SIGMETRICS Digest - 7 Jul 2006 to 8 Jul 2006 (#2006-99)

Mon Jul 10 06:39:34 EDT 2006

SCI 2004

SoSCI 2004

Combined

Number of source journals

5968

1712

7379

unique journal-journal relations

1,038,268

96,207

1,195,158

sum of journal-journal relations

18,943,827

966,619

20,326,793

average cell value

18.25

10.05

17.01

total 'citing'

25,798,965

2,909,219

27,961,981

total 'cited'

20,909,401

1,453,397

21,810,032

'within-journal citations'

2,016,500

137,269

2,107,885

Source:  <http://www.leydesdorff.net/sci_sosci/index.htm> Mapping
Interdisciplinarity at the Interfaces between the Science Citation Index and
the Social Science Citation Index, Scientometrics (forthcoming); <
<http://www.leydesdorff.net/sci_sosci/sci+sosci.pdf> pdf-version>

The within-journal citations are of the order of 10%, but this percentage
varie among journals.

Statistics

N

Valid

7379

Missing

0

Mean

12.6395

Median

9.0596

Mode

.00

Std. Deviation

12.66792

Variance

160.476

Skewness

2.297

Std. Error of Skewness

.029

Kurtosis

7.157

Std. Error of Kurtosis

.057

Minimum

.00

Maximum

100.00

Using local citation maps at http://www.leydesdorff.net/jcr04/cited, one is
able to correct for "within-journal" citations.

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/

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics
> [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of David Watkins
> Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 11:47 AM
> To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU
> Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] SIGMETRICS Digest - 7 Jul 2006 to 8
> Jul 2006 (#2006-99)
>
> Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe):
> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
>
> Journal Self-Citation etc....
>
>
> Academics are human beings; science is a social activity.
>
> There does not need to be overt pressure to increase rates of
> self citation over a hypothetical 'natural' level. Authors
> know that editors like to see their journal 'used', and it is
> natural that any one paper will build on similar work that is
> published in similar journals. Given an a choice to cite
> work, even by the same author(s), in journal A or journal B
> in the literature survey, which very often happens, a
> sensible new author will cite the work in jA if s/he is
> submitting there, or vice versa.
>
> The situation is compounded by the refereeing system. What
> assiduous author does not try to identify potential referees
> - often members of the target journal's Editorial Board - and
> ensure their work is cited, even if it is actually marginal?
> This is a habit instilled at doctoral level: "for goodness
> sake cite the intended external's work, and do so in a
> favourable light....!"
>
> Even it this attempt to subvert the system fails, who has not
> experienced the comment from an 'anonymous' referee, that the
> work of Dr X is under-acknowledged, with copious examples,
> when it is clear to all that Dr X is the refereee...? S/he is
> probably on the Editorial Board...so yet more journal
> self-citations are added during the revison process.
>
> Probably, since some authors 'work their way down' a ranked
> list of journals until they get acceptance, initial decisions
> on who and what to cite therefore also generate an enhanced
> 'Mathew Effect' which is imprinted in the paper even when it
> is published lower down the pecking order - although I've
> also known authors add and subtract citations during this
> process (for the reasons above) without altering the paper
> itself in any substantive way.
>
> Not sure Open Access (a good idea suis generis) will impact
> this in any way. But almost certainly new biases will be
> introduced. If the rules of the game change, players respond
> (Vide UK RAE etc.....)
>
> David Watkins
>
> ************************************************
> Professor David Watkins
> Postgraduate Research Centre
> Southampton Business School
> Southampton Solent University
> East Park Terrace
> Southampton SO14 0RH
>
> David.Watkins at solent.ac.uk
>  023 80 319610 (Tel)
> +44 23 80 31 96 10 (Tel)
>
> 02380 33 26 27 (fax)
> +44 23 80 33 26 27 (fax)
>
>
>
>
>
> Automatic digest processor <LISTSERV at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU>
> 09/07/2006 05:00
>
> Please respond to ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics
>        <SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU>
>
> Sent by:    ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics
>        <SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU>
>
>
> To:    Recipients of SIGMETRICS digests <SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU>
> cc:
> Subject:    SIGMETRICS Digest - 7 Jul 2006 to 8 Jul 2006 (#2006-99)
>
> There is one message totalling 104 lines in this issue.
>
> Topics of the day:
>
>   1. Self-Citation Bias and Open Access
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date:    Sat, 8 Jul 2006 18:01:59 +0100
> From:    Stevan Harnad <harnad at ECS.SOTON.AC.UK>
> Subject: Self-Citation Bias and Open Access
>
> Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe):
> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
>
> Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2006 18:15:44 +0100 (BST)
> From: [journalist, identity deleted]
>
> > I am a journalist at [deleted]... investigating the phenomenon of
> > [journal self-citation bias]
> >
> > I wonder if you could let me know... whether any journals... have
> > rules that state that the author of a paper it publishes must cite
> > other papers published in its journal.
>
> I have heard rumours, several times now, that some journals
> have a policy of encouraging or even requiring their authors
> to cite papers in the same journal, in order to raise the
> journal's citation impact. I do not have evidence of this,
> though others might. (I am branching the query to the
> sigmetrics list.)
>
> > Also, do you know of any academics who...
> > have agreed to cite colleagues if they cite him/her?
>
> That's even harder to track down, but soon it will be
> possible to track
> both: There will be "endogamy/exogamy" indices for articles,
> authors and journals, reflecting the degree to which their
> citation impact comes from (1) self-citations, (2) citations
> to and from the same circle of authors or co-authors, (3)
> citations to and from the same journal, or small closed
> circle of journals, and (4) how this compares with the
> pattern for other comparable authors, papers and journals,
> equated as much as possible for subject matter and citation level.
>
> Such studies are already possible, in principle, using the
> ISI citations database, but the coverage there is not total
> (it only covers about the top quarter of the journals
> published: 8000/24000). Once the research institutions and
> funders mandate that their research journal article output
> must be made openly accessible free for all on the web, it
> will be possible to do exhaustive and rigorous analyses for
> (1)-(4) and much
> more:
>
>     Shadbolt, N., Brody, T., Carr, L. and Harnad, S. (2006) The Open
>     Research Web: A Preview of the Optimal and the
> Inevitable, in Jacobs,
>     N., Eds. Open Access: Key Strategic, Technical and
> Economic Aspects,
>     chapter 21. Chandos.
>     http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/12369/
>
> Practices that are openly detectable are also
> name-and-shame-able. Hence Open Access is both the best way
> to monitor as well as to discourage dubious ones.
> Open Access will maximize legitimate research impact and its
> measurement, while minimizing abuses.
>
> Stevan Harnad
>
> > Excerpts from the Wall Street Journal
> >
> > Science Journals Artfully Try To Boost Their Rankings By
> SHARON BEGLEY
> > June 5, 2006; Page B1
> >
> > John B. West...  Distinguished Professor of Medicine and
> Physiology at
> the
> > University of California, San Diego ...
> > submitted a paper on the design of the human lung to the American
> > Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. [A]n
> editor emailed
> him
> > that the paper was basically fine. There was just one
> thing: Dr. West
> > should cite more studies that had appeared in the
> respiratory journal.
> >
> > ...Scientists and editors say scientific journals increasingly are
> > manipulating rankings -- called "impact factors" -- that
> are based on
> > how often papers they publish are cited by other researchers.
> >
> > ...Impact factors are calculated annually for some 5,900 science
> > journals by Thomson Scientific, part of the Thomson
> >
> <http://online.wsj.com/quotes/main.html?type=djn
<http://online.wsj.com/quotes/main.html?type=djn&symbol=tms> &symbol=tms>
Corp.,
> > of Stamford, Conn. Numbers less than 2 are considered low. Top
> > journals, such as the Journal of the American Medical Association,
> > score in the double digits. Researchers and editors say
> manipulating
> > the score is more common among smaller, newer journals,
> which struggle
> > for visibility against more established rivals.
> >
> > ...Impact factors matter to publishers' bottom lines because
> > librarians rely on them to make purchasing decisions...
> >
> > ...Self-citation can go too far. In 2005, Thomson
> Scientific dropped
> > the World Journal of Gastroenterology from its rankings
> because 85% of
> > the citations it published were to its own papers and because few
> > other journals cited it....
> >
> > Journals can limit citations to papers published by competitors,
> > keeping the rivals' impact factors down...
> >
> > Journals' "questionable" steps to raise their impact
> factors "affect
> > the public," Ms. Liebert says. "Ultimately, funding is allocated to
> > scientists and topics perceived to be of the greatest
> importance. If
> > impact factor is being manipulated, then scientists and
> studies that
> > seem important will be funded perhaps at the expense of those that
> > seem less important."
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of SIGMETRICS Digest - 7 Jul 2006 to 8 Jul 2006 (#2006-99)
> **************************************************************
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.asis.org/pipermail/sigmetrics/attachments/20060710/37a37170/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: att2589d.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 5672 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.asis.org/pipermail/sigmetrics/attachments/20060710/37a37170/attachment.gif>