netherlands are particularly encouraged to apply. Salary Depending on education and work experience, the maximum gross monthly salary coming with a full-time appointment will amount to ? 4.605,--, scale 12, Collective Agreement for Dutch Universities (CAO-Nederlandse Universiteiten), excluding 8% holiday pay and a year-end bonus. We offer an extensive package of fringe benefits. Work location Amsterdam All candidates for these research positions should - be strongly focused on ground-breaking basic research in one of the relevant fields in humanities and social sciences - have a PhD in either humanities or social sciences - have a strong international orientation in their research - have expertise in, or willingness to develop, the use of digital tools in research - have, or be willing to develop, expertise in the methodological innovations necessary for the specific tasks within the VKS - enjoy theoretical plurality and be able to engage with, and contribute to diverse theoretical perspectives based on empirical research - have excellent organisational skills - have a strong research track record, as demonstrated by an excellent publication list and acquired funding for research projects - be proficient in English. Applicants who are not proficient in Dutch are expected to acquire a sufficient level of Dutch language skills within two years. ______________________________________________________________________________________ The Management Assistant will have a central role in the organisation of the VKS. He/she will perform all administrative and secretarial duties and be responsible for the planning of meetings. The Management Assistant will organise VKS lectures, seminars and scientific conferences. He/she will also be responsible for the production of the VKS Website, newsletter and for the VKS information services. Candidates for the Management Assistant position: - should have outstanding organisational and administrative skills - will be excellent communicators in both English and Dutch - will be used to working in innovative work environments and taking the initiative will come naturally to them - should have expertise in project management or be willing to acquire these skills in a short time. Appointment This position involves a permanent appointment, beginning with a temporary appointment for a maximum of 2 years. Given proven suitability for the job, the appointment will then be converted into a pemanent appointment. Salary The position is part-time (4 days a week). Depending on education and work experience, the maximum gross monthly salary coming with a full-time appointment will amount to ? 2.796,--, scale 8, Collective Agreement for Dutch Universities (CAO-Nederlandse Universiteiten), excluding 8% holiday pay and a year-end bonus. We offer an extensive package of fringe benefits. Work location Amsterdam ______________________________________________________________________________________ Information Information about the VKS programme can be obtained from the VKS Website www.virtualknowledgestudio.nl. Questions about the programme can be sent to the programme leader Paul Wouters, paul.wouters at vks.knaw.nl. Application You may send your application, consisting of a letter of motivation, copies of two publications, and curriculum vitae, to the VKS to the attention of Lianne Heuschen, Postbus 95110, 1090 HC by 15 January 2006 at the latest. You may also email your application by forwarding a Word document to lianne.heuschen at vks.knaw.nl stating the vacancy reference. Any acquisition further to this advertisement will not be appreciated. Dr. Andrea Scharnhorst PLEASE NOTE I HAVE A NEW EMAIL ADDRESS andrea.scharnhorst at vks.knaw.nl AND A NEW WEBSITE (SEE BELOW) Senior Research Fellow The Virtual Knowledge Studio for the Humanities and Social Sciences (VKS); Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences Amsterdam, NL Mail Address: PO Box 95110 1090 HC Amsterdam The Netherlands Visiting address: Joan Muyskenweg 25 1096 CJ Amsterdam, NL T 3120 4628670 F 3120 6658013 http://www.virtualknowledgestudio.nl/en/vks_members/homepage_andrea_scharnhorst/ From eugene.garfield at THOMSON.COM Tue Nov 29 19:01:31 2005 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSON.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 19:01:31 -0500 Subject: authors read national literatures? Message-ID: You must make a distinction between scientists and physicians. To lump them together is valid. You can tell from citation patterns of the literature outside the US that researchers read and cite the US literature. I just saw an analysis of citations to Lancet, Nature. Science, e.g,. by Chinese journals. It has often been claimed by Europeans that Americans do not read their literature but I have never seen any proof of this. They were studies long ago that showed that American physicians did not even cite British journals, but again are we talking about research physicians or clinicians. The latter have barely enough time to read their own journals, whereever they are. However, the wide distribution of JAMA worldwide would indicate otherwise. Best wishes Gretchen. Gene Garfield -----Original Message----- From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Gretchen Whitney Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 8:53 PM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: [SIGMETRICS] authors read national literatures? greetings all, I have a vague recollection that a study (or studies) reported, perhaps by analysis of lists of references in documents, that scientists primarily read their national literatures, and did not stray frequently into the literatures of other countries. Is there any evidence of this? Does this sound familiar to anyone? What might I have read? This could be as old as some studies out of psychology in the 1970s. I'm doing a study of a subset of MEDLINE through DIALOG, and I'd like to be able to assert that the values in the CP (country of publication) field reflect what scientists in a given country READ, and the values in the CS (author affiliation) field reflect what they experiment with and WRITE. By analysis of these fields and titles/subjects, this assertion seems to be supported because there is consitency in values regarding therapies explored/supported/promoted from both fields. In other words, there is consistency in both that enable me to assert that country x is exploring y therapy, as opposed to country w exploring z therapy. Is there literature out there that supports the idea that scientists, particularly physicians, read their national literatures predominantly, and write in those intellectual domains? I've already tried Tenopir/King, and it wasn't them. Any help would be greatly appreciated. --gw <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> <> Gretchen Whitney, PhD tel 865.974.7919 School of Information Sciences fax 865.974.4967 University of Tennessee, Knoxville TN 37996 USA gwhitney at utk.edu http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/ jESSE:http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/jesse.html SIGMETRICS:http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> <> From jmcdonald at LIBRARY.CALTECH.EDU Tue Nov 29 19:22:25 2005 From: jmcdonald at LIBRARY.CALTECH.EDU (John McDonald) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 16:22:25 -0800 Subject: authors read national literatures? Message-ID: Gretchen, Here's just one recent example: Schloegl,C & Stock WG (2004) Impact and Relevance of LIS Journals: A Scientometric Analysis of International and German-Language LIS Journals-Citation Analysis Versus Reader Survey. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 55(13):1155-1168, 2004 "There is not much information exchange between international, i.e., English-writing, and German-writing LIS authors. German-writing authors cite at least some international journals such as JASIST, Online, Digital Libraries, LibraryJournal , or Libri (see Figure 1). Authors of the English-language LIS periodicals cite their German-writing counterpart to such a small extent that the defined threshold values were not reached. A similar result was found in a study about foreign authorship distribution in JASIST and Journal of Documentation (He & Spink, 2002). Accordingly, 125 authors from the United Kingdom and 110 from Canada published articles in JASIST and American Documentation, respectively, in the period 1950 to 1999. However, only 25 authors were from Germany, 6 from Switzerland, and 3 from Austria. In the British Journal of Documentation, 128 authors were from the United States, but only 8 from Germany, 3 from Switzerland, and none from Austria. This might raise the following question: Are there any invisible borderlines between English-speaking information scientists and their German-speaking colleagues?" They also cite a number of related studies that have shown the same effect. I think I would tend to think the reason for the results they found is due to language abilities rather than cultural or national identities. John McDonald Acquisitions Librarian California Institute of Technology -----Original Message----- From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Eugene Garfield Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 4:02 PM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] authors read national literatures? You must make a distinction between scientists and physicians. To lump them together is valid. You can tell from citation patterns of the literature outside the US that researchers read and cite the US literature. I just saw an analysis of citations to Lancet, Nature. Science, e.g,. by Chinese journals. It has often been claimed by Europeans that Americans do not read their literature but I have never seen any proof of this. They were studies long ago that showed that American physicians did not even cite British journals, but again are we talking about research physicians or clinicians. The latter have barely enough time to read their own journals, whereever they are. However, the wide distribution of JAMA worldwide would indicate otherwise. Best wishes Gretchen. Gene Garfield -----Original Message----- From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Gretchen Whitney Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 8:53 PM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: [SIGMETRICS] authors read national literatures? greetings all, I have a vague recollection that a study (or studies) reported, perhaps by analysis of lists of references in documents, that scientists primarily read their national literatures, and did not stray frequently into the literatures of other countries. Is there any evidence of this? Does this sound familiar to anyone? What might I have read? This could be as old as some studies out of psychology in the 1970s. I'm doing a study of a subset of MEDLINE through DIALOG, and I'd like to be able to assert that the values in the CP (country of publication) field reflect what scientists in a given country READ, and the values in the CS (author affiliation) field reflect what they experiment with and WRITE. By analysis of these fields and titles/subjects, this assertion seems to be supported because there is consitency in values regarding therapies explored/supported/promoted from both fields. In other words, there is consistency in both that enable me to assert that country x is exploring y therapy, as opposed to country w exploring z therapy. Is there literature out there that supports the idea that scientists, particularly physicians, read their national literatures predominantly, and write in those intellectual domains? I've already tried Tenopir/King, and it wasn't them. Any help would be greatly appreciated. --gw <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> <> Gretchen Whitney, PhD tel 865.974.7919 School of Information Sciences fax 865.974.4967 University of Tennessee, Knoxville TN 37996 USA gwhitney at utk.edu http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/ jESSE:http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/jesse.html SIGMETRICS:http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> <> From azun at METU.EDU.TR Wed Nov 30 04:01:30 2005 From: azun at METU.EDU.TR (ali uzun) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 11:01:30 +0200 Subject: authors read national =?us-ascii?q?literatures=3F?= In-Reply-To: <311174B69873F148881A743FCF1EE537D44679@TSHUSPAPHIMBX02.ERF.THOMSON.COM> Message-ID: -----------Dear Dr. Whitney, A recent article of mine titled `Assessing internationality of scholarly journals through foreign authorship patterns`, Scientometrics, Vol. 61, No.3(2004) 457-465, and the papers listed in the references therein may be helpful. A set of major journals in information science and scientometrics of the European or USA origin were studied in the article. Regards, Ali Uzun -------- > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > You must make a distinction between scientists and physicians. To lump > them together is valid. You can tell from citation patterns of the > literature outside the US that researchers read and cite the US > literature. I just saw an analysis of citations to Lancet, Nature. > Science, e.g,. by Chinese journals. > > It has often been claimed by Europeans that Americans do not read their > literature but I have never seen any proof of this. They were studies > long ago that showed that American physicians did not even cite British > journals, but again are we talking about research physicians or > clinicians. The latter have barely enough time to read their own > journals, whereever they are. However, the wide distribution of JAMA > worldwide would indicate otherwise. Best wishes Gretchen. Gene Garfield > > -----Original Message----- > From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics > [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Gretchen Whitney > Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 8:53 PM > To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU > Subject: [SIGMETRICS] authors read national literatures? > > > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > greetings all, > > I have a vague recollection that a study (or studies) reported, perhaps > by analysis of lists of references in documents, that scientists > primarily read their national literatures, and did not stray frequently > into the literatures of other countries. Is there any evidence of this? > Does this sound familiar to anyone? What might I have read? This could > be as old as some studies out of psychology in the 1970s. I'm doing a > study of a subset of MEDLINE through DIALOG, and I'd like to be able to > assert that the values in the CP (country of publication) field reflect > what scientists in a given country READ, and the values in the CS > (author affiliation) field reflect what they experiment with and WRITE. > By analysis of these fields and titles/subjects, this assertion seems to > be supported because there is consitency in values regarding therapies > explored/supported/promoted from both fields. > > In other words, there is consistency in both that enable me to assert > that country x is exploring y therapy, as opposed to country w exploring > z therapy. > > Is there literature out there that supports the idea that scientists, > particularly physicians, read their national literatures predominantly, > and write in those intellectual domains? > > I've already tried Tenopir/King, and it wasn't them. > > Any help would be greatly appreciated. > > --gw > > <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> <> > <> > Gretchen Whitney, PhD tel > 865.974.7919 > School of Information Sciences fax > 865.974.4967 > University of Tennessee, Knoxville TN 37996 USA > gwhitney at utk.edu > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/ > jESSE:http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/jesse.html > SIGMETRICS:http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> <> > <> > From loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET Wed Nov 30 04:07:33 2005 From: loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET (Loet Leydesdorff) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 10:07:33 +0100 Subject: nanoscience and technology Message-ID: MRS Meeting Scene Day 2 ? Monday, November 28 Daily dose from Boston. Bringing you the very best of MRS. Symposium X - Frontiers of Materials Research The other symposium X talk of the meeting was given by Loet Leydesdorff, (Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR), Netherlands) on The Self-Organizing Dynamics of a Knowledge-Based Economy. During the course of his talk, he posed three key questions and attempted to answer them. First, what is the knowledge base of an economy? Leydesdorff described how a knowledge base is constructed within social systems and the conditions under which it is stabilized and also globalized. The self-organization was specified and described as an interaction among three dynamics, the so-called Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government. Second, how can the knowledge base be measured? The production of negative entropy within the system was used as an indicator. Using the Triple Helix model, the mutual information in three dimensions was introduced as serving this function. The maps of two na! tional economies, Germany and the Netherlands, were shown using this indicator. Leydesdorff described how an advanced knowledge-based economy was not confined to regions in the former West Germany but also included specific areas in the former East Germany. Third, can the knowledge base be modeled or simulated? Leydesdorff described Anticipatory Systems, which are knowledge-based systems process models of themselves. He discussed strong anticipation versus weak anticipation. He described how psychological systems are only weakly anticipatory (that is, they entertain models of themselves), while social systems can become strongly anticipatory (under historically specifiable conditions). Strongly anticipatory systems construct their own next stage. ? Materials Research Society, 2005 _____ Loet Leydesdorff 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/ The Knowledge-Based Economy: Modeled, Measured, and Simulated The Self-Organization of the Knowledge-Based Society; The Challenge of Scientometrics -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: clip_image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 18009 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: clip_image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 1066 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: clip_image003.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 4033 bytes Desc: not available URL: From notsjb at LSU.EDU Wed Nov 30 10:44:07 2005 From: notsjb at LSU.EDU (Stephen J. Bensman) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 10:44:07 -0500 Subject: authors read national literatures? Message-ID: I thought that I would throw in a theoretical perspective from which to approach the problem of whether authors read mainly their national literatures. >From the research I have done, it seems that scientists and scholars operate within a certain social stratification system and will tend to read and cite those scientists and scholars dominant within this social stratification system. It therefore depends on whether a given field of study has become globalized and in what form this globalization has taken place. If the field has become totally globalized, then the reading and citation patterns will be international. If the field has not become globalized, then the reading and citing patterns will follow the dictates of some localized stratification system. I think that as a general hypothesis you can posit that the more universal the topic, the more globalized the field. This would probably be the pattern in the hard sciences. However, as you approach the social sciences and humanities, the patterns will become more national and regional due to a narrowing of interests. I am most familiar with this phenomenon in chemistry. As in many fields. there seems to be a pattern of globalization through the main US scientific association--the American Chemical Society. I have discussed this matter with persons on the ACS board, and they agree with this. This why the Journal of the American Chemical Society is the dominant journal in the field, because this is where the international elite tend to publish. There is also signs of this with ASIST and JASIST, as anybody who has attended an ASIST conference or looked at the authorship pattern of JASIST. In contrast the ALA has remained parochial, and there is little awareness of IFLA and its journal among American librarians. Therefore, you are dealing with a very complex issue that is dependent on a number of very complex variables. However, I think that if you maintain this theoretical perspective, you can sort through these variables. It is a crucial issue, because I really do not think that European really should be evaluating themselves with ISI citations, whose patterns are largely dictated by the social stratification system of the US. Despite all the trans-Atlantic hollering, the US is not a European country and every day is becoming less of one in both values and ethnic composition. SB On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 16:22:25 -0800, John McDonald wrote: >Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): >http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > >Gretchen, Here's just one recent example: > >Schloegl,C & Stock WG (2004) Impact and Relevance of LIS Journals: A >Scientometric Analysis of International and German-Language LIS >Journals-Citation Analysis Versus Reader Survey. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN >SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 55(13):1155-1168, 2004 > >"There is not much information exchange between international, >i.e., English-writing, and German-writing LIS >authors. German-writing authors cite at least some international >journals such as JASIST, Online, Digital Libraries, >LibraryJournal , or Libri (see Figure 1). Authors of the >English-language LIS periodicals cite their German-writing >counterpart to such a small extent that the defined threshold >values were not reached. A similar result was found in a >study about foreign authorship distribution in JASIST and >Journal of Documentation (He & Spink, 2002). Accordingly, >125 authors from the United Kingdom and 110 from Canada >published articles in JASIST and American Documentation, >respectively, in the period 1950 to 1999. However, only 25 >authors were from Germany, 6 from Switzerland, and 3 from >Austria. In the British Journal of Documentation, 128 authors >were from the United States, but only 8 from Germany, >3 from Switzerland, and none from Austria. This might raise >the following question: Are there any invisible borderlines >between English-speaking information scientists and their >German-speaking colleagues?" > >They also cite a number of related studies that have shown the same >effect. I think I would tend to think the reason for the results they >found is due to language abilities rather than cultural or national >identities. > > >John McDonald >Acquisitions Librarian >California Institute of Technology > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics >[mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Eugene Garfield >Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 4:02 PM >To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU >Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] authors read national literatures? > >Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): >http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > >You must make a distinction between scientists and physicians. To lump >them together is valid. You can tell from citation patterns of the >literature outside the US that researchers read and cite the US >literature. I just saw an analysis of citations to Lancet, Nature. >Science, e.g,. by Chinese journals. > >It has often been claimed by Europeans that Americans do not read their >literature but I have never seen any proof of this. They were studies >long ago that showed that American physicians did not even cite British >journals, but again are we talking about research physicians or >clinicians. The latter have barely enough time to read their own >journals, whereever they are. However, the wide distribution of JAMA >worldwide would indicate otherwise. Best wishes Gretchen. Gene Garfield > >-----Original Message----- >From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics >[mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Gretchen Whitney >Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 8:53 PM >To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU >Subject: [SIGMETRICS] authors read national literatures? > > >Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): >http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > >greetings all, > > I have a vague recollection that a study (or studies) reported, perhaps >by analysis of lists of references in documents, that scientists >primarily read their national literatures, and did not stray frequently >into the literatures of other countries. Is there any evidence of this? >Does this sound familiar to anyone? What might I have read? This could >be as old as some studies out of psychology in the 1970s. I'm doing a >study of a subset of MEDLINE through DIALOG, and I'd like to be able to >assert that the values in the CP (country of publication) field reflect >what scientists in a given country READ, and the values in the CS >(author affiliation) field reflect what they experiment with and WRITE. >By analysis of these fields and titles/subjects, this assertion seems to >be supported because there is consitency in values regarding therapies >explored/supported/promoted from both fields. > >In other words, there is consistency in both that enable me to assert >that country x is exploring y therapy, as opposed to country w exploring >z therapy. > >Is there literature out there that supports the idea that scientists, >particularly physicians, read their national literatures predominantly, >and write in those intellectual domains? > >I've already tried Tenopir/King, and it wasn't them. > >Any help would be greatly appreciated. > > --gw > ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> ><> >Gretchen Whitney, PhD tel >865.974.7919 >School of Information Sciences fax >865.974.4967 >University of Tennessee, Knoxville TN 37996 USA gwhitney at utk.edu >http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/ >jESSE:http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/jesse.html >SIGMETRICS:http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> ><> From samorri at OKSTATE.EDU Wed Nov 30 11:14:28 2005 From: samorri at OKSTATE.EDU (Steven Morris) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 10:14:28 -0600 Subject: Cumulation of knowledge in a specialty Message-ID: The level of activity on this list in the last few days has been dizzying.... I am wondering if anyone knows of any studies that compare literatures of different specialties or fields on the basis of their 'cumulation of knowledge'. For example: medical and engineering fields quickly build up bodies of knowledge on a topic, this knowledge is relatively undisputed after an short shake-out period and researchers build on this knowledge to further advance the topic. Compare to fields like psychology where the topics are rehashed over and over and the knowledge doesn't seem to cumulate very much. Are there any papers out there that describe the phenomenon of cumulation of knowledge and how that cumulation is manifested in journal literature? Has anyone studied this in terms of Kuhnian paradigms? For example, maybe a specialty with cumulating knowledge is in a state of paradigmatic "puzzle solving", and a specialty that doesn't cumulate knowledge is in a "pre-paradigm" state. I'd be happy to hear from anyone that has any ideas on the topic, or can point me to some relevant papers. Thanks kindly, Steven Morris Oklahoma State University From notsjb at LSU.EDU Wed Nov 30 11:52:19 2005 From: notsjb at LSU.EDU (Stephen J Bensman) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 10:52:19 -0600 Subject: Cumulation of knowledge in a specialty Message-ID: One easy way to handle this problem would be to analyze the importance of review journals in various fields. This is easily done through looking at the ranking of journals by the standard ISI impact factor. If there are review journals at the top of the hierarchy, you can assume that the fielding is cumulating and codifying knowledge. If not, then the field is probably not doing so. Once again I suspect that there may be a sharp dichotomy in this between the hard sciences, on the one hand, and the social sciences and humanities, on the other. I recently did an analysis of this phenomenon for information science. Of great interest is the sudden jump of ARIST in impact factor rankings with the change of editorship. I do not know how to interpret this. It could be that the change in editorship has caused ARIST to start playing it proper role. It could also be a fluke due to a single important article. For your edification I am attaching the spreadsheets with the data. SB (See attached file: JCR 1999 IS Ranks.xls)(See attached file: JCR 2001 IS Ranks.xls)(See attached file: JCR 2002 IS Ranks.xls)(See attached file: JCR 2004 IS Ranks.xls) Steven Morris @LISTSERV.UTK.EDU> on 11/30/2005 10:14:28 AM Please respond to ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics Sent by: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU cc: (bcc: Stephen J Bensman/notsjb/LSU) Subject: [SIGMETRICS] Cumulation of knowledge in a specialty The level of activity on this list in the last few days has been dizzying.... I am wondering if anyone knows of any studies that compare literatures of different specialties or fields on the basis of their 'cumulation of knowledge'. For example: medical and engineering fields quickly build up bodies of knowledge on a topic, this knowledge is relatively undisputed after an short shake-out period and researchers build on this knowledge to further advance the topic. Compare to fields like psychology where the topics are rehashed over and over and the knowledge doesn't seem to cumulate very much. Are there any papers out there that describe the phenomenon of cumulation of knowledge and how that cumulation is manifested in journal literature? Has anyone studied this in terms of Kuhnian paradigms? For example, maybe a specialty with cumulating knowledge is in a state of paradigmatic "puzzle solving", and a specialty that doesn't cumulate knowledge is in a "pre-paradigm" state. I'd be happy to hear from anyone that has any ideas on the topic, or can point me to some relevant papers. Thanks kindly, Steven Morris Oklahoma State University -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: JCR 1999 IS Ranks.xls Type: application/msexcel Size: 43516 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: JCR 2001 IS Ranks.xls Type: application/msexcel Size: 50176 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: JCR 2002 IS Ranks.xls Type: application/msexcel Size: 55808 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: JCR 2004 IS Ranks.xls Type: application/msexcel Size: 62251 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Berenika.Webster at VUW.AC.NZ Wed Nov 30 16:08:02 2005 From: Berenika.Webster at VUW.AC.NZ (Berenika Webster) Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 10:08:02 +1300 Subject: authors read national literatures? Message-ID: To add an empirical dimension to this discussion. My own study of citation patterns of Polish sociologists (as recorded in 4 Polish sociological journals between 1981 and 1995) shows a steady increase of citations to foreign literature, reaching some 35% in mid 1990s. Also, we observe a shift from citations to monographs to journals as well as quicker 'pick up' of foreign materials. In earlier years we have seen citations to Polish translations of foreign monographs, more recently we see a significant increase of citations to foreign-language journal articles. Predictably, US, UK and Germany provide the bulk of the cited works. Conversely, a study of SSCI for the same time period has shown a somewhat limited presence/impact of Polish sociology. Only 0.46% of all SSCI sociology papers were authored by Polish sociologists and analysis of citations received by Polish papers revealed three distinct groups of subject of interest to international sociological community (as represented by SSCI); these were: post-1989 transformation in Poland; social stratification in a socialist society and writings on theory, methodology and history of sociology. (Journal of Info Science v. 24(1)) Berenika M. Webster School of Information Management Victoria University of Wellington Wellington, New Zealand -----Original Message----- From: Stephen J. Bensman [mailto:notsjb at LSU.EDU] Sent: Thursday, 1 December 2005 4:44 a.m. To: SIGMETRICS at listserv.utk.edu Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] authors read national literatures? I thought that I would throw in a theoretical perspective from which to approach the problem of whether authors read mainly their national literatures. >From the research I have done, it seems that scientists and scholars operate within a certain social stratification system and will tend to read and cite those scientists and scholars dominant within this social stratification system. It therefore depends on whether a given field of study has become globalized and in what form this globalization has taken place. If the field has become totally globalized, then the reading and citation patterns will be international. If the field has not become globalized, then the reading and citing patterns will follow the dictates of some localized stratification system. I think that as a general hypothesis you can posit that the more universal the topic, the more globalized the field. This would probably be the pattern in the hard sciences. However, as you approach the social sciences and humanities, the patterns will become more national and regional due to a narrowing of interests. I am most familiar with this phenomenon in chemistry. As in many fields. there seems to be a pattern of globalization through the main US scientific association--the American Chemical Society. I have discussed this matter with persons on the ACS board, and they agree with this. This why the Journal of the American Chemical Society is the dominant journal in the field, because this is where the international elite tend to publish. There is also signs of this with ASIST and JASIST, as anybody who has attended an ASIST conference or looked at the authorship pattern of JASIST. In contrast the ALA has remained parochial, and there is little awareness of IFLA and its journal among American librarians. Therefore, you are dealing with a very complex issue that is dependent on a number of very complex variables. However, I think that if you maintain this theoretical perspective, you can sort through these variables. It is a crucial issue, because I really do not think that European really should be evaluating themselves with ISI citations, whose patterns are largely dictated by the social stratification system of the US. Despite all the trans-Atlantic hollering, the US is not a European country and every day is becoming less of one in both values and ethnic composition. SB On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 16:22:25 -0800, John McDonald wrote: >Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): >http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > >Gretchen, Here's just one recent example: > >Schloegl,C & Stock WG (2004) Impact and Relevance of LIS Journals: A >Scientometric Analysis of International and German-Language LIS >Journals-Citation Analysis Versus Reader Survey. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN >SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 55(13):1155-1168, 2004 > >"There is not much information exchange between international, >i.e., English-writing, and German-writing LIS >authors. German-writing authors cite at least some international >journals such as JASIST, Online, Digital Libraries, >LibraryJournal , or Libri (see Figure 1). Authors of the >English-language LIS periodicals cite their German-writing >counterpart to such a small extent that the defined threshold >values were not reached. A similar result was found in a >study about foreign authorship distribution in JASIST and >Journal of Documentation (He & Spink, 2002). Accordingly, >125 authors from the United Kingdom and 110 from Canada >published articles in JASIST and American Documentation, >respectively, in the period 1950 to 1999. However, only 25 >authors were from Germany, 6 from Switzerland, and 3 from >Austria. In the British Journal of Documentation, 128 authors >were from the United States, but only 8 from Germany, >3 from Switzerland, and none from Austria. This might raise >the following question: Are there any invisible borderlines >between English-speaking information scientists and their >German-speaking colleagues?" > >They also cite a number of related studies that have shown the same >effect. I think I would tend to think the reason for the results they >found is due to language abilities rather than cultural or national >identities. > > >John McDonald >Acquisitions Librarian >California Institute of Technology > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics >[mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Eugene Garfield >Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 4:02 PM >To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU >Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] authors read national literatures? > >Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): >http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > >You must make a distinction between scientists and physicians. To lump >them together is valid. You can tell from citation patterns of the >literature outside the US that researchers read and cite the US >literature. I just saw an analysis of citations to Lancet, Nature. >Science, e.g,. by Chinese journals. > >It has often been claimed by Europeans that Americans do not read their >literature but I have never seen any proof of this. They were studies >long ago that showed that American physicians did not even cite British >journals, but again are we talking about research physicians or >clinicians. The latter have barely enough time to read their own >journals, whereever they are. However, the wide distribution of JAMA >worldwide would indicate otherwise. Best wishes Gretchen. Gene Garfield > >-----Original Message----- >From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics >[mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Gretchen Whitney >Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 8:53 PM >To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU >Subject: [SIGMETRICS] authors read national literatures? > > >Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): >http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > >greetings all, > > I have a vague recollection that a study (or studies) reported, perhaps >by analysis of lists of references in documents, that scientists >primarily read their national literatures, and did not stray frequently >into the literatures of other countries. Is there any evidence of this? >Does this sound familiar to anyone? What might I have read? This could >be as old as some studies out of psychology in the 1970s. I'm doing a >study of a subset of MEDLINE through DIALOG, and I'd like to be able to >assert that the values in the CP (country of publication) field reflect >what scientists in a given country READ, and the values in the CS >(author affiliation) field reflect what they experiment with and WRITE. >By analysis of these fields and titles/subjects, this assertion seems to >be supported because there is consitency in values regarding therapies >explored/supported/promoted from both fields. > >In other words, there is consistency in both that enable me to assert >that country x is exploring y therapy, as opposed to country w exploring >z therapy. > >Is there literature out there that supports the idea that scientists, >particularly physicians, read their national literatures predominantly, >and write in those intellectual domains? > >I've already tried Tenopir/King, and it wasn't them. > >Any help would be greatly appreciated. > > --gw > ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> ><> >Gretchen Whitney, PhD tel >865.974.7919 >School of Information Sciences fax >865.974.4967 >University of Tennessee, Knoxville TN 37996 USA gwhitney at utk.edu >http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/ >jESSE:http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/jesse.html >SIGMETRICS:http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> ><> From notsjb at LSU.EDU Wed Nov 30 16:38:28 2005 From: notsjb at LSU.EDU (Stephen J Bensman) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 15:38:28 -0600 Subject: authors read national literatures? Message-ID: Probably was a big jump in the citations of Polish sociologists to US, UK, and German literature after the Berlin Wall came down in 1989. That is what happens when you win a big war. S Berenika Webster @LISTSERV.UTK.EDU> on 11/30/2005 03:08:02 PM Please respond to ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics Sent by: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU cc: (bcc: Stephen J Bensman/notsjb/LSU) Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] authors read national literatures? To add an empirical dimension to this discussion. My own study of citation patterns of Polish sociologists (as recorded in 4 Polish sociological journals between 1981 and 1995) shows a steady increase of citations to foreign literature, reaching some 35% in mid 1990s. Also, we observe a shift from citations to monographs to journals as well as quicker 'pick up' of foreign materials. In earlier years we have seen citations to Polish translations of foreign monographs, more recently we see a significant increase of citations to foreign-language journal articles. Predictably, US, UK and Germany provide the bulk of the cited works. Conversely, a study of SSCI for the same time period has shown a somewhat limited presence/impact of Polish sociology. Only 0.46% of all SSCI sociology papers were authored by Polish sociologists and analysis of citations received by Polish papers revealed three distinct groups of subject of interest to international sociological community (as represented by SSCI); these were: post-1989 transformation in Poland; social stratification in a socialist society and writings on theory, methodology and history of sociology. (Journal of Info Science v. 24(1)) Berenika M. Webster School of Information Management Victoria University of Wellington Wellington, New Zealand -----Original Message----- From: Stephen J. Bensman [mailto:notsjb at LSU.EDU] Sent: Thursday, 1 December 2005 4:44 a.m. To: SIGMETRICS at listserv.utk.edu Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] authors read national literatures? I thought that I would throw in a theoretical perspective from which to approach the problem of whether authors read mainly their national literatures. >From the research I have done, it seems that scientists and scholars operate within a certain social stratification system and will tend to read and cite those scientists and scholars dominant within this social stratification system. It therefore depends on whether a given field of study has become globalized and in what form this globalization has taken place. If the field has become totally globalized, then the reading and citation patterns will be international. If the field has not become globalized, then the reading and citing patterns will follow the dictates of some localized stratification system. I think that as a general hypothesis you can posit that the more universal the topic, the more globalized the field. This would probably be the pattern in the hard sciences. However, as you approach the social sciences and humanities, the patterns will become more national and regional due to a narrowing of interests. I am most familiar with this phenomenon in chemistry. As in many fields. there seems to be a pattern of globalization through the main US scientific association--the American Chemical Society. I have discussed this matter with persons on the ACS board, and they agree with this. This why the Journal of the American Chemical Society is the dominant journal in the field, because this is where the international elite tend to publish. There is also signs of this with ASIST and JASIST, as anybody who has attended an ASIST conference or looked at the authorship pattern of JASIST. In contrast the ALA has remained parochial, and there is little awareness of IFLA and its journal among American librarians. Therefore, you are dealing with a very complex issue that is dependent on a number of very complex variables. However, I think that if you maintain this theoretical perspective, you can sort through these variables. It is a crucial issue, because I really do not think that European really should be evaluating themselves with ISI citations, whose patterns are largely dictated by the social stratification system of the US. Despite all the trans-Atlantic hollering, the US is not a European country and every day is becoming less of one in both values and ethnic composition. SB On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 16:22:25 -0800, John McDonald wrote: >Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): >http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > >Gretchen, Here's just one recent example: > >Schloegl,C & Stock WG (2004) Impact and Relevance of LIS Journals: A >Scientometric Analysis of International and German-Language LIS >Journals-Citation Analysis Versus Reader Survey. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN >SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 55(13):1155-1168, 2004 > >"There is not much information exchange between international, >i.e., English-writing, and German-writing LIS >authors. German-writing authors cite at least some international >journals such as JASIST, Online, Digital Libraries, >LibraryJournal , or Libri (see Figure 1). Authors of the >English-language LIS periodicals cite their German-writing >counterpart to such a small extent that the defined threshold >values were not reached. A similar result was found in a >study about foreign authorship distribution in JASIST and >Journal of Documentation (He & Spink, 2002). Accordingly, >125 authors from the United Kingdom and 110 from Canada >published articles in JASIST and American Documentation, >respectively, in the period 1950 to 1999. However, only 25 >authors were from Germany, 6 from Switzerland, and 3 from >Austria. In the British Journal of Documentation, 128 authors >were from the United States, but only 8 from Germany, >3 from Switzerland, and none from Austria. This might raise >the following question: Are there any invisible borderlines >between English-speaking information scientists and their >German-speaking colleagues?" > >They also cite a number of related studies that have shown the same >effect. I think I would tend to think the reason for the results they >found is due to language abilities rather than cultural or national >identities. > > >John McDonald >Acquisitions Librarian >California Institute of Technology > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics >[mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Eugene Garfield >Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 4:02 PM >To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU >Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] authors read national literatures? > >Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): >http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > >You must make a distinction between scientists and physicians. To lump >them together is valid. You can tell from citation patterns of the >literature outside the US that researchers read and cite the US >literature. I just saw an analysis of citations to Lancet, Nature. >Science, e.g,. by Chinese journals. > >It has often been claimed by Europeans that Americans do not read their >literature but I have never seen any proof of this. They were studies >long ago that showed that American physicians did not even cite British >journals, but again are we talking about research physicians or >clinicians. The latter have barely enough time to read their own >journals, whereever they are. However, the wide distribution of JAMA >worldwide would indicate otherwise. Best wishes Gretchen. Gene Garfield > >-----Original Message----- >From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics >[mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Gretchen Whitney >Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 8:53 PM >To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU >Subject: [SIGMETRICS] authors read national literatures? > > >Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): >http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > >greetings all, > > I have a vague recollection that a study (or studies) reported, perhaps >by analysis of lists of references in documents, that scientists >primarily read their national literatures, and did not stray frequently >into the literatures of other countries. Is there any evidence of this? >Does this sound familiar to anyone? What might I have read? This could >be as old as some studies out of psychology in the 1970s. I'm doing a >study of a subset of MEDLINE through DIALOG, and I'd like to be able to >assert that the values in the CP (country of publication) field reflect >what scientists in a given country READ, and the values in the CS >(author affiliation) field reflect what they experiment with and WRITE. >By analysis of these fields and titles/subjects, this assertion seems to >be supported because there is consitency in values regarding therapies >explored/supported/promoted from both fields. > >In other words, there is consistency in both that enable me to assert >that country x is exploring y therapy, as opposed to country w exploring >z therapy. > >Is there literature out there that supports the idea that scientists, >particularly physicians, read their national literatures predominantly, >and write in those intellectual domains? > >I've already tried Tenopir/King, and it wasn't them. > >Any help would be greatly appreciated. > > --gw > ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> ><> >Gretchen Whitney, PhD tel >865.974.7919 >School of Information Sciences fax >865.974.4967 >University of Tennessee, Knoxville TN 37996 USA gwhitney at utk.edu >http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/ >jESSE:http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/jesse.html >SIGMETRICS:http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> ><>