From wilsontd at GMAIL.COM Fri Jan 1 09:15:21 2010 From: wilsontd at GMAIL.COM (Tom Wilson) Date: Fri, 1 Jan 2010 14:15:21 +0000 Subject: Information Research Message-ID: The December 2009 issue of Information Research has a couple of items of potential interest to Sigmetrics members - you'll find them from the contents page at http://informationr.net/ir/14-4/infres144.html ---------------------------------------------------------- Professor Tom Wilson, PhD, PhD (h.c.), ----------------------------------------------------------- Publisher and Editor in Chief: Information Research: an international electronic journal Website - http://InformationR.net/ir/ Blog - http://info-research.blogspot.com/ Photoblog - http://tomwilson.shutterchance.com/ ----------------------------------------------------------- E-mail: wilsontd at gmail.com ----------------------------------------------------------- From amsciforum at GMAIL.COM Tue Jan 5 06:48:20 2010 From: amsciforum at GMAIL.COM (Stevan Harnad) Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 06:48:20 -0500 Subject: Whether Self-Selected or Mandated, Open Access Increases Citation Impact for Higher Quality Research Message-ID: ** Cross-Posted ** Self-Selected or Mandated, Open Access Increases Citation Impact for Higher Quality Research http://arxiv.org/abs/1001.0361 Yassine Gargouri, Chawki Hajjem, Vincent Lariviere, Yves Gingras, Les Carr, Tim Brody, Stevan Harnad ABSTRACT: Articles whose authors make them Open Access (OA) by self-archiving them online are cited significantly more than articles accessible only to subscribers. Some have suggested that this "OA Advantage" may not be causal but just a self-selection bias, because authors preferentially make higher-quality articles OA. To test this we compared self-selective self-archiving with mandatory self-archiving for a sample of 27,197 articles published 2002-2006 in 1,984 journals. The OA Advantage proved just as high for both. Logistic regression showed that the advantage is independent of other correlates of citations (article age; journal impact factor; number of co-authors, references or pages; field; article type; or country) and greatest for the most highly cited articles. The OA Advantage is real, independent and causal, but skewed. Its size is indeed correlated with quality, just as citations themselves are (the top 20% of articles receive about 80% of all citations). The advantage is greater for the more citeable articles, not because of a quality bias from authors self-selecting what to make OA, but because of a quality advantage, from users self-selecting what to use and cite, freed by OA from the constraints of selective accessibility to subscribers only. http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/18346/ From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Wed Jan 6 12:57:57 2010 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 11:57:57 -0600 Subject: FW: Professor Brian Vickery has died Message-ID: I was saddened to receive this news about the passing of Brian Vickery, a pioneer and colleague for over 50 years. We first met at the Dorking conference in 1957. The message I received today is from his daughter Susan ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------ Eugene Garfield, PhD. email: garfield at codex.cis.upenn.edu home page: www.eugenegarfield.org Tel: 215-243-2205 Fax: 610-560-4749 Chairman Emeritus, Thomson Reuters Scientific (formerly ISI) 1500 Spring Garden Street, Philadelphia, PA 19130-4067 ________________________________ From: Susan O'Halloran [mailto:susan.ohalloran at btopenworld.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 11:22 AM To: Garfield, Eugene Subject: Professor Brian Vickery has died I am writing to Brian's contacts to let you know that Brian Vickery sadly died on October 17th,. He died after a few days' feeling unwell, but otherwise as full of life and projects as ever. He had enjoyed his 91st birthday party the previous month, with all his children , grandchildren and great grandchildren If you feel that an obituary or other form of tribute would be appropriate in one of the professional journals or other forums he was in contact with, please get in touch with me I am sorry to have to give you this sad news Yours sincerely Susan O'Halloran (Brian's daughter -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amsciforum at GMAIL.COM Wed Jan 6 16:22:33 2010 From: amsciforum at GMAIL.COM (Stevan Harnad) Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 16:22:33 -0500 Subject: Universities UK on Open Access, Metrics, Mandates and the Research Excellence Framework Message-ID: Hyperlinked version: http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/683-guid.html Universities UK recommends making all the research outputs submitted to the UK's new Research Excellence Framework (REF) Open Access (OA). The UUK's recommendation is of course very welcome and timely. All research funded by the RCUK research councils is already covered by the fact that all the UK councils already mandate OA. It is this policy, already adopted by the UK, that the US is now also contemplating adopting, in the form of the proposed Federal Research Public Access Act (FRPAA), as well as the discussion in President Obama's ongoing OSTP Public Access Policy Forum. But if HEFCE were to follow the UUK's recommendation, it would help to ensure Open Access to UK research funded by the EU (for which OA is only partially mandated thus far) and other funders, as well as to unfunded research -- for which OA is mandated by a still small but growing number of universities in the UK and worldwide. (The same UUK proposal could of course be taken up by UK's universities, for once they mandate OA for all their research output, all UK research, funded and unfunded, becomes OA!) There is an arbitrary constraint on REF submissions, however, which would greatly limit the scope of an OA requirement (as well as the scope of REF itself): Only four research outputs per researcher may be submitted, for a span covering at least four years, rather than all research output in that span. This limitation arises because the REF retains the costly and time-consuming process of re-reviewing, by the REF peer panels, of all the already peer-reviewed research outputssubmitted. This was precisely what it had earlier been proposed to replace by metrics, if they prove sufficiently correlated with -- and hence predictive of -- the peer panel ranklings. Now it will only be partially supplemented by a few metrics. This is a pity, and an opportunity lost, both for OA and for testing and validating a rich and diverse new battery of metrics and initializing their respective weights, discipline by discipline. Instead, UUK has endorsed a simplistic (and likewise untested and arbitrary) a-priori weighting ("60/20/20 for outputs, impact and environment"). Harnad, S. (2009) Open Access Scientometrics and the UK Research Assessment Exercise. Scientometrics 79 (1) Also in Proceedings of 11th Annual Meeting of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics 11(1), pp. 27-33, Madrid, Spain. Torres-Salinas, D. and Moed, H. F., Eds. (2007) From richardp at ACADEMIA.EDU Wed Jan 6 19:32:31 2010 From: richardp at ACADEMIA.EDU (Richard Price) Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 16:32:31 -0800 Subject: New Academia.edu feature for SIGMetrics Message-ID: Dear SIGMetrics members, I wanted to tell the list about a new feature on Academia.edu. Academia.edu launched 12 months ago and now helps 300,000 academics a month answer the question 'who's researching what?' There are now 3,955 people on Academia.edu listing Library Science as their research interest. We have built a dedicated page on Academia.edu for the mailing list: http://lists.academia.edu/See-members-of-SIGMetrics This page will show you fellow members of SIGMetrics already on Academia.edu. You can see their papers, research interests, and other information. 10,239 people have already signed up through the mailing list feature. Visit the link below, sign up with Academia.edu, and share your research interests with fellow members of SIGMetrics. http://lists.academia.edu/See-members-of-SIGMetrics Richard Dr. Richard Price, post-doc, Philosophy Dept, Oxford University. Founder of Academia.edu From pmd8 at CORNELL.EDU Thu Jan 7 06:50:06 2010 From: pmd8 at CORNELL.EDU (Philip Davis) Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 06:50:06 -0500 Subject: Whether Self-Selected or Mandated, Open Access Increases Citation Impact for Higher Quality Research In-Reply-To: Message-ID: An interesting bit of research, although I have some methodological concerns about how you treat the data, which may explain some inconsistent and counter-intuitive results, see: http://j.mp/8LK57u A technical response addressing the methodology is welcome. --Phil Davis Stevan Harnad wrote: > Self-Selected or Mandated, Open Access Increases Citation Impact for > Higher Quality Research > > http://arxiv.org/abs/1001.0361 > > Yassine Gargouri, Chawki Hajjem, Vincent Lariviere, Yves Gingras, Les > Carr, Tim Brody, Stevan Harnad > > ABSTRACT: Articles whose authors make them Open Access (OA) by > self-archiving them online are cited significantly more than articles > accessible only to subscribers. Some have suggested that this "OA > Advantage" may not be causal but just a self-selection bias, because > authors preferentially make higher-quality articles OA. To test this > we compared self-selective self-archiving with mandatory > self-archiving for a sample of 27,197 articles published 2002-2006 in > 1,984 journals. The OA Advantage proved just as high for both. > Logistic regression showed that the advantage is independent of other > correlates of citations (article age; journal impact factor; number of > co-authors, references or pages; field; article type; or country) and > greatest for the most highly cited articles. The OA Advantage is real, > independent and causal, but skewed. Its size is indeed correlated with > quality, just as citations themselves are (the top 20% of articles > receive about 80% of all citations). The advantage is greater for the > more citeable articles, not because of a quality bias from authors > self-selecting what to make OA, but because of a quality advantage, > from users self-selecting what to use and cite, freed by OA from the > constraints of selective accessibility to subscribers only. > > http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/18346/ > > -- Philip M. Davis PhD Student Department of Communication 301 Kennedy Hall Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853 email: pmd8 at cornell.edu phone: 607 255-2124 https://confluence.cornell.edu/display/~pmd8/resume http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/author/pmd8/ From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Thu Jan 7 10:54:46 2010 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 09:54:46 -0600 Subject: New Paper by Nek Moed on "Measuring contextual citation impact of scientific journals" Message-ID: The paper is posted in ArXiv, and the same version has recently been accepted for publication in the Journal of Informetrics. The link is: http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0911/0911.2632.pdf This paper explores a new indicator of journal citation impact, denoted as source normalized impact per paper (SNIP). It measures a journal's contextual citation impact, taking into account characteristics of its properly defined subject field, especially the frequency at which authors cite other papers in their reference lists, the rapidity of maturing of citation impact, and the extent to which a database used for the assessment covers the field's literature. It further develops Eugene Garfield's notions of a field's 'citation potential' defined as the average length of references lists in a field and determining the probability of being cited, and the need in fair performance assessments to correct for differences between subject fields. A journal's subject field is defined as the set of papers citing that journal. SNIP is defined as the ratio of the journal's citation count per paper and the citation potential in its subject field. It aims to allow direct comparison of sources in different subject fields. Citation potential is shown to vary not only between journal subject categories - groupings of journals sharing a research field - or disciplines (e.g., journals in mathematics, engineering and social sciences tend to have lower values than titles in life sciences), but also between journals within the same subject category. For instance, basic journals tend to show higher citation potentials than applied or clinical journals, and journals covering emerging topics higher than periodicals in classical subjects or more general journals. SNIP corrects for such differences. Its strengths and limitations are critically discussed, and suggestions are made for further research. All empirical results are derived from Elsevier's Scopus -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Thu Jan 7 11:02:43 2010 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 10:02:43 -0600 Subject: correction: Paper by Henk Moed on "Measuring contextual citation impact of scientific journals" Message-ID: Please note there is a typo in the previous message. The author is Henk Moed and the email address is: moed at cwts.leidenuniv.nl ________________________________ From: Garfield, Eugene Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 10:55 AM To: 'SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU' Subject: New Paper by Nek Moed on "Measuring contextual citation impact of scientific journals" The paper is posted in ArXiv, and the same version has recently been accepted for publication in the Journal of Informetrics. The link is: http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0911/0911.2632.pdf This paper explores a new indicator of journal citation impact, denoted as source normalized impact per paper (SNIP). It measures a journal's contextual citation impact, taking into account characteristics of its properly defined subject field, especially the frequency at which authors cite other papers in their reference lists, the rapidity of maturing of citation impact, and the extent to which a database used for the assessment covers the field's literature. It further develops Eugene Garfield's notions of a field's 'citation potential' defined as the average length of references lists in a field and determining the probability of being cited, and the need in fair performance assessments to correct for differences between subject fields. A journal's subject field is defined as the set of papers citing that journal. SNIP is defined as the ratio of the journal's citation count per paper and the citation potential in its subject field. It aims to allow direct comparison of sources in different subject fields. Citation potential is shown to vary not only between journal subject categories - groupings of journals sharing a research field - or disciplines (e.g., journals in mathematics, engineering and social sciences tend to have lower values than titles in life sciences), but also between journals within the same subject category. For instance, basic journals tend to show higher citation potentials than applied or clinical journals, and journals covering emerging topics higher than periodicals in classical subjects or more general journals. SNIP corrects for such differences. Its strengths and limitations are critically discussed, and suggestions are made for further research. All empirical results are derived from Elsevier's Scopus -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isidro.aguillo at CCHS.CSIC.ES Thu Jan 7 11:07:05 2010 From: isidro.aguillo at CCHS.CSIC.ES (Isidro F. Aguillo) Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 17:07:05 +0100 Subject: Taxonomy of webometrics tools Message-ID: Measuring the institution?s footprint in the web Isidro F. Aguillo Address to request of reprints: isidro.aguillo at cchs.csic.es Library Hi Tech, Vol. 27 No. 4, 2009. pp. 540-556 Abstract Purpose ? The purpose of this paper is to provide an alternative, although complementary, system for the evaluation of the scholarly activities of academic organizations, scholars and researchers, based on web indicators, in order to speed up the change of paradigm in scholarly communication towards a new fully electronic twenty-first century model. Design/methodology/approach ? In order to achieve these goals, a new set of web indicators has been introduced, obtained mainly from data gathered from search engines, the new mediators of scholarly communication. Findings ? It was found that three large groups of indicators are feasible to obtain and relevant for evaluation purposes: activity (web publication); impact (visibility) and usage (visits and visitors). As a proof of concept, a Ranking Web of Universities has been built with Webometrics data. There are two relevant findings: ranking results are similar to those obtained by other bibliometric-based rankings; and there is a concerning digital divide between North American and European universities, which appear in lower positions when compared with their USA and Canada counterparts. Research limitations/implications ? Cybermetrics is still an emerging discipline, so new developments should be expected when more empirical data become available. Practical implications ? The proposed approach suggests the publication of truly electronic journals, rather than digital versions of printed articles. Additional materials, such as raw data and multimedia files, should be included along with other relevant information arising from more informal activities. These repositories should be Open Access, available as part of the public web, indexed by the main commercial search engines. It is expected that these actions could generate larger web-based audiences, reduce the costs of publication and access and allow third parties to take advantage of the knowledge generated, without sacrificing peer review, which should be extended (pre- and post-) and expanded (closed and open). Originality/value ? A full taxonomy of web indicators is introduced for describing and evaluating research activities, academic organizations and individual scholars and scientists. Previous attempts for building such classification were incomplete and did not take into account feasibility and efficiency. -- ************************************* Isidro F. Aguillo, HonPhD Cybermetrics Lab CCHS - CSIC Albasanz, 26-28, 3C1. 28037 Madrid. Spain Ph. 91-602 2890. Fax: 91-602 2971 isidro.aguillo @ cchs.csic.es www. webometrics.info ************************************* From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Thu Jan 7 14:14:43 2010 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 13:14:43 -0600 Subject: The value of science: changing conceptions of scientific productivity, 1869 to circa 1970 Benoit Godin Message-ID: Title: The value of science: changing conceptions of scientific productivity, 1869 to circa 1970 Authors: Godin, B Author Full Names: Godin, Benoit Source: SOCIAL SCIENCE INFORMATION SUR LES SCIENCES SOCIALES 48 (4): 547-586 DEC 2009 Language: English Document Type: Review Author Keywords: Economics of science; History of science; Scientific productivity; Statistics KeyWords Plus: AMERICAN-PSYCHOLOGICAL-ASSOCIATION; VITAL-STATISTICS; ECONOMIC-GROWTH; UNITED-STATES; MEN; AGE; PERFORMANCE; ORGANIZATION; RETURN; RATES Abstract: Productivity is now a buzzword in science studies. Whether you consult the literature on research management, the economic literature on technology and innovation, the literature on bibliometrics or the official literature on science policy and its conceptual frameworks, what you find is analyses on productivity, often accompanied by a plea, and recipes, for increased productivity. This article documents how the concept of productivity got into the analysis of science, through the statistics on which the concept rested, and its transformation over one hundred years. It argues that, through history, the concept as applied to science has carried four meanings: productivity as reproduction, productivity as output, productivity as efficiency and productivity as outcome. Reprint Address: Godin, B, INRS Urbanisat Culture & Soc, 385 Rue Sherbrooke Est, Montreal, PQ H2X 1E3, Canada. Research Institution addresses: INRS Urbanisat Culture & Soc, Montreal, PQ H2X 1E3, Canada E-mail Address: benoit.godin at ucs.inrs.ca Cited References: *ADV COUNC SCI POL, 1956, ANN REP. *CEC, 2003, INV RES ACT PLAN EUR. *CEC, 2004, EUR INN SCOR 2004. *DEP REC SUPPL, 1947, RES SCI ACT CAN FED. *DOM BUR STAT, 1941, SURV SCI IND LAB CAN. *DOM BUR STAT, 1956, IND RES DEV EXP CAN. *DOM BUR STAT, 1960, FED GOV EXP SCI ACT. *DSIR, 1958, EST RES DEV SCI ENG. *EC, 2005, KEY FIG 2005 EUR RES. *FED BRIT IND, 1943, IND RES. *FED BRIT IND, 1947, SCI TECHN RES BRIT I. *FED BRIT IND, 1952, RES DEV BRIT IND. *OECD, 1962, 50 PER CENT GROWTH T. *OECD, 1962, EC RES TECHN. *OECD, 1962, MEAS SCI TECHN ACT P. *OECD, 1970, GAPS TECHN COMP COUN. *OECD, 1990, MEAS SCI TECHN ACT P. *OECD, 1992, MEAS SCI TECHN ACT P. *OECD, 1992, TECHN EC KEY REL. *OECD, 1994, MEAS SCI TECHN ACT D. *OECD, 1995, MAN MEAS HUM RES DEV. *OECD, 2001, MEAS PROD MEAS AGGR. *SAPPHO PROJ, 1972, SUCC FAIL IND INN SU. *SPRU, 1972, SUCC FAIL IND INN SU. *US BUR BUDG, 1950, R D EST OBL EXP. *US BUR LAB STAT, 1931, MON LABOR REV, V33, P749. *US BUR LAB STAT, 1932, MON LABOR REV, V35, P1031. *US BUR LAB STAT, 1953, IND R D PREL REP. *US BUR LAB STAT, 1953, SCI R D AM IND STUD. *US DEP DEF, 1953, B US DEP DEF, V1148. *US I CHEM ENG, 1963, P S HELD LOND 11 12. *US NAT ASS MAN, 1949, TRENDS IND RES PAT P. *US NAT RES COMM, 1938, RES NAT RES, V1. *US NAT RES COUNC, 1920, DOCT CONF SCI 1920 A. *US NAT RES COUNC, 1920, RES LAB IND EST US A. *US NAT RES COUNC, 1921, FUNDS AV 1920 US AM. *US NAT RES COUNC, 1923, FELL SCHOL ADV WORK. *US NAT RES COUNC, 1927, HDB SCI TECHN SOC I. *US NAT RES COUNC, 1941, RES NAT RES, V2. *US NAT SCI BOARD, 1973, SCI IND. *US NAT SCI BOARD, 1975, SCI IND 1974. *US NAT SCI FDN, 1953, FED FUNDS SCI FED FU. *US NAT SCI FDN, 1956, 5616 NSF. *US NAT SCI FDN, 1956, REV DAT R D, V1. *US NAT SCI FDN, 1959, 5936 NSF. *US OSRD, 1947, COST AN R D WORK REL. *US PRES SCI RES B, 1947, SCI PUBL POL. ABRAMS A, 1951, P 4 ANN C ADM RES U, P22. ADAMS CW, 1946, ISIS, V36, P166. ALLISON PD, 1974, AM SOCIOL REV, V39, P596. ALLISON PD, 1982, AM SOCIOL REV, V47, P615. ALLISON PD, 1990, AM SOCIOL REV, V55, P469. ANTHONY RN, 1952, MANAGEMENT CONTROLS. BELL D, 1965, END IDEOLOGIES EXHAU, P227. BENDAVID J, 1991, SCI GROWTH ESSAYS SO, P103. BERNAL JD, 1973, SOCIAL FUNCTION SCI. BIX AS, 2000, INVENTING OURSELVES. BRADFORD SC, 1934, ENGINEERING-LONDON, V137, P85. BRODMAN E, 1944, B MED LIB ASS, V32, P479. BUCHNER EF, 1904, PSYCHOL BULL, V1, P57. BUSH V, 1995, SCI ENDLESS FRONTIER. CANDOLLE A, 1987, HIST SCI SAVANTS DEP. CARR LJ, 1929, RURAL COMMUNITY, P204. CARR LJ, 1932, AM J SOCIOL, V37, P569. CARTER CF, 1957, IND TECHNICAL PROGR. CARTER CF, 1958, INVESTMENT INNOVATIO. CATTELL JM, 1896, PSYCHOL REV, V3, P134. CATTELL JM, 1898, SCIENCE, V8, P533. CATTELL JM, 1903, AM J PSYCHOL, V14, P310. CATTELL JM, 1903, POPULAR SCI MONT FEB, P359. CATTELL JM, 1903, SCIENCE, V17, P561. CATTELL JM, 1906, SCIENCE, V24, P732. CATTELL JM, 1909, SCIENCE, V29, P228. CATTELL JM, 1910, SCIENCE, V32, P633. CATTELL JM, 1915, POPULAR SCI MONT MAY, P248. CATTELL JM, 1917, SCI MON, V4, P248. CATTELL JM, 1917, SCI MON, V5, P368. CATTELL JM, 1917, SCIENCE, V45, P275. CATTELL JM, 1922, SCI MON, V14, P568. CATTELL JM, 1929, SCIENCE, V70, P335. CATTELL JM, 2006, AM MEN SCI BIOGRAPHI. CHANDLER AD, 1977, VISIBLE HAND MANAGER. CLARKE EL, 1916, AM MEN LETT THEIR NA. COBB CW, 1928, AM ECON REV, V18, P139. COLE FJ, 1917, SCI PROGR, V11, P578. COLE JR, 1973, SOCIAL STRATIFICATIO. COLE S, 1967, AM SOCIOL REV, V32, P377. COLE S, 1979, AM J SOCIOL, V84, P958. COMPTON KT, 1941, RES NATL RESOURCE, V2, P124. CRANE D, 1965, AM SOCIOL REV, V30, P699. DEAN BV, 1968, EVALUATING SELECTING. DEARBORN DC, 1953, SPENDING IND RES 195. DENISON EF, 1962, SOURCES EC GROWTH US. DENISON EF, 1967, WHY GROWTH RATES DIF. DENNIS W, 1954, SCI MON, V79, P180. DENNIS W, 1956, SCIENCE, V123, P724. DOUGLAS PH, 1930, AM FED, V37, P923. DOUGLAS PH, 1930, B TAYLOR SOC, V15, P254. DOUGLAS PH, 1931, PROBLEM UNEMPLOYMENT. ELLIS H, 1904, STUDY BRIT GENIUS. EWELL RH, 1955, CHEM ENG NEWS 0718, P2980. FABIAN Y, 1963, DASPD6348 OECD. FABRICANT S, 1954, EC PROGR EC CHANGE. FANO E, 1991, TECHNOL CULT, V32, P264. FERNBERGER SW, 1921, PSYCHOL BULL, V18, P569. FERNBERGER SW, 1930, PSYCHOL REV, V27, P526. FERNBERGER SW, 1932, PSYCHOL BULL, V29, P1. FERNBERGER SW, 1938, PSYCHOL BULL, V35, P261. FERNBERGER SW, 1938, PSYCHOL BULL, V35, P84. FERNBERGER SW, 1943, PSYCHOL REV, V50, P33. FERNBERGER SW, 1946, SCIENCE, V104, P175. FLETCHER S, 1952, SCIENCE, V115, P25. FRANZ SI, 1917, PSYCHOL REV, V24, P197. FREEMAN C, 1962, NATL I ECON REV, V20, P21. FREEMAN C, 1963, SCI EC GROWTH GOVT P. FREEMAN C, 1965, RES DEV EFFORT W EUR. FREEMAN C, 1967, SCIENCE, V158, P463. FREEMAN C, 1969, STS16 UNESCO. FREEMAN C, 1971, REPORT BOLTON COMMIT. FREEMAN C, 1974, EC IND INNOVATION. FREEMAN C, 1982, RECENT DEV SCI TECHN. FUSSLER HH, 1949, LIBR QUART, V19, P119. GALTON F, 1873, FORTNIGHTLY REV, V19, P345. GALTON F, 1874, ENGLISH MEN SCI THEI. GALTON F, 1883, INQUIRIES HUMAN FACU. GALTON F, 1901, NATURE, V64, P659. GALTON F, 1906, NOTEWORTHY FAMILIES. GALTON F, 2001, HEREDITARY GENIUS IN. GARFIELD E, 1955, SCIENCE, V122, P108. GARFIELD E, 1963, SCI CITATION INDEX. GARFIELD E, 1964, SCIENCE, V144, P649. GILFILLAN SC, 1930, GEOGR REV, V20, P301. GILFILLAN SC, 1935, SOCIOLOGY INVENTION, P109. GILFILLAN SC, 1951, J PATENT TRADEMARK, V33, P328. GILFILLAN SC, 1960, TECHNOL CULT, V1, P201. GILL C, 1940, UNEMPLOYMENT TECHNOL. GODIN B, 2002, MINERVA, V40, P375. GODIN B, 2004, RES POLICY, V33, P679, DOI 10.1016/j.respol.2003.10.006. GODIN B, 2005, MEASUREMENT STAT SCI. GODIN B, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V68, P109. GODIN B, 2007, RES POLICY, V36, P1388, DOI 10.1016/j.respol.2007.06.002. GODIN B, 2007, SOC STUD SCI, V37, P691, DOI 10.1177/0306312706075338. GRAUE E, 1943, REV ECON STATISTICS, V25, P221. GRILICHES Z, 1958, J POLITICAL EC, V66, P419. GRILICHES Z, 1962, RATE DIRECTION INVEN, P346. GRILICHES Z, 1998, R D PRODUCTIVITY ECO, P52. GROSS PLK, 1927, SCIENCE, V66, P385. GROSS PLK, 1931, SCIENCE, V73, P660. HART H, 1927, PROGR SOCIOLOGY, P191. HODGE MH, 1963, HARVARD BUSINESS NOV, P109. HOGAN RM, 1950, SCIENCE, V112, P613. HOLLAND M, 1933, RES HARD TIMES. HOPWOOD AG, 1984, ISSUES PUBLIC SECTOR, P167. HOUNSHELL DA, 1988, SCI CORPORATE STRATE. HULME EW, 1923, STAT BIBLIO RELATION. HUNTINGTON E, 1927, BUILDERS AM. JACOBY P, 1904, SELECTION CHEZ HOMME. JEFFERSON M, 1911, B AM GEOGR SOC N Y, V43, P241. JEROME H, 1934, MECH IND. JOHNSON HT, 1978, BUS HIST REV, V52, P490. JOHNSON HT, 1987, RELEVANCE LOST RISE. JORGENSON DW, 1967, REV ECON STUD, V34, P249. KAPLAN N, 1960, IEEE T ENG MANAGE, V30, P24. KENDRICK JW, 1961, PRODUCTIVITY TRENDS. KEVLES DJ, 1985, NAME EUGENICS. KILGORE HM, 1945, GOVT WARTIME RES DEV. KUZNETS SS, 1930, SECULAR MOVEMENTS PR, P1. LEHMAN HC, 1953, AGE ACHIEVEMENT. LEVI L, 1869, NATURE 1125, P99. LIPETZ BA, 1965, MEASUREMENT EFFICIEN. LOMBROSO C, 1891, MAN GENIUS. LOTKA AJ, 1926, J WASHINGTON ACADEMY, V16, P317. MACHLUP F, 1962, PRODUCTION DISTRIBUT. MACHLUP F, 1962, RATE DIRECTION INVEN, P143. MAGDOFF H, 1938, PRODUCTION EMPLOYMEN. MANIS JG, 1951, SOC FORCES, V29, P267. MANNICHE E, 1957, BEHAV SCI, V2, P301. MANSFIELD E, 1965, AM ECON REV, V55, P310. MANSFIELD E, 1968, EC TECHNOLOGICAL CHA. MANSFIELD E, 1972, SCIENCE, V175, P477. MANSFIELD E, 1977, Q J EC MAY, P221. MEER B, 1955, J PSYCHOL, V39, P117. MELTZER BN, 1949, AM J SOCIOL, V40, P25. MELTZER BN, 1956, J SOC ISSUES, V12, P32. MERTON RK, 1935, Q J ECON, V49, P454. MILLS FC, 1932, EC TENDENCIES US. MILLS FC, 1936, PRICES RECESSION REC. MILLS FC, 1938, EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNI. MINASIAN J, 1969, AM ECON REV, V59, P80. MINASIAN JR, 1962, RATE DIRECTION INVEN, P93. NEARING S, 1914, POPULAR SCI MONTHLY, V85, P189. NEARING S, 1916, SCI MON, V2, P48. NELSON H, 1928, AM J PSYCHOL, V40, P303. ODIN A, 1895, GENESE GRANDS HOMMES. OGBURN WF, 1922, POLITICAL SCI Q, V37, P83. OGBURN WF, 1933, RECENT SOCIAL TRENDS, P126. OLSEN F, 1948, RES IND ITS ORG MANA, P402. PEARL R, 1925, P NATL ACAD SCI USA, V11, P752. PEARL R, 1926, P NATL ACAD SCI USA, V12, P258. PELZ DC, 1956, ADM SCI Q, V1, P310. PELZ DC, 1966, SCI ORG PRODUCTIVE C. PERAZICH G, 1940, IND RES CHANGING TEC. PICK D, 1989, FACES DEGENERATION E. PICKERING EC, 1908, POPULAR SCI MONT OCT, P372. PICKERING EC, 1909, POPULAR SCI MONT JAN, P80. PORTER TM, 1995, TRUST NUMBERS PURSUI. PRICE DD, 1978, METRIC SCI ADVENT SC, P69. PRICE DJD, 1951, ARCH INT HIST SCI, V14, P85. PRICE DJD, 1956, DISCOVERY, V17, P240. PRICE DJD, 1961, SCI BABYLON. PRICE DJD, 1963, LITTLE SCI BIG SCI. PRICE DJD, 1967, JOURNEYS SCI SMALL S, P1. PRICE DJD, 1967, SCI TECHNOLOGY OCT, P84. PRICE DJD, 1980, C EV SCI TECHN THEOR. PRICE DJD, 1980, RES DEV TECHNOLOGICA, P251. QUINN JB, 1959, YARDSTICKS IND RES E. QUINN JB, 1960, HARVARD BUS REV, P69. RAINOFF TJ, 1929, ISIS, V12, P287. RESKIN BF, 1977, AM SOCIOL REV, V42, P491. ROE A, 1951, GENETIC PSYCHOL MONO, V43, P121. ROE A, 1951, PSYCHOL MONOGR-GEN A, V65, P1. ROE A, 1952, MAKING SCI. ROE A, 1952, SCI AM, V187, P21. ROE A, 1953, PSYCHOL MONOGR-GEN A, V67, P1. ROE A, 1961, SCIENCE, V134, P456. ROE A, 1963, SCI CREATIVITY. ROE A, 1964, MANAGE SCI, P49. ROE A, 1965, SCI REVISITED. ROE A, 1965, SCIENCE, V150, P313. ROE A, 1972, SCIENCE, V176, P940. ROSA EB, 1920, J WASHINGTON ACAD SC, V10, P341. ROSA EB, 1921, ANN AM ACAD POLIT SS, V95, P26. ROSEN SM, 1941, TECHNOLOGY SOC INFLU. ROSSMAN J, 1931, Q J ECON, V45, P522. RUBENSTEIN AH, 1957, HARVARD BUSINESS JAN, P95. SANDERS BS, 1936, J PATENT OFFICE OCT, P666. SANDERS BS, 1962, RATE DIRECTION INVEN, P53. SARTON G, 1923, CARNIEGIE I WASHINGT, V22, P335. SCHMOOKLER J, 1950, J PATENT TRADEMARK, V32, P123. SCHMOOKLER J, 1954, REV ECON STAT, P183. SCHMOOKLER J, 1956, J PATENT OFFICE APR, P223. SCHMOOKLER J, 1960, TECHNOL CULT, V1, P214. SCHUMPETER J, 1939, BUSINESS CYCLES THEO, V1. SCHUSTER A, 1925, P R SOC LOND A-CONTA, V107, P368. SCOTT JS, 1978, AM SOCIOL REV, V43, P889. SCOTT JS, 1981, AM SOCIOL REV, V46, P422. SEEBER NC, 1964, REV DATA R D, V44. SEILER RE, 1965, IMPROVING EFFECTIVEN. SHAPLEY W, 1959, METHODOLOGY STATISTI, P7. SHER IH, 1966, RES PROGRAM EFFECTIV, P136. SHERMAN JV, 1941, RES NATL RESOURCE, V2, P120. SHOCHLEY W, 1954, P IRE MAR, P279. SOLOW RM, 1956, Q J ECON, V70, P65. SOLOW RM, 1957, REV ECON STAT, V39, P312. SOLOW RM, 1978, CAMBRIDGE EC HIST 1, V7. SOLOWAY RA, 1990, DEMOGRAPHY DEGENERAT, P1. SOROKIN PA, 1935, ISIS, V22, P516. STAFFORD AB, 1952, AM J SOCIOL, V42, P539. STEIN MI, 1953, J PSYCHOL, V36, P311. STEIN MI, 1960, CREATIVITY INDIVIDUA. STEPHAN PE, 1992, STRIKING MOTHER LODE. STIGLER GS, 1947, TRENDS OUTPUT EMPLOY. TAYLOR CW, 1963, SCI CREATIVITY ITS R. TAYLOR CW, 1964, CREATIVITY PROGR POT. TAYLOR CW, 1964, WIDENING HORIZONS CR. TAYLOR CW, 1967, SCIENCE, V155, P1075. TOMLINSON J, 1994, ACCOUNTING SOCIAL I, P168. VALAVANISVAIL S, 1955, AM ECON REV, P208. VISHER SS, 1947, SCI STARRED 1903 194. VOLLMER HM, 1966, RES PROGRAM EFFECTIV, P148. WADE N, 1975, SCIENCE, V188, P429. WALLER JC, 2001, STUD HIST PHILOS M P, V32, P457. WEINBERG B, 1923, REV GEN SCI 1030, P565. WEINBERG B, 1926, REV GEN SCI, V37, P43. WEINTRAUB D, 1932, J AM STAT ASSOC, V27, P383. WEINTRAUB D, 1937, TECHNOLOGICAL TRENDS, P67. WHITE HS, 1915, SCIENCE, V42, P105. WILSON PW, 1935, SCI MON, V41, P240. WINSTON S, 1937, AM SOCIOL REV, V3, P837. WOODS FA, 1906, MENTAL MORAL HEREDIT. WYMAN WI, 1919, J PATENT TRADEMARK, V1, P439. YOVITS MC, 1966, RES PROGRAM EFFECTIV. ZUCKERMAN H, 1972, SOCIOLOGY AGE STRATI. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------ Eugene Garfield, PhD. email: garfield at codex.cis.upenn.edu home page: www.eugenegarfield.org Tel: 215-243-2205 Fax: 610-560-4749 Chairman Emeritus, Thomson Reuters Scientific (formerly ISI) 1500 Spring Garden Street, Philadelphia, PA 19130-4067 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.asist.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Thu Jan 7 14:30:03 2010 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 13:30:03 -0600 Subject: articles by Companario and others Message-ID: ________________________________ ________________________________ Title: Surviving bad times: The role of citations, self-citations and numbers of citable items in recovery of the journal impact factor after at least four years of continuous decreases Authors: Campanario, JM; Molina, A Author Full Names: Miguel Campanario, Juan; Molina, Antonio Source: SCIENTOMETRICS 81 (3): 859-864 DEC 2009 Language: English Document Type: Article KeyWords Plus: LABELED EDITORIAL MATERIAL; INDEX Abstract: We studied the influence of the number of citations, the number of citable items and the number of journal self-citations on increases in the impact factor (IF) in 123 journals from the Journal Citation Reports database in which this scientometric indicator had decreased during the previous four years. In general, we did not find evidence that abuse of journal self-citations contributed to the increase in the impact factor after several years of decreases. Reprint Address: Campanario, JM, Univ Alcala de Henares, Dept Fis, Madrid 28871, Spain. Research Institution addresses: [Miguel Campanario, Juan; Molina, Antonio] Univ Alcala de Henares, Dept Fis, Madrid 28871, Spain E-mail Address: juan.campanario at uah.es Funding Acknowledgement: Spanish Ministry of Science and Technology (Direccion General de Investigacion) ; European Regional Development Fund (ERDF/FEDER) [SEJ200766236/SOCI] Funding Text: This work was supported by a grant from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Technology (Direccion General de Investigacion) and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF/FEDER, project SEJ200766236/SOCI). We thank K. Shashok for improving the use of English in the manuscript and for suggestions about the content. Cited References: ANDRADE A, 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS IN PR. CAMPANARIO JM, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P365, DOI 10.1007/s11192-006-0158-1. FALAGAS ME, 2007, INT J IMPOT RES, V19, P443, DOI 10.1038/si.ijir.3901583. FRANDSEN TF, 2008, SCIENTOMETRICS, V74, P439, DOI 10.1007/s11192-007-1697-9. GLANZEL W, 2002, SCIENTOMETRICS, V53, P171. GOLUBIC R, 2008, SCI ENG ETHICS, V14, P41, DOI 10.1007/s11948-007-9044-3. GONZALEZ L, 2007, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V58, P252, DOI 10.1002/asi.20424. MANNINO DM, 2005, AM J RESP CRIT CARE, V171, P417. NEUBERGER J, 2002, EUR J GASTROEN HEPAT, V14, P209. Cited Reference Count: 9 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER; VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS DOI: 10.1007/s11192-008-2257-7 ________________________________ Open Access journal Title: Article-Level Metrics and the Evolution of Scientific Impact Authors: Neylon, C; Wu, S Author Full Names: Neylon, Cameron; Wu, Shirley Source: PLOS BIOLOGY 7 (11): Art. No. e1000242 NOV 2009 Language: English Document Type: Article KeyWords Plus: SCIENCE Reprint Address: Neylon, C, Rutherford Appleton Lab, Sci & Technol Facil Council, Didcot OX11 0QX, Oxon, England. Research Institution addresses: [Neylon, Cameron] Rutherford Appleton Lab, Sci & Technol Facil Council, Didcot OX11 0QX, Oxon, England; [Wu, Shirley] 23andMe, Mountain View, CA USA E-mail Address: swu at 23andme.com Cited References: 2006, PLOS MED, V3, E291, DOI 10.1371/JOURNAL.PMED.0030291. BERGSTROM C, 2007, C RL NEWS, V68. BOLLEN J, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P669. BOLLEN J, 2009, PLOS ONE, V4, ARTN e4803. BOLLEN J, 2009, PLOS ONE, V4, ARTN e6022. BOURNE PE, 2008, PLOS COMPUT BIOL, V4, ARTN e1000037. CAMPBELL P, 2008, ETHICS SCI ENV POLIT, V8, P5. CHEN P, 2007, J INFORMETR, V1, P8. DERUIJTER W, 2009, BRIT MED J, V338, A3083. GARFIELD E, 1972, SCIENCE, V178, P471. HENNING V, 2009, USAGEBASED IMPACT ME. LAWRENCE PA, 2009, PLOS BIOL, V7, ARTN e1000197. NIELSEN M, 2009, PHYS WORLD MAY, P30. OLEKSYK TK, 2008, PLOS ONE, V3, ARTN e1712. REEVES WC, 2005, BMC MED, V3, P19. ROSSNER M, 2007, J CELL BIOL, V179, P1091. ROSSNER M, 2008, J CELL BIOL, V180, P254. SHIRKY C, 2008, ITS NOT INFORM OVERL. Cited Reference Count: 18 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE; 185 BERRY ST, STE 1300, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94107 USA Subject Category: Biochemistry & Molecular Biology; Biology ISSN: 1544-9173 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000242 IDS Number: 522WY ________________________________ *Record 6 of 17. Search terms matched: FACTOR(1); IMPACT(1) *Click Here to View Full Record *Order Full Text [ ] Title: A comparative analysis of social sciences citation tools Authors: Levine-Clark, M; Gil, E Author Full Names: Levine-Clark, Michael; Gil, Esther Source: ONLINE INFORMATION REVIEW 33 (5): 986-996 2009 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Software tools; Databases KeyWords Plus: WEB-OF-SCIENCE; GOOGLE-SCHOLAR; IMPACT FACTOR; INDEXES; SCOPUS Abstract: Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to identify the utility of Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar as citation analysis tools for the social sciences. Design/methodology/approach - The 25 most-accessed articles in 163 social sciences journals are searched in three citation databases. Findings - Web of Science has long been the only tool for citation analysis. Scopus and Google Scholar, while still new to the market, are complementary to Web of Science and in some cases can provide a more nuanced view of the importance of scholarly articles in the social sciences. Practical implications - As libraries struggle to provide the best tools to their users, they may wish to consider the freely-available Google Scholar as a substitute or complement to expensive databases such as Web of Science and Scopus. Originality/value - Most analyses of citation databases have focused on the sciences. Because this study examined the social sciences literature, it has expanded on the research available on Web of Science, Google Scholar and Scopus. Reprint Address: Levine-Clark, M, Univ Denver, Penrose Lib, Denver, CO 80208 USA. Research Institution addresses: [Levine-Clark, Michael; Gil, Esther] Univ Denver, Penrose Lib, Denver, CO 80208 USA E-mail Address: Michael.levine-clark at du.edu Cited References: 2008, SCIENCEDIRECT INFO. *GOOGL, 2008, AB GOOGL SCHOL. *SCIENCEDIRECT, 2008, BROWS J BOOKS SUBJ. *SCOPUSINFO, 2008, SCOP DET. *THOMS REUT, ARTS HUM CIT IND J L. *THOMS REUT, SCI CIT IND J LIST. *THOMS REUT, SOC SCI CIT IND J LI. *THOMS REUT, 2008, THOMS SCI IMP FACT. BAIRD LM, 1994, J INF SCI, V20, P2. BAKKALBASI N, 2006, BIOMEDICAL DIGITAL L, V3. BAUER K, 2005, D LIB MAGAZINE, V11. BELEW RK, 2005, ARXIVCS0504036V1CSIR. BUTLER D, 2004, NATURE, V432, P423, DOI 10.1038/432423a. CAMERON BD, 2005, PORTAL-LIBR ACAD, V5, P105. FALAGAS ME, 2008, FASEB J, V22, P338, DOI 10.1096/fj.07-9492LSF. GARFIELD E, 1955, SCIENCE, V122, P108. GARFIELD E, 2006, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V295, P90. JACSO P, 2008, ONLINE INFORM REV, V32, P102, DOI 10.1108/14684520810866010. KOUSHA K, 2007, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V58, P1055, DOI 10.1002/asi.20584. LEVINECLARK M, 2009, J BUSINESS FINANCE L, V14, P32. MEHO LI, 2007, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V58, P2105, DOI 10.1002/asi.20677. MOED HF, 2005, CITATION ANAL RES EV. NISONGER TE, 2004, SERIALS LIBR, V47, P57. NORRIS M, 2007, J INFORMETR, V1, P161, DOI 10.1016/j.joi.2006.12.001. NORUZI A, 2005, LIBRI, V55, P170. PAULY D, 2005, ETHICS SCI ENV POLIT, P33. SCHROEDER R, 2007, PORTAL-LIBR ACAD, V7, P243. YANG K, 2006, CIT AN COMP GOOGL SC. Cited Reference Count: 28 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LIMITED; HOWARD HOUSE, WAGON LANE, BINGLEY BD16 1WA, W YORKSHIRE, ENGLAND Subject Category: Computer Science, Information Systems; Information Science & Library Science ISSN: 1468-4527 DOI: 10.1108/14684520911001954 IDS Number: 521LF ________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________ ] Title: The International Publication Productivity of Malaysia in Social Sciences DEVELOPING A SCIENTIFIC POWER INDEX Authors: Davarpanah, MR Author Full Names: Davarpanah, Mohammad Reza Source: JOURNAL OF SCHOLARLY PUBLISHING 41 (1): 67-91 OCT 2009 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: social sciences; Malaysia; publication output; citation impact; scientific power index (PI) KeyWords Plus: ECONOMICS Abstract: The purpose of this study is to evaluate publication output and citation impact in the social sciences in Malaysia, based on Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) data, for the period 1999-2008. In addition to the analysis of trends in publication and citation patterns and national publication profiles, an attempt is made to explore the strengths and weakness of different fields, using a new mathematical index, the scientific power index (PI). The findings indicate that publication output in the social sciences has been on the increase since 1999. Mostpapers have been published in median-impact-factor Journals (mean impact factor of 2.72 per paper). Internationally co-authored publications represented 77 per cent of all citations. Most of the prolific authors are from the highly productive institutions; however, none of highly cited first authors are from highly productive institutions. Psychology, economics, management, and environmental studies a! re the dominant fields in Malaysian social sciences. Reprint Address: Davarpanah, MR, Ferdowsi Univ Mashhad, Dept Lib & Informat Sci, Fac Educ & Psychol, Mashhad, Iran. Cited References: 2004, J CROSS CULTURAL PSY, V35, P367. BIGLIA B, 2005, BIBLIOMETRIC ANAL AS, P4. BUTLER L, 2003, NAT SCHOL COMM C DEA. CHUANG KY, 2007, SCIENTOMETRICS, V72, P201, DOI 10.1007/s11192-007-1721-0. GLANZEL W, 1996, SCIENTOMETRICS, V35, P291. GLANZEL W, 2005, S BIBL HUM BRUSS BEL. GODIN B, 2002, 1 PROJ MEAS SOC SCI. GU YN, 2002, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V53, P974, DOI 10.1002/asi.10125. KOLJATIC M, 2001, SCIENTOMETRICS, V51, P381. NASIR AM, 1994, SCIENTOMETRICS, V29, P191. NEDERHOF AJ, 1997, SCIENTOMETRICS, V40, P237. RAMOS R, 2007, SCIENTOMETRICS, V71, P117, DOI 10.1007/s11192-007-1652-9. RIGGS FW, GLOBALIZATION SOCIAL. ROUSSEAU R, 2002, LIBR TRENDS, V50, P418. STERNBERG R, 2005, SCIENTOMETRICS, V65, P29, DOI 10.1007/s11192-005-0258-3. ZAINAB AN, 2008, LIBRES LIB INFORM SC, V18, P1. ZHOU P, 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS, V79, P593, DOI 10.1007/s11192-007-2068-x. ZHOU, 1963, LITTLE SCI BIG SCI. Cited Reference Count: 18 Publisher: UNIV TORONTO PRESS INC; JOURNALS DIVISION, 5201 DUFFERIN ST, DOWNSVIEW, TORONTO, ON M3H 5T8, CANADA DOI: 10.3138/jsp.41.1.67 ________________________________ ________________________________ Title: A Comparison of Impact Factor, Clinical Query Filters, and Pattern Recognition Query Filters in Terms of Sensitivity to Topic Authors: Fu, LD; Wang, L; Aphinyanagphongs, Y; Aliferis, CF Author Full Names: Fu, Lawrence D.; Wang, Lily; Aphinyanagphongs, Yindalon; Aliferis, Constantin F. Editor(s): Kuhn, KA; Warren, JR; Leong, TY Source: MEDINFO 2007: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 12TH WORLD CONGRESS ON HEALTH (MEDICAL) INFORMATICS, PTS 1 AND 2 129: 716-720 2007 Book series title: Studies in Health Technology and Informatics Language: English Document Type: Proceedings Paper KeyWords Plus: MEDLINE Abstract: Evaluating journal quality and finding high-quality articles in the biomedical literature are challenging information retrieval tasks. The most widely used method for journal evaluation is impact factor, while novel approaches for finding articles are PubMed's clinical query filters and machine learning-based filter models. The related literature has focused on the average behavior of these methods over all topics. The present study evaluates the variability of these approaches for different topics. We find that impact factor and clinical query filters are unstable for different topics while a topic-specific impact factor and machine learning-based filter models appear more robust. Thus when using the less stable methods for a specific topic, researchers should realize that their performance may diverge from expected average performance. Better yet, the more stable methods should be preferred whenever applicable. Reprint Address: Fu, LD, Vanderbilt Univ, Dept Biomed Informat, Nashville, TN 37235 USA. Research Institution addresses: [Fu, Lawrence D.; Aphinyanagphongs, Yindalon; Aliferis, Constantin F.] Vanderbilt Univ, Dept Biomed Informat, Nashville, TN 37235 USA Cited References: PUBMED CLIN QUERIES. *NAT LIB MED, MESH BROWS. *THOMS SCI, ISI IMP FACT. *THOMS SCI, ISI WEB KNOWL. APHINYANAPHONGS Y, 2005, J AM MED INFORM ASSN, V12, P207, DOI 10.1197/jamia.M1641. APHINYANAPHONGS Y, 2006, J AM MED INFORM ASSN, V13, P446, DOI 10.1197/jamia.M2031. BLAND JM, 1986, LANCET, V307, P310. BURGES CJC, 1998, DATA MIN KNOWL DISC, V2, P121. GARFIELD E, 1965, CAN CITATION INDEXIN. GARFIELD E, 1972, SCIENCE, V178, P471. GARFIELD E, 2006, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V295, P90. GLANZEL W, 2002, SCIENTOMETRICS, V53, P171. HAYNES RB, 1994, J AM MED INFORM ASSN, V1, P447. TAKAHASHI K, 1999, OCCUP MED-OXFORD, V49, P57. UEHARA M, 2003, J OCCUP HEALTH, V45, P248. Cited Reference Count: 15 Publisher: I O S PRESS; NIEUWE HEMWEG 6B, 1013 BG AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS ________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From harnad at ECS.SOTON.AC.UK Thu Jan 7 14:34:49 2010 From: harnad at ECS.SOTON.AC.UK (Stevan Harnad) Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 14:34:49 -0500 Subject: Whether Self-Selected or Mandated, Open Access Increases Citation Impact for Higher Quality Research In-Reply-To: <4B45CA6E.4000505@cornell.edu> Message-ID: On 7-Jan-10, at 6:50 AM, Philip Davis wrote: > An interesting bit of research, although I have some methodological > concerns about how you treat the data, which may explain some > inconsistent and counter-intuitive results, see: > http://j.mp/8LK57u > A technical response addressing the methodology is welcome. > Philip M. Davis > PhD Student > Department of Communication > 301 Kennedy Hall > Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853 > email: pmd8 at cornell.edu > phone: 607 255-2124 > https://confluence.cornell.edu/display/~pmd8/resume > http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/author/pmd8/ Thanks for the feedback. We reply to the three points of substance, in order of importance: (1) LOG RATIOS: We analyzed log citation ratios to adjust for departures from normality. Logs were used to normalize the citations and attenuate distortion from high values. This approach loses some values when the log tranformation makes the denominator zero, but despite these lost data, the t-test results were significant, and were further confirmed by our second, logistic regression analysis. Moed's (2007) point was about (non-log) ratios that were not used in this study. We used the ratio of log citations and not the log of citation ratios. When we compare log3/log2 with log30/log20, we don't compare percentages with percentages (60% with 14%) because the citation values are transformed or normalized: the higher the citations, the stronger the normalisation. It is highly unlikely that any of this would introduce a systematic bias in favor of OA, but if the referees of the paper should call for a "simpler and more elegant" analysis to make sure, we will be glad to perform it. (2) Effect Size: The size of the OA Advantage varies greatly from year to year and field to field. We reported this in Hajjem et al (2005), stressing that the important point is that there is virtually always a positive OA Advantage, absent only when the sample is too small or the effect is measured too early (as in Davis et al's 2008 study). The consistently bigger OA Advantage in physics (Brody & Harnad 2004) is almost certainly an effect of the Early Access factor, because in physics, unlike in most other disciplines (apart from computer science and economics), authors tend to make their unrefereed preprints OA well before publication. (This too might be a good practice to emulate, for authors desirous of greater research impact.) (3) Mandated OA Advantage? Yes, the fact that the citation advantage of mandated OA was slightly greater than that of self-selected OA is surprising, and if it proves reliable, it is interesting and worthy of interpretation. We did not interpret it in our paper, because it was the smallest effect, and our focus was on testing the Self-Selection/ Quality-Bias hypothesis, according to which mandated OA should have little or no citation advantage at all, if self-selection is a major contributor to the OA citation advantage. Our sample was 2002-2006. We are now analyzing 2007-2008. If there is still a statistically significant OA advantage for mandated OA over self-selected OA in this more recent sample too, a potential explanation is the inverse of the Self-Selection/Quality-Bias hypothesis (which, by the way, we do think is one of the several factors that contribute to the OA Advantage, alongside the other contributors: Early Advantage, Quality Advantage, Competitive Advantage, Download Advantage, Arxiv Advantage, and probably others). http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/29-guid.html The Self-Selection/Quality-Bias (SSQB) consists of better authors being more likely to make their papers OA, and/or authors being more likely to make their better papers OA, because they are better, hence more citeable. The hypothesis we tested was that all or most of the widely reported OA Advantage across all fields and years is just due to SSQB. Our data show that it is not, because the OA Advantage is no smaller when it is mandated. If it turns out to be reliably bigger, the most likely explanation is a variant of the "Sitting Pretty" (SP) effect, whereby some of the more comfortable authors have said that the reason they do not make their articles OA is that they think they have enough access and impact already. Such authors do not self- archive spontaneously. But when OA is mandated, their papers reap the extra benefit of OA, with its Quality Advantage (for the better, more citeable papers). In other words, if SSQB is a bias in favor of OA on the part of some of the better authors, mandates reverse an SP bias against OA on the part of others of the better authors. Spontaneous, unmandated OA would be missing the papers of these SP authors. http://www.eprints.org/openaccess/self-faq/#29.Sitting There may be other explanations too. But we think any explanation at all is premature until it is confirmed that this new mandated OA advantage is indeed reliable and replicable. Phil further singles out the fact that the mandate advantage is present in the middle citation ranges and not the top and bottom. Again, it seems premature to interpret these minor effects whose unreliability is unknown, but if forced to pick an interpretation now, we would say it was because the "Sitting Pretty" authors may be the middle-range authors rather than the top ones... Yassine Gargouri, Chawki Hajjem, Vincent Lariviere, Yves Gingras, Les Carr, Tim Brody, Stevan Harnad Brody, T. and Harnad, S. (2004) Comparing the Impact of Open Access (OA) vs. Non-OA Articles in the Same Journals. D-Lib Magazine 10(6). http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/10207/ Davis, P.M., Lewenstein, B.V., Simon, D.H., Booth, J.G., Connolly, M.J.L. (2008) Open access publishing, article downloads, and citations: randomised controlled trial British Medical Journal 337:a568 http://www.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/337/jul31_1/a568 Hajjem, C., Harnad, S. and Gingras, Y. (2005) Ten-Year Cross- Disciplinary Comparison of the Growth of Open Access and How it Increases Research Citation Impact. IEEE Data Engineering Bulletin 28(4) 39-47. http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/11688/ Moed, H. F. (2006) The effect of 'Open Access' upon citation impact: An analysis of ArXiv's Condensed Matter Section Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 58(13) 2145-2156 http://arxiv.org/abs/cs/0611060 > Stevan Harnad wrote: >> Self-Selected or Mandated, Open Access Increases Citation Impact for >> Higher Quality Research >> >> http://arxiv.org/abs/1001.0361 >> >> Yassine Gargouri, Chawki Hajjem, Vincent Lariviere, Yves Gingras, Les >> Carr, Tim Brody, Stevan Harnad >> >> ABSTRACT: Articles whose authors make them Open Access (OA) by >> self-archiving them online are cited significantly more than articles >> accessible only to subscribers. Some have suggested that this "OA >> Advantage" may not be causal but just a self-selection bias, because >> authors preferentially make higher-quality articles OA. To test this >> we compared self-selective self-archiving with mandatory >> self-archiving for a sample of 27,197 articles published 2002-2006 in >> 1,984 journals. The OA Advantage proved just as high for both. >> Logistic regression showed that the advantage is independent of other >> correlates of citations (article age; journal impact factor; number >> of >> co-authors, references or pages; field; article type; or country) and >> greatest for the most highly cited articles. The OA Advantage is >> real, >> independent and causal, but skewed. Its size is indeed correlated >> with >> quality, just as citations themselves are (the top 20% of articles >> receive about 80% of all citations). The advantage is greater for the >> more citeable articles, not because of a quality bias from authors >> self-selecting what to make OA, but because of a quality advantage, >> from users self-selecting what to use and cite, freed by OA from the >> constraints of selective accessibility to subscribers only. >> >> http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/18346/ From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Thu Jan 7 14:37:40 2010 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 13:37:40 -0600 Subject: FW: FW: Personal Alert: 1 items found [Profile:003172] Message-ID: E-Mail: address yjyang at illinois.edu TITLE: Mapping the Structure and Dynamics of Psychological Knowledge: Forty Years of APA Journal Citations (1970-2009) (Article, English) AUTHOR: Yang, YJ; Chiu, CY SOURCE: REVIEW OF GENERAL PSYCHOLOGY 13 (4). DEC 2009. p.349-356 EDUCATIONAL PUBLISHING FOUNDATION, WASHINGTON SEARCH TERM(S): PRICE DJD rauth; CITATION* item_title; JOURNAL item_title; REV GEN PSYCHOL source_abbrev_20 KEYWORDS: structure; dynamics; development; psychology; multidimensional scaling KEYWORDS+: PERSONALITY; SCIENCE; RATINGS ABSTRACT: To understand how subfields of psychology relate to each other as a whole, we analyzed 40 years (from 1979 to 2009) of journal citation data collected from 17 American Psychological Association journals. The results reveal two stable underlying dimensions of psychological knowledge-basic versus applied, and population-specific versus population-general-that organize subfields of psychology. Within the structure, personality and social psychology is located at the heart of psychological knowledge. Analysis of the dynamic flow of knowledge between subfields of psychology further reveals that although the subfields engage in clear division of labor, they also engage in dynamic transactions of knowledge. Finally, an emergent subfield would first obtain its intellectual nutrients from the established disciplines. Once it has found its own niche, it turns into a spin-off and starts to assume the role of knowledge supplier. The implications of these results for psychology as a science are discussed. AUTHOR ADDRESS: YJ Yang, 603 E Daniel St, Champaign, IL 61820 USA -- Yung-jui (Daniel) Yang Department of Psychology University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Web: http://yungjui.googlepages.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2009YangChiu-structure and dynamics of psychology.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 178832 bytes Desc: 2009YangChiu-structure and dynamics of psychology.pdf URL: From umutal at HACETTEPE.EDU.TR Thu Jan 7 14:48:49 2010 From: umutal at HACETTEPE.EDU.TR (Umut AL) Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 21:48:49 +0200 Subject: ELPUB 2010 submission deadline extended to January 22nd, 2010 Message-ID: Dear Colleagues: Due to a number of requests we have decided to extend the submission deadline for ELPUB 2010: 14th International Conference on Electronic Publishing to January 22nd, 2010. For more information and submitting your contribution, see www.elpub.net. Kind regards. Yasar Tonta, Program Chair (tonta at hacettepe.edu.tr) Turid Hedlund, General Chair (turid.hedlund at hanken.fi) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET Thu Jan 7 15:10:39 2010 From: loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET (Loet Leydesdorff) Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 21:10:39 +0100 Subject: Redundancy in Systems which Entertain a Model of Themselves: Interaction Information and the Self-organization of Anticipation Message-ID: Redundancy in Systems which Entertain a Model of Themselves: Interaction Information and the Self-organization of Anticipation, Entropy 12(1) (2010) 63-79 Mutual information among three or more dimensions (?* = -Q) has been considered as interaction information. However, Krippendorff (2009a, 2009b) has shown that this measure cannot be interpreted as a unique property of the interactions and has proposed an alternative measure of interaction information based on iterative approximation of maximum entropies. Q can then be considered as a measure of the difference between interaction information and redundancy generated in a model entertained by an observer. I argue that this provides us with a measure of the imprint of a second-order observing system-a model entertained by the system itself-on the underlying information processing. The second-order system communicates meaning hyper-incursively; an observation instantiates this meaning-processing within the information processing. The net results may add to or reduce the prevailing uncertainty. The model is tested empirically for the case where textual organization can be expected to contain intellectual organization in terms of distributions of title words, author names, and cited references. Loet Leydesdorff Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) Kloveniersburgwal 48, 1012 CX Amsterdam. Tel. +31-20-525 6598; fax: +31-842239111 loet at leydesdorff.net ** apologies for cross-postings From pmd8 at CORNELL.EDU Fri Jan 8 10:06:11 2010 From: pmd8 at CORNELL.EDU (Philip Davis) Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 10:06:11 -0500 Subject: Whether Self-Selected or Mandated, Open Access Increases Citation Impact for Higher Quality Research In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Stevan, Granted, you may be more interested in what the referees of the paper have to say than my comments; I'm interested in whether this paper is good science, whether the methodology is sound and whether you interpret your results properly. For instance, it is not clear whether your Odds Ratios are interpreted correctly. Based on Figure 4, OA article are MORE LIKELY to receive zero citations than 1-5 citations (or conversely, LESS LIKELY to receive 1-5 citations than zero citations). You write: "For example, we can say for the first model that for a one unit increase in OA, the odds of receiving 1-5 citations (versus zero citations) increased by a factor of 0.957. Figure 4.. (p.9) Similarly in Figure 4 (if I understand the axes correctly), CERN article are more than twice as likely to be in the 20+ citation category than in the 1-5 citation category, a fact that may distort further interpretation of your data as it may be that institutional effects may explain your Mandated OA effect. See comments by Patrick Gaule and Ludo Waltman on the review http://j.mp/8LK57u --Phil Davis Stevan Harnad wrote: > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > On 7-Jan-10, at 6:50 AM, Philip Davis wrote: > >> An interesting bit of research, although I have some methodological >> concerns about how you treat the data, which may explain some >> inconsistent and counter-intuitive results, see: >> http://j.mp/8LK57u >> A technical response addressing the methodology is welcome. >> Philip M. Davis >> PhD Student >> Department of Communication >> 301 Kennedy Hall >> Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853 >> email: pmd8 at cornell.edu >> phone: 607 255-2124 >> https://confluence.cornell.edu/display/~pmd8/resume >> http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/author/pmd8/ > > Thanks for the feedback. We reply to the three points of substance, in > order of importance: > > (1) LOG RATIOS: We analyzed log citation ratios to adjust for > departures from normality. Logs were used to normalize the citations > and attenuate distortion from high values. This approach loses some > values when the log tranformation makes the denominator zero, but > despite these lost data, the t-test results were significant, and were > further confirmed by our second, logistic regression analysis. Moed's > (2007) point was about (non-log) ratios that were not used in this > study. We used the ratio of log citations and not the log of citation > ratios. When we compare log3/log2 with log30/log20, we don't compare > percentages with percentages (60% with 14%) because the citation > values are transformed or normalized: the higher the citations, the > stronger the normalisation. It is highly unlikely that any of this > would introduce a systematic bias in favor of OA, but if the referees > of the paper should call for a "simpler and more elegant" analysis to > make sure, we will be glad to perform it. > > (2) Effect Size: The size of the OA Advantage varies greatly from year > to year and field to field. We reported this in Hajjem et al (2005), > stressing that the important point is that there is virtually always a > positive OA Advantage, absent only when the sample is too small or > the effect is measured too early (as in Davis et al's 2008 study). The > consistently bigger OA Advantage in physics (Brody & Harnad 2004) is > almost certainly an effect of the Early Access factor, because in > physics, unlike in most other disciplines (apart from computer science > and economics), authors tend to make their unrefereed preprints OA > well before publication. (This too might be a good practice to > emulate, for authors desirous of greater research impact.) > > (3) Mandated OA Advantage? Yes, the fact that the citation advantage > of mandated OA was slightly greater than that of self-selected OA is > surprising, and if it proves reliable, it is interesting and worthy of > interpretation. We did not interpret it in our paper, because it was > the smallest effect, and our focus was on testing the > Self-Selection/Quality-Bias hypothesis, according to which mandated > OA should have little or no citation advantage at all, if > self-selection is a major contributor to the OA citation advantage. > > Our sample was 2002-2006. We are now analyzing 2007-2008. If there is > still a statistically significant OA advantage for mandated OA over > self-selected OA in this more recent sample too, a potential > explanation is the inverse of the Self-Selection/Quality-Bias > hypothesis (which, by the way, we do think is one of the several > factors that contribute to the OA Advantage, alongside the other > contributors: Early Advantage, Quality Advantage, Competitive > Advantage, Download Advantage, Arxiv Advantage, and probably others). > http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/29-guid.html > > The Self-Selection/Quality-Bias (SSQB) consists of better authors > being more likely to make their papers OA, and/or authors being more > likely to make their better papers OA, because they are better, hence > more citeable. The hypothesis we tested was that all or most of the > widely reported OA Advantage across all fields and years is just due > to SSQB. Our data show that it is not, because the OA Advantage is no > smaller when it is mandated. If it turns out to be reliably bigger, > the most likely explanation is a variant of the "Sitting Pretty" (SP) > effect, whereby some of the more comfortable authors have said that > the reason they do not make their articles OA is that they think they > have enough access and impact already. Such authors do not > self-archive spontaneously. But when OA is mandated, their papers reap > the extra benefit of OA, with its Quality Advantage (for the better, > more citeable papers). In other words, if SSQB is a bias in favor of > OA on the part of some of the better authors, mandates reverse an SP > bias against OA on the part of others of the better authors. > Spontaneous, unmandated OA would be missing the papers of these SP > authors. http://www.eprints.org/openaccess/self-faq/#29.Sitting > > There may be other explanations too. But we think any explanation at > all is premature until it is confirmed that this new mandated OA > advantage is indeed reliable and replicable. Phil further singles out > the fact that the mandate advantage is present in the middle citation > ranges and not the top and bottom. Again, it seems premature to > interpret these minor effects whose unreliability is unknown, but if > forced to pick an interpretation now, we would say it was because the > "Sitting Pretty" authors may be the middle-range authors rather than > the top ones... > > Yassine Gargouri, Chawki Hajjem, Vincent Lariviere, Yves Gingras, Les > Carr, Tim Brody, Stevan Harnad > -- Philip M. Davis PhD Student Department of Communication 301 Kennedy Hall Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853 email: pmd8 at cornell.edu phone: 607 255-2124 https://confluence.cornell.edu/display/~pmd8/resume http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/author/pmd8/ From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Fri Jan 8 14:44:15 2010 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 13:44:15 -0600 Subject: FW: ISI Web of Knowledge Alert - eg science Message-ID: *Record 1 of 17. *Click Here to View Full Record *Order Full Text [ ] Title: The value of science: changing conceptions of scientific productivity, 1869 to circa 1970 Authors: Godin, B Author Full Names: Godin, Benoit Source: SOCIAL SCIENCE INFORMATION SUR LES SCIENCES SOCIALES 48 (4): 547-586 DEC 2009 Language: English Document Type: Review Author Keywords: Economics of science; History of science; Scientific productivity; Statistics KeyWords Plus: AMERICAN-PSYCHOLOGICAL-ASSOCIATION; VITAL-STATISTICS; ECONOMIC-GROWTH; UNITED-STATES; MEN; AGE; PERFORMANCE; ORGANIZATION; RETURN; RATES Abstract: Productivity is now a buzzword in science studies. Whether you consult the literature on research management, the economic literature on technology and innovation, the literature on bibliometrics or the official literature on science policy and its conceptual frameworks, what you find is analyses on productivity, often accompanied by a plea, and recipes, for increased productivity. This article documents how the concept of productivity got into the analysis of science, through the statistics on which the concept rested, and its transformation over one hundred years. It argues that, through history, the concept as applied to science has carried four meanings: productivity as reproduction, productivity as output, productivity as efficiency and productivity as outcome. Reprint Address: Godin, B, INRS Urbanisat Culture & Soc, 385 Rue Sherbrooke Est, Montreal, PQ H2X 1E3, Canada. Research Institution addresses: INRS Urbanisat Culture & Soc, Montreal, PQ H2X 1E3, Canada E-mail Address: benoit.godin at ucs.inrs.ca Cited References: *ADV COUNC SCI POL, 1956, ANN REP. *CEC, 2003, INV RES ACT PLAN EUR. *CEC, 2004, EUR INN SCOR 2004. *DEP REC SUPPL, 1947, RES SCI ACT CAN FED. *DOM BUR STAT, 1941, SURV SCI IND LAB CAN. *DOM BUR STAT, 1956, IND RES DEV EXP CAN. *DOM BUR STAT, 1960, FED GOV EXP SCI ACT. *DSIR, 1958, EST RES DEV SCI ENG. *EC, 2005, KEY FIG 2005 EUR RES. *FED BRIT IND, 1943, IND RES. *FED BRIT IND, 1947, SCI TECHN RES BRIT I. *FED BRIT IND, 1952, RES DEV BRIT IND. *OECD, 1962, 50 PER CENT GROWTH T. *OECD, 1962, EC RES TECHN. *OECD, 1962, MEAS SCI TECHN ACT P. *OECD, 1970, GAPS TECHN COMP COUN. *OECD, 1990, MEAS SCI TECHN ACT P. *OECD, 1992, MEAS SCI TECHN ACT P. *OECD, 1992, TECHN EC KEY REL. *OECD, 1994, MEAS SCI TECHN ACT D. *OECD, 1995, MAN MEAS HUM RES DEV. *OECD, 2001, MEAS PROD MEAS AGGR. *SAPPHO PROJ, 1972, SUCC FAIL IND INN SU. *SPRU, 1972, SUCC FAIL IND INN SU. *US BUR BUDG, 1950, R D EST OBL EXP. *US BUR LAB STAT, 1931, MON LABOR REV, V33, P749. *US BUR LAB STAT, 1932, MON LABOR REV, V35, P1031. *US BUR LAB STAT, 1953, IND R D PREL REP. *US BUR LAB STAT, 1953, SCI R D AM IND STUD. *US DEP DEF, 1953, B US DEP DEF, V1148. *US I CHEM ENG, 1963, P S HELD LOND 11 12. *US NAT ASS MAN, 1949, TRENDS IND RES PAT P. *US NAT RES COMM, 1938, RES NAT RES, V1. *US NAT RES COUNC, 1920, DOCT CONF SCI 1920 A. *US NAT RES COUNC, 1920, RES LAB IND EST US A. *US NAT RES COUNC, 1921, FUNDS AV 1920 US AM. *US NAT RES COUNC, 1923, FELL SCHOL ADV WORK. *US NAT RES COUNC, 1927, HDB SCI TECHN SOC I. *US NAT RES COUNC, 1941, RES NAT RES, V2. *US NAT SCI BOARD, 1973, SCI IND. *US NAT SCI BOARD, 1975, SCI IND 1974. *US NAT SCI FDN, 1953, FED FUNDS SCI FED FU. *US NAT SCI FDN, 1956, 5616 NSF. *US NAT SCI FDN, 1956, REV DAT R D, V1. *US NAT SCI FDN, 1959, 5936 NSF. *US OSRD, 1947, COST AN R D WORK REL. *US PRES SCI RES B, 1947, SCI PUBL POL. ABRAMS A, 1951, P 4 ANN C ADM RES U, P22. ADAMS CW, 1946, ISIS, V36, P166. ALLISON PD, 1974, AM SOCIOL REV, V39, P596. ALLISON PD, 1982, AM SOCIOL REV, V47, P615. ALLISON PD, 1990, AM SOCIOL REV, V55, P469. ANTHONY RN, 1952, MANAGEMENT CONTROLS. BELL D, 1965, END IDEOLOGIES EXHAU, P227. BENDAVID J, 1991, SCI GROWTH ESSAYS SO, P103. BERNAL JD, 1973, SOCIAL FUNCTION SCI. BIX AS, 2000, INVENTING OURSELVES. BRADFORD SC, 1934, ENGINEERING-LONDON, V137, P85. BRODMAN E, 1944, B MED LIB ASS, V32, P479. BUCHNER EF, 1904, PSYCHOL BULL, V1, P57. BUSH V, 1995, SCI ENDLESS FRONTIER. CANDOLLE A, 1987, HIST SCI SAVANTS DEP. CARR LJ, 1929, RURAL COMMUNITY, P204. CARR LJ, 1932, AM J SOCIOL, V37, P569. CARTER CF, 1957, IND TECHNICAL PROGR. CARTER CF, 1958, INVESTMENT INNOVATIO. CATTELL JM, 1896, PSYCHOL REV, V3, P134. CATTELL JM, 1898, SCIENCE, V8, P533. CATTELL JM, 1903, AM J PSYCHOL, V14, P310. CATTELL JM, 1903, POPULAR SCI MONT FEB, P359. CATTELL JM, 1903, SCIENCE, V17, P561. CATTELL JM, 1906, SCIENCE, V24, P732. CATTELL JM, 1909, SCIENCE, V29, P228. CATTELL JM, 1910, SCIENCE, V32, P633. CATTELL JM, 1915, POPULAR SCI MONT MAY, P248. CATTELL JM, 1917, SCI MON, V4, P248. CATTELL JM, 1917, SCI MON, V5, P368. CATTELL JM, 1917, SCIENCE, V45, P275. CATTELL JM, 1922, SCI MON, V14, P568. CATTELL JM, 1929, SCIENCE, V70, P335. CATTELL JM, 2006, AM MEN SCI BIOGRAPHI. CHANDLER AD, 1977, VISIBLE HAND MANAGER. CLARKE EL, 1916, AM MEN LETT THEIR NA. COBB CW, 1928, AM ECON REV, V18, P139. COLE FJ, 1917, SCI PROGR, V11, P578. COLE JR, 1973, SOCIAL STRATIFICATIO. COLE S, 1967, AM SOCIOL REV, V32, P377. COLE S, 1979, AM J SOCIOL, V84, P958. COMPTON KT, 1941, RES NATL RESOURCE, V2, P124. CRANE D, 1965, AM SOCIOL REV, V30, P699. DEAN BV, 1968, EVALUATING SELECTING. DEARBORN DC, 1953, SPENDING IND RES 195. DENISON EF, 1962, SOURCES EC GROWTH US. DENISON EF, 1967, WHY GROWTH RATES DIF. DENNIS W, 1954, SCI MON, V79, P180. DENNIS W, 1956, SCIENCE, V123, P724. DOUGLAS PH, 1930, AM FED, V37, P923. DOUGLAS PH, 1930, B TAYLOR SOC, V15, P254. DOUGLAS PH, 1931, PROBLEM UNEMPLOYMENT. ELLIS H, 1904, STUDY BRIT GENIUS. EWELL RH, 1955, CHEM ENG NEWS 0718, P2980. FABIAN Y, 1963, DASPD6348 OECD. FABRICANT S, 1954, EC PROGR EC CHANGE. FANO E, 1991, TECHNOL CULT, V32, P264. FERNBERGER SW, 1921, PSYCHOL BULL, V18, P569. FERNBERGER SW, 1930, PSYCHOL REV, V27, P526. FERNBERGER SW, 1932, PSYCHOL BULL, V29, P1. FERNBERGER SW, 1938, PSYCHOL BULL, V35, P261. FERNBERGER SW, 1938, PSYCHOL BULL, V35, P84. FERNBERGER SW, 1943, PSYCHOL REV, V50, P33. FERNBERGER SW, 1946, SCIENCE, V104, P175. FLETCHER S, 1952, SCIENCE, V115, P25. FRANZ SI, 1917, PSYCHOL REV, V24, P197. FREEMAN C, 1962, NATL I ECON REV, V20, P21. FREEMAN C, 1963, SCI EC GROWTH GOVT P. FREEMAN C, 1965, RES DEV EFFORT W EUR. FREEMAN C, 1967, SCIENCE, V158, P463. FREEMAN C, 1969, STS16 UNESCO. FREEMAN C, 1971, REPORT BOLTON COMMIT. FREEMAN C, 1974, EC IND INNOVATION. FREEMAN C, 1982, RECENT DEV SCI TECHN. FUSSLER HH, 1949, LIBR QUART, V19, P119. GALTON F, 1873, FORTNIGHTLY REV, V19, P345. GALTON F, 1874, ENGLISH MEN SCI THEI. GALTON F, 1883, INQUIRIES HUMAN FACU. GALTON F, 1901, NATURE, V64, P659. GALTON F, 1906, NOTEWORTHY FAMILIES. GALTON F, 2001, HEREDITARY GENIUS IN. GARFIELD E, 1955, SCIENCE, V122, P108. GARFIELD E, 1963, SCI CITATION INDEX. GARFIELD E, 1964, SCIENCE, V144, P649. GILFILLAN SC, 1930, GEOGR REV, V20, P301. GILFILLAN SC, 1935, SOCIOLOGY INVENTION, P109. GILFILLAN SC, 1951, J PATENT TRADEMARK, V33, P328. GILFILLAN SC, 1960, TECHNOL CULT, V1, P201. GILL C, 1940, UNEMPLOYMENT TECHNOL. GODIN B, 2002, MINERVA, V40, P375. GODIN B, 2004, RES POLICY, V33, P679, DOI 10.1016/j.respol.2003.10.006. GODIN B, 2005, MEASUREMENT STAT SCI. GODIN B, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V68, P109. GODIN B, 2007, RES POLICY, V36, P1388, DOI 10.1016/j.respol.2007.06.002. GODIN B, 2007, SOC STUD SCI, V37, P691, DOI 10.1177/0306312706075338. GRAUE E, 1943, REV ECON STATISTICS, V25, P221. GRILICHES Z, 1958, J POLITICAL EC, V66, P419. GRILICHES Z, 1962, RATE DIRECTION INVEN, P346. GRILICHES Z, 1998, R D PRODUCTIVITY ECO, P52. GROSS PLK, 1927, SCIENCE, V66, P385. GROSS PLK, 1931, SCIENCE, V73, P660. HART H, 1927, PROGR SOCIOLOGY, P191. HODGE MH, 1963, HARVARD BUSINESS NOV, P109. HOGAN RM, 1950, SCIENCE, V112, P613. HOLLAND M, 1933, RES HARD TIMES. HOPWOOD AG, 1984, ISSUES PUBLIC SECTOR, P167. HOUNSHELL DA, 1988, SCI CORPORATE STRATE. HULME EW, 1923, STAT BIBLIO RELATION. HUNTINGTON E, 1927, BUILDERS AM. JACOBY P, 1904, SELECTION CHEZ HOMME. JEFFERSON M, 1911, B AM GEOGR SOC N Y, V43, P241. JEROME H, 1934, MECH IND. JOHNSON HT, 1978, BUS HIST REV, V52, P490. JOHNSON HT, 1987, RELEVANCE LOST RISE. JORGENSON DW, 1967, REV ECON STUD, V34, P249. KAPLAN N, 1960, IEEE T ENG MANAGE, V30, P24. KENDRICK JW, 1961, PRODUCTIVITY TRENDS. KEVLES DJ, 1985, NAME EUGENICS. KILGORE HM, 1945, GOVT WARTIME RES DEV. KUZNETS SS, 1930, SECULAR MOVEMENTS PR, P1. LEHMAN HC, 1953, AGE ACHIEVEMENT. LEVI L, 1869, NATURE 1125, P99. LIPETZ BA, 1965, MEASUREMENT EFFICIEN. LOMBROSO C, 1891, MAN GENIUS. LOTKA AJ, 1926, J WASHINGTON ACADEMY, V16, P317. MACHLUP F, 1962, PRODUCTION DISTRIBUT. MACHLUP F, 1962, RATE DIRECTION INVEN, P143. MAGDOFF H, 1938, PRODUCTION EMPLOYMEN. MANIS JG, 1951, SOC FORCES, V29, P267. MANNICHE E, 1957, BEHAV SCI, V2, P301. MANSFIELD E, 1965, AM ECON REV, V55, P310. MANSFIELD E, 1968, EC TECHNOLOGICAL CHA. MANSFIELD E, 1972, SCIENCE, V175, P477. MANSFIELD E, 1977, Q J EC MAY, P221. MEER B, 1955, J PSYCHOL, V39, P117. MELTZER BN, 1949, AM J SOCIOL, V40, P25. MELTZER BN, 1956, J SOC ISSUES, V12, P32. MERTON RK, 1935, Q J ECON, V49, P454. MILLS FC, 1932, EC TENDENCIES US. MILLS FC, 1936, PRICES RECESSION REC. MILLS FC, 1938, EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNI. MINASIAN J, 1969, AM ECON REV, V59, P80. MINASIAN JR, 1962, RATE DIRECTION INVEN, P93. NEARING S, 1914, POPULAR SCI MONTHLY, V85, P189. NEARING S, 1916, SCI MON, V2, P48. NELSON H, 1928, AM J PSYCHOL, V40, P303. ODIN A, 1895, GENESE GRANDS HOMMES. OGBURN WF, 1922, POLITICAL SCI Q, V37, P83. OGBURN WF, 1933, RECENT SOCIAL TRENDS, P126. OLSEN F, 1948, RES IND ITS ORG MANA, P402. PEARL R, 1925, P NATL ACAD SCI USA, V11, P752. PEARL R, 1926, P NATL ACAD SCI USA, V12, P258. PELZ DC, 1956, ADM SCI Q, V1, P310. PELZ DC, 1966, SCI ORG PRODUCTIVE C. PERAZICH G, 1940, IND RES CHANGING TEC. PICK D, 1989, FACES DEGENERATION E. PICKERING EC, 1908, POPULAR SCI MONT OCT, P372. PICKERING EC, 1909, POPULAR SCI MONT JAN, P80. PORTER TM, 1995, TRUST NUMBERS PURSUI. PRICE DD, 1978, METRIC SCI ADVENT SC, P69. PRICE DJD, 1951, ARCH INT HIST SCI, V14, P85. PRICE DJD, 1956, DISCOVERY, V17, P240. PRICE DJD, 1961, SCI BABYLON. PRICE DJD, 1963, LITTLE SCI BIG SCI. PRICE DJD, 1967, JOURNEYS SCI SMALL S, P1. PRICE DJD, 1967, SCI TECHNOLOGY OCT, P84. PRICE DJD, 1980, C EV SCI TECHN THEOR. PRICE DJD, 1980, RES DEV TECHNOLOGICA, P251. QUINN JB, 1959, YARDSTICKS IND RES E. QUINN JB, 1960, HARVARD BUS REV, P69. RAINOFF TJ, 1929, ISIS, V12, P287. RESKIN BF, 1977, AM SOCIOL REV, V42, P491. ROE A, 1951, GENETIC PSYCHOL MONO, V43, P121. ROE A, 1951, PSYCHOL MONOGR-GEN A, V65, P1. ROE A, 1952, MAKING SCI. ROE A, 1952, SCI AM, V187, P21. ROE A, 1953, PSYCHOL MONOGR-GEN A, V67, P1. ROE A, 1961, SCIENCE, V134, P456. ROE A, 1963, SCI CREATIVITY. ROE A, 1964, MANAGE SCI, P49. ROE A, 1965, SCI REVISITED. ROE A, 1965, SCIENCE, V150, P313. ROE A, 1972, SCIENCE, V176, P940. ROSA EB, 1920, J WASHINGTON ACAD SC, V10, P341. ROSA EB, 1921, ANN AM ACAD POLIT SS, V95, P26. ROSEN SM, 1941, TECHNOLOGY SOC INFLU. ROSSMAN J, 1931, Q J ECON, V45, P522. RUBENSTEIN AH, 1957, HARVARD BUSINESS JAN, P95. SANDERS BS, 1936, J PATENT OFFICE OCT, P666. SANDERS BS, 1962, RATE DIRECTION INVEN, P53. SARTON G, 1923, CARNIEGIE I WASHINGT, V22, P335. SCHMOOKLER J, 1950, J PATENT TRADEMARK, V32, P123. SCHMOOKLER J, 1954, REV ECON STAT, P183. SCHMOOKLER J, 1956, J PATENT OFFICE APR, P223. SCHMOOKLER J, 1960, TECHNOL CULT, V1, P214. SCHUMPETER J, 1939, BUSINESS CYCLES THEO, V1. SCHUSTER A, 1925, P R SOC LOND A-CONTA, V107, P368. SCOTT JS, 1978, AM SOCIOL REV, V43, P889. SCOTT JS, 1981, AM SOCIOL REV, V46, P422. SEEBER NC, 1964, REV DATA R D, V44. SEILER RE, 1965, IMPROVING EFFECTIVEN. SHAPLEY W, 1959, METHODOLOGY STATISTI, P7. SHER IH, 1966, RES PROGRAM EFFECTIV, P136. SHERMAN JV, 1941, RES NATL RESOURCE, V2, P120. SHOCHLEY W, 1954, P IRE MAR, P279. SOLOW RM, 1956, Q J ECON, V70, P65. SOLOW RM, 1957, REV ECON STAT, V39, P312. SOLOW RM, 1978, CAMBRIDGE EC HIST 1, V7. SOLOWAY RA, 1990, DEMOGRAPHY DEGENERAT, P1. SOROKIN PA, 1935, ISIS, V22, P516. STAFFORD AB, 1952, AM J SOCIOL, V42, P539. STEIN MI, 1953, J PSYCHOL, V36, P311. STEIN MI, 1960, CREATIVITY INDIVIDUA. STEPHAN PE, 1992, STRIKING MOTHER LODE. STIGLER GS, 1947, TRENDS OUTPUT EMPLOY. TAYLOR CW, 1963, SCI CREATIVITY ITS R. TAYLOR CW, 1964, CREATIVITY PROGR POT. TAYLOR CW, 1964, WIDENING HORIZONS CR. TAYLOR CW, 1967, SCIENCE, V155, P1075. TOMLINSON J, 1994, ACCOUNTING SOCIAL I, P168. VALAVANISVAIL S, 1955, AM ECON REV, P208. VISHER SS, 1947, SCI STARRED 1903 194. VOLLMER HM, 1966, RES PROGRAM EFFECTIV, P148. WADE N, 1975, SCIENCE, V188, P429. WALLER JC, 2001, STUD HIST PHILOS M P, V32, P457. WEINBERG B, 1923, REV GEN SCI 1030, P565. WEINBERG B, 1926, REV GEN SCI, V37, P43. WEINTRAUB D, 1932, J AM STAT ASSOC, V27, P383. WEINTRAUB D, 1937, TECHNOLOGICAL TRENDS, P67. WHITE HS, 1915, SCIENCE, V42, P105. WILSON PW, 1935, SCI MON, V41, P240. WINSTON S, 1937, AM SOCIOL REV, V3, P837. WOODS FA, 1906, MENTAL MORAL HEREDIT. WYMAN WI, 1919, J PATENT TRADEMARK, V1, P439. YOVITS MC, 1966, RES PROGRAM EFFECTIV. ZUCKERMAN H, 1972, SOCIOLOGY AGE STRATI. Cited Reference Count: 283 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD; 1 OLIVERS YARD, 55 CITY ROAD, LONDON EC1Y 1SP, ENGLAND Subject Category: Information Science & Library Science; Social Sciences, Interdisciplinary ISSN: 0539-0184 DOI: 10.1177/0539018409344475 IDS Number: 521FT ________________________________ *Record 2 of 17. *Click Here to View Full Record *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Assessing scientific research performance and impact with single indices Authors: Panaretos, J; Malesios, C Author Full Names: Panaretos, John; Malesios, Chrisovaladis Source: SCIENTOMETRICS 81 (3): 635-670 DEC 2009 Language: English Document Type: Article KeyWords Plus: SUCCESSIVE H-INDEXES; HIRSCH-TYPE INDEXES; BIBLIOMETRIC INDICATORS; CITATION ANALYSIS; RESEARCH OUTPUT; SCIENCE; RANKING; MODEL; JOURNALS; PUBLICATIONS Abstract: We provide a comprehensive and critical review of the h-index and its most important modifications proposed in the literature, as well as of other similar indicators measuring research output and impact. Extensions of some of these indices are presented and illustrated. Reprint Address: Panaretos, J, Athens Univ Econ & Business, 76 Patis St, Athens 10434, Greece. Research Institution addresses: [Panaretos, John; Malesios, Chrisovaladis] Athens Univ Econ & Business, Athens 10434, Greece E-mail Address: jpan at aueb.gr Cited References: 2007, USERS MANUAL. *RES POL COMM U UK, 2007, US BIBL MEAS RES QUA. ADLER R, 2008, CITATION STAT JOINT. AMIN M, 2000, PERSPECTIVES PUBLISH, V1, P1. ARENCIBIAJORGE R, 2008, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V59, P155, DOI 10.1002/asi.20729. BALL P, 2005, NATURE, V436, P900, DOI 10.1038/436900a. BANKS MG, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P161, DOI 10.1007/s11192-006-0146-5. BARENDSE W, 2007, BIOMED DIGIT LIB, V4, P3. BATISTA PD, 2005, UNIVERSAL BEHAV RES. BEIRLANT J, 2007, ASYMPTOTICS HIRSCH I. BORNMANN L, 2007, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V58, P1381, DOI 10.1002/asi.20609. BORNMANN L, 2008, J AM SOC INFORM SCI, V59, P1. BRAUN T, 2005, SCIENTIST, V19, P8. BRAUN T, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P169, DOI 10.1007/s11192-006-0147-4. BURRELL QL, 1992, INFORMATION PROCESSI, V28, P637. BURRELL QL, 2007, J INFORMETR, V1, P16, DOI 10.1016/j.joi.2006.07.001. BURRELL QL, 2007, J INFORMETR, V1, P170, DOI 10.1016/j.joi.2007.01.003. CHAI JC, 2008, P WIS 2008 BERL 4 IN. CHAPRON G, 2006, BIOSCIENCE, V56, P558. COLE S, 1973, SOCIAL STRATIFICATIO. COSTAS R, 2007, J INFORMETR, V1, P193, DOI 10.1016/j.joi.2007.02.001. COZZENS SE, 1989, SCIENTOMETRICS, V15, P437. CRONIN B, 2006, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V57, P1275, DOI 10.1002/asi.20354. EGGHE L, 2000, J AM SOC INFORM SCI, V51, P145. EGGHE L, 2005, POWER LAWS INFORM PR. EGGHE L, 2006, ISSI NEWSLETTER, V2, P8. EGGHE L, 2006, SCIENTIST, V20, P14. EGGHE L, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P121, DOI 10.1007/s11192-006-0143-8. EGGHE L, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P131, DOI 10.1007/s11192-006-0144-7. EGGHE L, 2007, INFORM PROCESSING MA, V44, P770. EGGHE L, 2008, J AM SOC IN IN PRESS. EGGHE L, 2008, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V59, P1276, DOI 10.1002/asi.20809. EGGHE L, 2008, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V59, P1608, DOI 10.1002/asi.20845. EGGHE L, 2008, SCIENTOMETR IN PRESS. GARFIELD E, 1955, SCIENCE, V122, P108. GARFIELD E, 2006, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V295, P90. GLANZEL W, 2006, SCI FOCUS, V1, P10. GOLDSTEIN H, 1996, J ROY STAT SOC A S 3, V159, P385. GUMBEL EJ, 1958, STAT EXTREMES. HIRSCH JE, 2005, P NATL ACAD SCI USA, V102, P16569, DOI 10.1073/pnas.0507655102. HIRSCH JE, 2007, DOES H INDEX HAVE PR. IGLESIAS JE, 2007, P 11 C INT SOC SCI I. IGLESIAS JE, 2007, SCIENTOMETRICS, V73, P303, DOI 10.1007/s11192-007-1805-x. IMPERIAL J, 2007, SCIENTOMETRICS, V71, P271, DOI 10.1007/s11192-007-1665-4. JACSO P, 2008, ONLINE INFORM REV, V32, P673, DOI 10.1108/14684520810914043. JACSO P, 2008, TESTING CALCULATION. JIN BH, 2006, SCI FOCUS, V1, P8. JIN BH, 2007, CHINESE SCI BULL, V52, P855, DOI 10.1007/s11434-007-0145-9. JIN BH, 2007, CHINESE SCI BULL, V52, P855, DOI 10.1007/s11434-007-0145-9. KELLY CD, 2006, TRENDS ECOL EVOL, V21, P167, DOI 10.1016/j.tree.2006.01.005. KINNEY AL, 2007, P NATL ACAD SCI USA, V104, P17943, DOI 10.1073/pnas.0704416104. KOSMULSKI M, 2006, ISSI NEWSLETTER, V2, P4. KOSMULSKI M, 2007, INT J SCIENTOMETRICS, V11. LEHMANN S, 2005, MEASURES MI IN PRESS. LEHMANN S, 2006, NATURE, V444, P1003, DOI 10.1038/4441003a. LIANG LM, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P153, DOI 10.1007/s11192-006-0145-6. LIU YX, 2007, P ISSI 2007, P514. MACROBERTS MH, 1989, J AM SOC INFORM SCI, V40, P342. MARTIN BR, 1983, RES POLICY, V12, P61. MEHO LI, 2007, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V58, P2105, DOI 10.1002/asi.20677. MEHO LI, 2007, PHYS WORLD, V20, P32. MILLER CW, 2006, SUPERIORITY H INDEX. MOED HF, 1996, NATURE, V381, P186. MOLINARI JF, 2008, SCIENTOMETRICS, V75, P163, DOI 10.1007/s11192-007-1853-2. ORBAY M, 2007, CASE STUDY TURKISH J. PANARETOS J, 2008, 235 ATH U EC BUS DEP. PERSSON O, 2008, SCIENTOMETR IN PRESS. PODLUBNY I, 2005, SCIENTOMETRICS, V64, P95. PODLUBNY I, 2006, RES EVALUAT, V15, P154. PRATHAP G, 2006, CURR SCI INDIA, V91, P1439. ROEDIGER HL, 2006, OBSERVER ACAD OBSERV, V19, P37. ROUSSEAU R, 2006, SCI FOCUS, V1, P23. ROUSSEAU R, 2006, SCI TECHNOL IN PRESS. ROUSSEAU R, 2007, J INFORMETR, V1, P2. ROUSSEAU R, 2007, SCI FOCUS. SAAD G, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P117, DOI 10.1007/s11192-006-0142-9. SAISANA M, 2008, JRC SCI TECHNICAL RE. SANDERSON M, 2008, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V59, P1184, DOI 10.1002/asi.20771. SCHREIBER M, 2007, 7830002 EPL, P1. SCHREIBER M, 2007, INFLUENCE SELF CITAT. SCHREIBER M, 2008, J INFORMETR, V2, P211, DOI 10.1016/j.joi.2008.05.001. SCHREIBER M, 2008, NEW J PHYS, V10, P9, DOI 10.1088/1367-2630/1010/1084/040201. SCHUBERT A, 2007, J INFORMETR, V1, P179, DOI 10.1016/j.joi.2006.12.002. SCHUBERT A, 2007, SCIENTOMETRICS, V70, P201, DOI 10.1007/s11192-007-0112-x. SIDIROPOULOS A, 2007, SCIENTOMETRICS, V72, P253, DOI 10.1007/s11192-007-1722-z. SYMONDS MR, 2006, PLOS ONE, V1, P1. TOL RSJ, 2007, FNU146. TOROALVES N, 2007, BRAZ J MED BIOL RES, V40, P1529. VANCLAY JK, 2007, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V58, P1547. VANRAAN AFJ, 2005, MEASUREMENT, V3, P1. VANRAAN AFJ, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V67, P491, DOI 10.1556/Scient.67.2006.3.10. VINKLER P, 2007, J INF SCI, V33, P481, DOI 10.1177/0165551506072165. WAN JK, 2007, PURE H INDEX CALCULA. WU Q, 2008, W INDEX SIGNIFICANT. Cited Reference Count: 94 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER; VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS Subject Category: Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications; Information Science & Library Science ISSN: 0138-9130 DOI: 10.1007/s11192-008-2174-9 IDS Number: 522HX ________________________________ *Record 3 of 17. Search terms matched: FACTOR(1); IMPACT(1) *Click Here to View Full Record *Order Full Text [ ] Title: The role of correspondence sections in post-publication peer review: A bibliometric study of general and internal medicine journals Authors: von Elm, E; Wandel, S; Juni, P Author Full Names: von Elm, Erik; Wandel, Simon; Jueni, Peter Source: SCIENTOMETRICS 81 (3): 747-755 DEC 2009 Language: English Document Type: Article KeyWords Plus: IMPACT FACTOR; CORRESPONDENCE COLUMNS; OLD LETTERS; RULES; AUDIT Abstract: Scientific journals claim that correspondence sections are for post-publication peer review. We compared the conditions for submission and the bibliometrics of letters-to-editors published in leading medical journals in 2002 and 2007 using journal-derived information and data from PubMed and Journal Citation Reports. The median time limit for letter submissions decreased from 6 to 3.5 weeks, the median word limit from 400 to 350. The median number of letters per published article was near one in both years. Only about half of the letters were followed by an author reply in either year. Electronic response systems were available for four journals in 2007. Reprint Address: von Elm, E, Univ Bern, Inst Social & Prevent Med, Finkenhubelweg 11, CH-3012 Bern, Switzerland. Research Institution addresses: [von Elm, Erik; Wandel, Simon; Jueni, Peter] Univ Bern, Inst Social & Prevent Med, CH-3012 Bern, Switzerland; [von Elm, Erik] Univ Med Ctr, Dept Med Biometry & Stat, German Cochrane Ctr, Freiburg, Germany; [Wandel, Simon; Jueni, Peter] Univ Hosp Bern, CTU, CH-3010 Bern, Switzerland E-mail Address: vonelm at ispm.unibe.ch Cited References: ANN REV MED PALO ALT. LANCET LONDON. MEDICINE BALTIMORE. 1989, LANCET, V1, P1115. *AM AC PED, PEDIATRICS. *AM COLL PHYS, ANN INTERNAL MED PHI. *AM MED ASS, ARCH INTERNAL MED CH. *AM MED ASS, JAMA J AM MED ASS. *BRIT MED ASS, BMJ BRIT MED J LONDO. *CAN MED ASS, CMAJ CANADIAN MED AS. *COPE, 2007, COD COND ED BIOM J. *MASS MED SOC, NEW ENGLAND J MED BO. *PUBL LIB SCI, PLOS MED SAN FRANCIS. *PUBL LIB SCI, PLOS ONE SAN FRANCIS. *WAME, 2003, CAS CONS AUTH DO NOT. *WAME, 2007, POL LETT ED. ALTMAN DG, 2002, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V287, P2765. ALTMAN DG, 2005, PLOS MED, V2, P457, ARTN E126. ALTMAN DG, 2005, PLOS MED, V2, E152. BHOPAL RS, 1994, BRIT MED J, V308, P1582. BOYTON RJ, 1990, BRIT MED J, V301, P1419. BUTLER C, 2003, LANCET, V361, P706. CASWELL A, 1992, MED J AUSTRALIA, V157, P63. CHEW M, 2007, J ROY SOC MED, V100, P142. CROSSAN L, 1998, BRIT MED J, V316, P1406. DAVIES S, 2003, BRIT MED J, V63, P300. GOLUBIC R, 2008, SCI ENG ETHICS, V14, P41, DOI 10.1007/s11948-007-9044-3. HORTON R, 2002, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V287, P2843. MAHESH S, 2001, NED TIJDSCHR GENEES, V145, P531. MARIC C, 2004, CLIN EXP PHARMACOL P, V31, P657. MARON NL, 2008, CURRENT MODELS DIGIT. MULLAN Z, 2003, LANCET, V361, P12. MULLAN Z, 2006, LANCET, V367, P1042. OCONNOR P, 2004, CLIN EXP PHARM PHYSL, V31, P657. OCONNOR P, 2004, CLIN EXP PHARM PHYSL, V31, P658. RENNIE D, 1998, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V280, P300. SEGLEN PO, 1997, BRIT MED J, V314, P498. STANG A, 2008, J CLIN EPIDEMIOL, V61, P309, DOI 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.10.013. Cited Reference Count: 38 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER; VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS Subject Category: Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications; Information Science & Library Science ISSN: 0138-9130 DOI: 10.1007/s11192-009-2236-0 IDS Number: 522HX ________________________________ *Record 4 of 17. Search terms matched: FACTOR(3); IMPACT(3) *Click Here to View Full Record *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Surviving bad times: The role of citations, self-citations and numbers of citable items in recovery of the journal impact factor after at least four years of continuous decreases Authors: Campanario, JM; Molina, A Author Full Names: Miguel Campanario, Juan; Molina, Antonio Source: SCIENTOMETRICS 81 (3): 859-864 DEC 2009 Language: English Document Type: Article KeyWords Plus: LABELED EDITORIAL MATERIAL; INDEX Abstract: We studied the influence of the number of citations, the number of citable items and the number of journal self-citations on increases in the impact factor (IF) in 123 journals from the Journal Citation Reports database in which this scientometric indicator had decreased during the previous four years. In general, we did not find evidence that abuse of journal self-citations contributed to the increase in the impact factor after several years of decreases. Reprint Address: Campanario, JM, Univ Alcala de Henares, Dept Fis, Madrid 28871, Spain. Research Institution addresses: [Miguel Campanario, Juan; Molina, Antonio] Univ Alcala de Henares, Dept Fis, Madrid 28871, Spain E-mail Address: juan.campanario at uah.es Funding Acknowledgement: Spanish Ministry of Science and Technology (Direccion General de Investigacion) ; European Regional Development Fund (ERDF/FEDER) [SEJ200766236/SOCI] Funding Text: This work was supported by a grant from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Technology (Direccion General de Investigacion) and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF/FEDER, project SEJ200766236/SOCI). We thank K. Shashok for improving the use of English in the manuscript and for suggestions about the content. Cited References: ANDRADE A, 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS IN PR. CAMPANARIO JM, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P365, DOI 10.1007/s11192-006-0158-1. FALAGAS ME, 2007, INT J IMPOT RES, V19, P443, DOI 10.1038/si.ijir.3901583. FRANDSEN TF, 2008, SCIENTOMETRICS, V74, P439, DOI 10.1007/s11192-007-1697-9. GLANZEL W, 2002, SCIENTOMETRICS, V53, P171. GOLUBIC R, 2008, SCI ENG ETHICS, V14, P41, DOI 10.1007/s11948-007-9044-3. GONZALEZ L, 2007, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V58, P252, DOI 10.1002/asi.20424. MANNINO DM, 2005, AM J RESP CRIT CARE, V171, P417. NEUBERGER J, 2002, EUR J GASTROEN HEPAT, V14, P209. Cited Reference Count: 9 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER; VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS Subject Category: Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications; Information Science & Library Science ISSN: 0138-9130 DOI: 10.1007/s11192-008-2257-7 IDS Number: 522HX ________________________________ *Record 5 of 17. *Click Here to View Full Record *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Article-Level Metrics and the Evolution of Scientific Impact Authors: Neylon, C; Wu, S Author Full Names: Neylon, Cameron; Wu, Shirley Source: PLOS BIOLOGY 7 (11): Art. No. e1000242 NOV 2009 Language: English Document Type: Article KeyWords Plus: SCIENCE Reprint Address: Neylon, C, Rutherford Appleton Lab, Sci & Technol Facil Council, Didcot OX11 0QX, Oxon, England. Research Institution addresses: [Neylon, Cameron] Rutherford Appleton Lab, Sci & Technol Facil Council, Didcot OX11 0QX, Oxon, England; [Wu, Shirley] 23andMe, Mountain View, CA USA E-mail Address: swu at 23andme.com Cited References: 2006, PLOS MED, V3, E291, DOI 10.1371/JOURNAL.PMED.0030291. BERGSTROM C, 2007, C RL NEWS, V68. BOLLEN J, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P669. BOLLEN J, 2009, PLOS ONE, V4, ARTN e4803. BOLLEN J, 2009, PLOS ONE, V4, ARTN e6022. BOURNE PE, 2008, PLOS COMPUT BIOL, V4, ARTN e1000037. CAMPBELL P, 2008, ETHICS SCI ENV POLIT, V8, P5. CHEN P, 2007, J INFORMETR, V1, P8. DERUIJTER W, 2009, BRIT MED J, V338, A3083. GARFIELD E, 1972, SCIENCE, V178, P471. HENNING V, 2009, USAGEBASED IMPACT ME. LAWRENCE PA, 2009, PLOS BIOL, V7, ARTN e1000197. NIELSEN M, 2009, PHYS WORLD MAY, P30. OLEKSYK TK, 2008, PLOS ONE, V3, ARTN e1712. REEVES WC, 2005, BMC MED, V3, P19. ROSSNER M, 2007, J CELL BIOL, V179, P1091. ROSSNER M, 2008, J CELL BIOL, V180, P254. SHIRKY C, 2008, ITS NOT INFORM OVERL. Cited Reference Count: 18 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE; 185 BERRY ST, STE 1300, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94107 USA Subject Category: Biochemistry & Molecular Biology; Biology ISSN: 1544-9173 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000242 IDS Number: 522WY ________________________________ *Record 6 of 17. Search terms matched: FACTOR(1); IMPACT(1) *Click Here to View Full Record *Order Full Text [ ] Title: A comparative analysis of social sciences citation tools Authors: Levine-Clark, M; Gil, E Author Full Names: Levine-Clark, Michael; Gil, Esther Source: ONLINE INFORMATION REVIEW 33 (5): 986-996 2009 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Software tools; Databases KeyWords Plus: WEB-OF-SCIENCE; GOOGLE-SCHOLAR; IMPACT FACTOR; INDEXES; SCOPUS Abstract: Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to identify the utility of Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar as citation analysis tools for the social sciences. Design/methodology/approach - The 25 most-accessed articles in 163 social sciences journals are searched in three citation databases. Findings - Web of Science has long been the only tool for citation analysis. Scopus and Google Scholar, while still new to the market, are complementary to Web of Science and in some cases can provide a more nuanced view of the importance of scholarly articles in the social sciences. Practical implications - As libraries struggle to provide the best tools to their users, they may wish to consider the freely-available Google Scholar as a substitute or complement to expensive databases such as Web of Science and Scopus. Originality/value - Most analyses of citation databases have focused on the sciences. Because this study examined the social sciences literature, it has expanded on the research available on Web of Science, Google Scholar and Scopus. Reprint Address: Levine-Clark, M, Univ Denver, Penrose Lib, Denver, CO 80208 USA. Research Institution addresses: [Levine-Clark, Michael; Gil, Esther] Univ Denver, Penrose Lib, Denver, CO 80208 USA E-mail Address: Michael.levine-clark at du.edu Cited References: 2008, SCIENCEDIRECT INFO. *GOOGL, 2008, AB GOOGL SCHOL. *SCIENCEDIRECT, 2008, BROWS J BOOKS SUBJ. *SCOPUSINFO, 2008, SCOP DET. *THOMS REUT, ARTS HUM CIT IND J L. *THOMS REUT, SCI CIT IND J LIST. *THOMS REUT, SOC SCI CIT IND J LI. *THOMS REUT, 2008, THOMS SCI IMP FACT. BAIRD LM, 1994, J INF SCI, V20, P2. BAKKALBASI N, 2006, BIOMEDICAL DIGITAL L, V3. BAUER K, 2005, D LIB MAGAZINE, V11. BELEW RK, 2005, ARXIVCS0504036V1CSIR. BUTLER D, 2004, NATURE, V432, P423, DOI 10.1038/432423a. CAMERON BD, 2005, PORTAL-LIBR ACAD, V5, P105. FALAGAS ME, 2008, FASEB J, V22, P338, DOI 10.1096/fj.07-9492LSF. GARFIELD E, 1955, SCIENCE, V122, P108. GARFIELD E, 2006, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V295, P90. JACSO P, 2008, ONLINE INFORM REV, V32, P102, DOI 10.1108/14684520810866010. KOUSHA K, 2007, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V58, P1055, DOI 10.1002/asi.20584. LEVINECLARK M, 2009, J BUSINESS FINANCE L, V14, P32. MEHO LI, 2007, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V58, P2105, DOI 10.1002/asi.20677. MOED HF, 2005, CITATION ANAL RES EV. NISONGER TE, 2004, SERIALS LIBR, V47, P57. NORRIS M, 2007, J INFORMETR, V1, P161, DOI 10.1016/j.joi.2006.12.001. NORUZI A, 2005, LIBRI, V55, P170. PAULY D, 2005, ETHICS SCI ENV POLIT, P33. SCHROEDER R, 2007, PORTAL-LIBR ACAD, V7, P243. YANG K, 2006, CIT AN COMP GOOGL SC. Cited Reference Count: 28 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LIMITED; HOWARD HOUSE, WAGON LANE, BINGLEY BD16 1WA, W YORKSHIRE, ENGLAND Subject Category: Computer Science, Information Systems; Information Science & Library Science ISSN: 1468-4527 DOI: 10.1108/14684520911001954 IDS Number: 521LF ________________________________ *Record 7 of 17. Search terms matched: FACTOR(1); IMPACT(1) *Click Here to View Full Record *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Improvement and decision-making process of an article Authors: Matias-Guiu, J; Ramos, RG Author Full Names: Matias-Guiu, J.; Garcia Ramos, R. Source: NEUROLOGIA 24 (6): 353-358 JUL-AUG 2009 Language: Spanish Document Type: Editorial Material Author Keywords: Peer review; Medical publications; Editors KeyWords Plus: RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED-TRIAL; GENERAL MEDICAL JOURNALS; CONFLICTS-OF-INTEREST; FILE-DRAWER PROBLEM; PEER REVIEWERS; PUBLICATION BIAS; EDITORS VIEWS; IMPACT FACTOR; QUALITY; AUTHORS Abstract: Introduction. Peer review (PR) is the traditional model for improving and deciding about the scientific publications. It consists of sending the material received for publication to the experts who analyze its quality and made a constructive criticism so that the authors can improve it while advising the editor on his/her publication decision. Development. An analysis is made of the situation of peer review based on its different characteristics, such as the peer's impartiality, equality, confidentiality and competence and their role in the decision making process on the acceptability of the manuscript and as an instrument for improvement of the articles. Conclusions. PR is more a culture than a method that can be evaluated. If it is the editor who makes the decision in a publication, it is really the editor who can evaluate the benefit of the process and know the grade of efficacy of the peer reviewers. It is true that the PR has disadvantages, such as creating officialism, that takes up time and resources and that may generate discouragement in some authors, however, it leads to improvement in the articles, correction of errors and alerts on distortions. The PR should be understood not only as a decision formula, but also as a way to improve the manuscripts placed at the service of the authors, regardless of whether the article is published or not. Reprint Address: Matias-Guiu, J, Univ Complutense, Inst Neurociencias, Serv Neurol, Hosp Clin San Carlos, Av Prof Martin Lagos S-N, Madrid 28010, Spain. Research Institution addresses: [Matias-Guiu, J.; Garcia Ramos, R.] Univ Complutense, Inst Neurociencias, Serv Neurol, Hosp Clin San Carlos, Madrid 28010, Spain E-mail Address: inc.hcsc at salud.madrid.org Cited References: 2008, LANCET, V371, P447. ANGELL M, 2000, NEW ENGL J MED, V342, P1516. ATKINSON M, 2001, SCI ENG ETHICS, V7, P193. BAGGS JG, 1999, RES NURS HEALTH, V22, P93. BALISTRERI WF, 2007, J PEDIATR, V151, P107, DOI 10.1016/j.jpeds.2007.05.049. BARNES J, 1981, DISCUSSES PRINCIPLES, P17. BATES T, 2004, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V292, P86. BAXT WG, 1998, ANN EMERG MED 1, V32, P310. BEKELMAN JE, 2003, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V289, P454. BENOS DJ, 2003, ADV PHYSIOL EDUC, V27, P47, DOI 10.1152/advan.00057.2002. BENOS DJ, 2005, ADV PHYSIOL EDUC, V29, P59, DOI 10.1152/advan.00056.2004. BENOS DJ, 2007, ADV PHYSIOL EDUC, V31, P145, DOI 10.1152/advan.00104.2006. BERGER E, 2008, ANN EMERG MED, V51, P737, DOI 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2008.04.010. BERKWITS M, 1999, J LAW MED ETHICS, V27, P122. BERO LA, 1992, NEW ENGL J MED, V327, P1135. BLACK N, 1998, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V280, P231. BORDAGE G, 2001, ACAD MED, V76, P889. BORDAGE G, 2001, ACAD MED, V76, P904. BRICE J, 2005, MED EDUC, V39, P83, DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2004.02027.x. BUDDEN AE, 2008, TRENDS ECOL EVOL, V23, P4. BURNHAM JC, 1990, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V263, P1323. CAELLEIGH AS, 2001, ACAD MED, V76, P914. CALLAHAM ML, 1998, ANN EMERG MED 1, V32, P318. CALLAHAM ML, 1998, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V280, P229. CALLAHAM ML, 2002, ANN EMERG MED, V40, P323, DOI 10.1067/mem.2002.127121. CALLAHAM ML, 2007, PLOS MED, V4, P40. CALLAHAN ML, 2002, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V287, P2781. CARUSO M, 2004, J APPL BEHAV ANAL, V37, P523. CASADEVALL A, 2009, INFECT IMMUN, V77, P1273, DOI 10.1128/IAI.00018-09. CECI SJ, 1984, AM PSYCHOL, V39, P1491. CHEW M, 2007, J ROY SOC MED, V100, P142. COUZIN J, 2006, SCIENCE, V312, P38. CULLEN DJ, 1992, ACAD MED, V67, P856. CURFMAN GD, 2008, NEW ENGL J MED, V358, P2276. DAVIDOFF F, 1998, ANN INTERN MED, V128, P66. DEMELOMARTIN I, 2007, NATURE, V448, P129, DOI 10.1038/448129a. DEVINE EB, 2005, AM J PHARM EDUC, V69, P455. DICKERSIN K, 1990, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V263, P1385. DICKERSIN K, 1992, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V267, P374. DICKERSIN K, 1993, ANN NY ACAD SCI, V703, P135. DOUGHERTY MC, 2004, NURS RES, V53, P213. DRAZEN JM, 2002, NEW ENGL J MED, V346, P1901. EARNSHAW JJ, 2000, ANN ROY COLL SURG S, V82, P133. EASTERBROOK PJ, 1991, LANCET, V337, P867. EATON KK, 1997, J NUTR ENV MED, V7, P139. EPSTEIN Y, 2002, J APPL PHYSIOL, V92, P2226. EVANS AT, 1993, J GEN INTERN MED, V8, P422. FISHER M, 1994, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V272, P143. FLANAGIN A, 1998, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V280, P222. FRISHAUF P, 2008, MEDSCAPE J MED, V10, P267. GANNON F, 2001, EMBO REP, V2, P743. GARCIADOVAL I, 2007, PLOS MED, V4, P144. GARFUNKEL JM, 1990, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V263, P1376. GHALI WA, 2002, CAN MED ASSOC J, V166, P1137. GIBSON K, 2008, MATER CHEM PHYS, V112, P52, DOI 10.1016/j.matchemphys.2008.05.007. GILBERT JR, 1994, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V272, P139. GODLEE F, 2002, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V287, P2762. GOLDMAN RL, 1996, JOINT COMM J QUAL IM, V22, P762. HALL W, 2006, ADDICTION, V101, P1223, DOI 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2006.01552.x. HILDNER FJ, 1997, CATHETER CARDIO DIAG, V42, P111. HOJAT M, 2003, ADV HEALTH SCI EDUC, V8, P75. HORTON R, 1998, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V280, P298. HUSSAIN A, 2001, BRIT MED J, V323, P263. ILAKOVAC V, 2007, CAN MED ASSOC J, V176, P41. INGELFINGER FJ, 1974, AM J MED, V56, P686. JEFFERSON T, 2002, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V287, P2784. JEFFERSON T, 2002, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V287, P2786. JEFFERSON T, 2007, COCHRANE DB SYST REV, ARTN MR000016. JOHNSTON SC, 2007, ANN NEUROL, V61, P10. JUSTICE AC, 1998, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V280, P240. KAISER J, 2006, SCIENCE, V314, P405. KASSIRER JP, 1994, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V272, P96. KEARNEY MH, 2005, RES NURS HEALTH, V28, P444, DOI 10.1002/nur.20104. KLIEWER MA, 2004, AM J ROENTGENOL, V183, P1545. KLIEWER MA, 2005, AM J ROENTGENOL, V184, P1731. KLJAKOVICGASPIC M, 2003, ARCH MED RES, V34, P439, DOI 10.1016/j.arcmed.2003.07.001. KMIETOWICZ Z, 2008, BRIT MED J, V336, P241. KORNGREEN A, 2005, NATURE, V438, P282, DOI 10.1038/438282d. KRONIC DA, 1990, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V283, P1321. KULSTAD E, 2007, PLOS MED, V4, P143. LABAND DN, 1994, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V272, P147. LANE J, 2009, IS THERE GENDER BIAS. LEVSKY ME, 2007, SOUTH MED J, V100, P371. LIPWORTH W, 2009, AUSTRALAS PSYCHIATRY, V17, P331, DOI 10.1080/10398560902721614. LUTY J, 2009, J MED ETHICS, V35, P200, DOI 10.1136/jme.2008.026740. MALONE RE, 1999, J EMERG NURS, V25, P150. MARRIS E, 2006, NATURE, V439, P520, DOI 10.1038/439520a. MASON DJ, 2003, AM J NURS, V103, P11, DOI 10.1038/439520a. MATIASGUIU J, 1996, REV NEUROL, V24, P765. MATIASGUIU J, 1997, REV NEUROLOGIA, V25, P1908. MATIASGUIU J, 2008, NEUROLOGIA, V23, P342. MATIASGUIU J, 2009, NEUROLOGIA, V24, P1. MCNAMEE D, 1998, LANCET, V351, P542. MCNUTT RA, 1990, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V263, P1371. MCNUTT RA, 1994, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V272, P143. MERTON RK, 1968, SCIENCE, V159, P56. MILLETT D, 2006, J ORTHOD, V33, P1. MORRISON AR, 2002, PERSPECT BIOL MED, V45, P606. MORRISON AR, 2002, PHYSIOLOGIST, V45, P135. MOWATT G, 2002, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V287, P2769. NAFTULIN DH, 1973, J MED EDUC, V48, P630. NYLENNA M, 1994, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V272, P149. OLSON CM, 1990, AM J EMERG MED, V8, P356. PALMA S, 2005, J EPIDEMIOL COMMUN H, V59, P864, DOI 10.1136/jech.2005.033027. PATSOPOULOS NA, 2006, BRIT MED J, V332, P1061, DOI 10.1136/bmj.38768.420139.80. PICAR JH, 2007, MATURITAS, V57, P16. POLAK JF, 1995, AM J ROENTGENOL, V165, P685. READY T, 2006, NAT MED, V12, P494. REED DA, 2007, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V298, P1002. REEVES DS, 2004, J ANTIMICROB CHEMOTH, V53, P411, DOI 10.1093/jac/dkh098. REGEHR G, 2006, MED EDUC, V40, P832, DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2959.2006.02539.x. RENNIE D, 1997, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V278, P579. RICHARDS D, 2007, EVID BASED DENT, V8, P88. RIVARA FP, 2007, J PEDIATR, V151, P202, DOI 10.1016/j.jpeds.2007.02.008. ROCHON PA, 1994, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V272, P108. ROSENBERG MS, 2005, EVOLUTION, V59, P464. ROSENTHAL R, 1979, PSYCHOL BULL, V86, P638. ROSS JS, 2006, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V295, P1675. ROTER DL, 2002, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V288, P756. SAIDMAN LJ, 1994, ANESTHESIOLOGY, V80, P491. SAPER CB, 2009, BEHAV BRAIN FUNCT, V5, ARTN 4. SCARGLE JD, 2000, J SCI EXPLORATION, V14, P91. SCHROTER S, 2004, BRIT MED J, V328, P673. SCHROTER S, 2006, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V295, P314. SHASHOK K, 1997, REV NEUROL, V148, P1946. SIEGELMAN SS, 1991, RADIOLOGY, V178, P637. SMITH JA, 2002, J UROLOGY, V168, P2123, DOI 10.1097/01.ju.0000034385.02340.99. SMITH R, 1997, BRIT MED J, V315, P759. SMITH R, 2005, BRIT MED J, V331, P288. SNELL L, 2005, MED EDUC, V39, P90, DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2004.02026.x. SPIER R, 2002, TRENDS BIOTECHNOL, V20, P357. STEERS WD, 2006, J UROLOGY, V176, P1905, DOI 10.1016/j.juro.2006.08.046. STEINBROOK R, 2004, NEW ENGL J MED, V350, P327. STIJNTJES F, 2008, NED TIJDSCHR GENEES, V152, P934. STOSSEL TP, 1985, NEW ENGL J MED, V312, P658. TAMBER PS, 2007, BRIT MED J, V334, P125. TILDEN V, 2002, NURS RES, V51, P275. TITE L, 2007, J EPIDEMIOL COMMUN H, V61, P9, DOI 10.1136/jech.2006.049817. TRIGGLE CR, 2007, VASC HLTH RISK MANAG, V3, P39. VANROOYEN S, 1999, J CLIN EPIDEMIOL, V52, P625. VANROOYEN S, 1999, J GEN INTERN MED, V14, P622. WADE D, 2004, CLIN REHABIL, V18, P117. WAGER E, 2006, BMC MED, V4, ARTN 13. WALSH E, 2000, BRIT J PSYCHIAT, V176, P47. WARE JE, 1975, J MED EDUC, V50, P149. WEBER EJ, 2002, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V287, P2790. WOOD D, 2001, LEARN PUBL, V14, P151. YANKAUER A, 1991, AM J PUBLIC HEALTH, V81, P843. Cited Reference Count: 148 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: GRUPO ARS XXI COMUNICACION S L; PASSEIG GRACIA 84, 1, BARCELONA, 08008, SPAIN Subject Category: Clinical Neurology ISSN: 0213-4853 IDS Number: 522XV ________________________________ *Record 8 of 17. Search terms matched: FACTOR(1); IMPACT(1) *Click Here to View Full Record *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Impact matters! Laser & Photonics Reviews earned its first impact factor Authors: Fuchs, GW Author Full Names: Fuchs, Guido W. Source: LASER & PHOTONICS REVIEWS 3 (6): A47-A48 NOV 2009 Language: English Document Type: Editorial Material Cited References: CHAN J, 2008, LASER PHOTONICS REV, V2, P325, DOI 10.1002/lpor.200810012. HUANG CB, 2008, LASER PHOTONICS REV, V2, P227, DOI 10.1002/lpor.200810001. KAMINSKII AA, 2007, LASER PHOTONICS REV, V1, P93, DOI 10.1002/lpor.200710008. PELTON M, 2008, LASER PHOTONICS REV, V2, P136, DOI 10.1002/lpor.200810003. PETROV V, 2007, LASER PHOTONICS REV, V1, P179, DOI 10.1002/lpor.200710010. PHILLIPS JM, 2007, LASER PHOTONICS REV, V1, P307, DOI 10.1002/lpor.200710019. Cited Reference Count: 6 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH; PO BOX 10 11 61, D-69451 WEINHEIM, GERMANY Subject Category: Optics; Physics, Applied; Physics, Condensed Matter ISSN: 1863-8880 DOI: 10.1002/lpor.200910517 IDS Number: 521AT ________________________________ *Record 9 of 17. Search terms matched: FACTOR(1); IMPACT(1) *Click Here to View Full Record *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Quality of Reporting in Randomized Trials Published in High-Quality Surgical Journals Authors: Sinha, S; Sinha, S; Ashby, E; Jayaram, R; Grocott, MPW Author Full Names: Sinha, Sidhartha; Sinha, Shrestha; Ashby, Elizabeth; Jayaram, Raja; Grocott, Michael P. W. Source: JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF SURGEONS 209 (5): 565-571 NOV 2009 Language: English Document Type: Article KeyWords Plus: REVISED CONSORT STATEMENT; CLINICAL-TRIALS; SURGERY; COMPLICATIONS; ELABORATION; EXPLANATION; COHORT Abstract: BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in surgery can provide valuable evidence of the efficacy of interventions if they are well-designed, appropriately executed, and adequately reported. Adequate reporting of methodology in surgical RCTs is known to be poor, and adverse-event reporting in surgical research is inconsistent. The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement is a framework to help authors report their findings in a transparent manner. Extensions to the CONSORT statement have been published recently to address deficiencies in adverse-event reporting and in reporting of specific criteria related to nonpharmacologic treatments. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of reporting of trial methodology and adverse events in a sample of general surgical RCTs published in high-quality surgical journals using the criteria specified in the CONSORT statements. STUDY DESIGN: We used Impact factor to identify the top three ranked surgical journals in 2004. We then obtained information on all RCTs published in these journals in the 2005 calendar year. We assessed quality of reporting using Jadad score, compared the quality of RCTs from CONS ORT-endorsing journals with nonendorsers, and assessed the number of RCTs adequately reporting key generic methodologic, adverse-event-related, and specific nonpharmacologic criteria. RESULTS: Of 42 RCTs analyzed, only 40% (17 of 42) had a Jadad score >= 3. There was no significant difference in the number of high-quality RCTs published in CONSORT-endorsing journals compared with nonendorsers (p = 0.3). The median percentage of RCTs adequately reporting generic methodologic, adverse-event-related, and specific nonpharmacologic criteria was 32.5%, 17%, and 36.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Quality of reporting of generic methodologic, adverse-event-related, and specific nonpharmacologic criteria in surgical RCTs is poor. Increased attention to quality of reporting of surgical RCTs is required If studies are to meet published criteria. (J Am Coll Surg 2009;209:565-571. (C) 2009 by the American College of Surgeons) Reprint Address: Sinha, S, 27 Aylmer Rd, London N2 0BS, England. Research Institution addresses: [Sinha, Sidhartha] N Middlesex Univ Hosp, Dept Gen Surg, London, England; [Sinha, Shrestha] UCL, Sch Med, London W1N 8AA, England; [Ashby, Elizabeth] Barnet & Chase Farm Hosp Natl Hlth Serv Trust, Dept Orthopaed Surg, London, England; [Jayaram, Raja] John Radcliffe Hosp, Dept Anaesthet, Oxford OX3 9DU, England; [Grocott, Michael P. W.] UCL, London Hosp, Joint Univ Coll, Comprehens Biomed Res Ctr,Surg Outcomes Res Ctr, London, England E-mail Address: sid261 at hotmail.com Funding Acknowledgement: UK Department of Health's National Institute Funding Text: This work was undertaken, in part, at University College London Hospital/University College London Comprehensive Biomedical Research Centre, which receives a proportion of funding from the UK Department of Health's National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centres funding scheme. Cited References: 2004, J CITATION REPORT. ABRAHAM NS, 2004, ALIMENT PHARM THERAP, V19, P631, DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2004.01878.x. AGHA R, 2007, INT J SURG, V5, P413. ALTMAN DG, 2001, ANN INTERN MED, V134, P663. BALASUBRAMANIAN SP, 2006, ANN SURG, V244, P663, DOI 10.1097/01.sla.0000217640.11224.05. BEGG C, 1996, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V276, P637. BOUTRON I, 2008, ANN INTERN MED, V148, P295. CURTIS WF, 2006, WORLD J SURG, V30, P1368, DOI 10.1007/s00268-004-0281-1. DINDO D, 2004, ANN SURG, V240, P205, DOI 10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae. HIGGINS JP, 2005, COCHRANE LIB. HOLLIS S, 1999, BRIT MED J, V319, P670. JACQUIER I, 2006, ANN SURG, V244, P677, DOI 10.1097/01.sla.0000242707.44007.80. JADAD AR, 1996, CONTROL CLIN TRIALS, V17, P1. LOANNIDIS JPA, 2004, ANN INTERN MED, V141, P781. MILLS E, 2005, J CLIN EPIDEMIOL, V58, P662, DOI 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.01.004. MILLS EJ, 2005, CONTEMP CLIN TRIALS, V26, P480, DOI 10.1016/j.cct.2005.02.008. MOHER D, 2001, ANN INTERN MED, V134, P657. MONTORI VM, 2002, J CLIN EPIDEMIOL, V55, P787. NAGURNEY JT, 2005, ACAD EMERG MED, V12, P884, DOI 10.1197/j.aem.2005.04.021. PILDAL J, 2005, BRIT MED J, V330, P1049, DOI 10.1136/bmj.38414.422650.8F. SEGLEN PO, 1997, BRIT MED J, V314, P497. TIRUVOIPATI R, 2006, J THORAC CARDIOV SUR, V132, P233, DOI 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2005.10.056. VEEN EJ, 2005, ARCH SURG-CHICAGO, V140, P1078. WINTER RB, 1999, SPINE, V24, P2550. Cited Reference Count: 24 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC; 360 PARK AVE SOUTH, NEW YORK, NY 10010-1710 USA Subject Category: Surgery ISSN: 1072-7515 DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2009.07.019 IDS Number: 520VB ________________________________ *Record 10 of 17. Search terms matched: FACTOR(2); IMPACT(2) *Click Here to View Full Record *Order Full Text [ ] Title: The International Publication Productivity of Malaysia in Social Sciences DEVELOPING A SCIENTIFIC POWER INDEX Authors: Davarpanah, MR Author Full Names: Davarpanah, Mohammad Reza Source: JOURNAL OF SCHOLARLY PUBLISHING 41 (1): 67-91 OCT 2009 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: social sciences; Malaysia; publication output; citation impact; scientific power index (PI) KeyWords Plus: ECONOMICS Abstract: The purpose of this study is to evaluate publication output and citation impact in the social sciences in Malaysia, based on Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) data, for the period 1999-2008. In addition to the analysis of trends in publication and citation patterns and national publication profiles, an attempt is made to explore the strengths and weakness of different fields, using a new mathematical index, the scientific power index (PI). The findings indicate that publication output in the social sciences has been on the increase since 1999. Mostpapers have been published in median-impact-factor Journals (mean impact factor of 2.72 per paper). Internationally co-authored publications represented 77 per cent of all citations. Most of the prolific authors are from the highly productive institutions; however, none of highly cited first authors are from highly productive institutions. Psychology, economics, management, and environmental studies a! re the dominant fields in Malaysian social sciences. Reprint Address: Davarpanah, MR, Ferdowsi Univ Mashhad, Dept Lib & Informat Sci, Fac Educ & Psychol, Mashhad, Iran. Cited References: 2004, J CROSS CULTURAL PSY, V35, P367. BIGLIA B, 2005, BIBLIOMETRIC ANAL AS, P4. BUTLER L, 2003, NAT SCHOL COMM C DEA. CHUANG KY, 2007, SCIENTOMETRICS, V72, P201, DOI 10.1007/s11192-007-1721-0. GLANZEL W, 1996, SCIENTOMETRICS, V35, P291. GLANZEL W, 2005, S BIBL HUM BRUSS BEL. GODIN B, 2002, 1 PROJ MEAS SOC SCI. GU YN, 2002, J AM SOC INF SCI TEC, V53, P974, DOI 10.1002/asi.10125. KOLJATIC M, 2001, SCIENTOMETRICS, V51, P381. NASIR AM, 1994, SCIENTOMETRICS, V29, P191. NEDERHOF AJ, 1997, SCIENTOMETRICS, V40, P237. RAMOS R, 2007, SCIENTOMETRICS, V71, P117, DOI 10.1007/s11192-007-1652-9. RIGGS FW, GLOBALIZATION SOCIAL. ROUSSEAU R, 2002, LIBR TRENDS, V50, P418. STERNBERG R, 2005, SCIENTOMETRICS, V65, P29, DOI 10.1007/s11192-005-0258-3. ZAINAB AN, 2008, LIBRES LIB INFORM SC, V18, P1. ZHOU P, 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS, V79, P593, DOI 10.1007/s11192-007-2068-x. ZHOU, 1963, LITTLE SCI BIG SCI. Cited Reference Count: 18 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: UNIV TORONTO PRESS INC; JOURNALS DIVISION, 5201 DUFFERIN ST, DOWNSVIEW, TORONTO, ON M3H 5T8, CANADA Subject Category: Humanities, Multidisciplinary; Information Science & Library Science ISSN: 1198-9742 DOI: 10.3138/jsp.41.1.67 IDS Number: 522QC ________________________________ *Record 11 of 17. Search terms matched: FACTOR(1); IMPACT(1) *Click Here to View Full Record *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Can Local Citation Analysis of Master's and Doctoral Theses help Decision-Making about the Management of the Collection of Periodicals? A Case Study in Psychology and Education Sciences Authors: Feyereisen, P; Spoiden, A Author Full Names: Feyereisen, Pierre; Spoiden, Anne Source: JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC LIBRARIANSHIP 35 (6): 514-522 NOV 2009 Language: English Document Type: Article KeyWords Plus: EVALUATING ACADEMIC JOURNALS; IMPACT FACTOR; DISSERTATION; LIBRARY; REFERENCES; RESOURCES; STUDENTS; FACULTY; TOOL Abstract: This study analyzed reference lists in a large number of master's and doctoral theses in a university library of psychology and education sciences. It compared citation counts to other indicators of the use of periodicals. The usefulness and limitations of these statistics are discussed in relation to decision-making in subscriptions' management. Research Institution addresses: [Feyereisen, Pierre] Univ Louvain, Collect Management Comm Psychol & Educ Sci, Louvain, Belgium; [Spoiden, Anne] Univ Louvain, Lib Psychol & Educ Sci, Louvain, Belgium E-mail Address: pierre.feyereisen at uclouvain.be; Anne.Spoiden at uclouvain.be Cited References: NUMBERS ARE JCR WEBS. *STAT PROD SERV SO, 1999, SPSS BAS 9 0 APPL GU. BEILE PM, 2004, J ACAD LIBR, V30, P347. BURRIGHT MA, 2005, COLL RES LIBR, V66, P198. BUTKOVICH NJ, 1996, LIBR RESOUR TECH SER, V40, P359. CHUNG HK, 2007, J ACAD LIBR, V33, P393. CORBY K, 2003, PORTAL-LIBR ACAD, V3, P207. DILEVKO J, 2002, COLL RES LIBR, V63, P562. DUY J, 2006, J ACAD LIBR, V32, P512. GARFIELD E, 1972, SCIENCE, V178, P471. GARFIELD E, 1980, CURRENT CONTENTS, V19, P5. GARFIELD, CITATION ANAL TOOL. JOSWICK KE, 1997, COLL RES LIBR, V58, P48. JUNNI P, 2007, INFORM RES, V12. KREIDER J, 1999, LIBR RESOUR TECH SER, V43, P67. MACROBERTS MH, 1989, J AM SOC INFORM SCI, V40, P342. MCROBERTS, PROBLEMS CITATION AN. PUDOVKIN AI, 2004, P ASIST ANNU, V41, P507. PUDOVKIN, RANK NORMALIZED IMPA. SCHAFFER T, 2004, J ACAD LIBR, V30, P354. SCHAFFER, PSYCHOL CITATIONS RE. SMITH ET, 2003, COLL RES LIBR, V64, P344. SYLVIA MJ, 1998, COLLECT BUILD, V17, P20. VALLMITJANA N, 2008, COLL RES LIBR, V69, P72. WAUGH CK, 2004, J ACAD LIBR, V30, P276. ZIPP LS, 1996, LIBR RESOUR TECH SER, V40, P335. Cited Reference Count: 26 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC; 360 PARK AVE SOUTH, NEW YORK, NY 10010-1710 USA Subject Category: Information Science & Library Science ISSN: 0099-1333 IDS Number: 522FV ________________________________ *Record 12 of 17. Search terms matched: FACTOR(1); IMPACT(1) *Click Here to View Full Record *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Evaluation of impact factor using two different methods Authors: Ma, TT Author Full Names: Ma, Tingting Source: HUMAN REPRODUCTION 24 (12): 3237-3237 DEC 2009 Language: English Document Type: Letter Reprint Address: Ma, TT, Chengdu Univ TCM, Acupuncture & Tuina Dept, Chengdu, Sichuan, Peoples R China. Research Institution addresses: Chengdu Univ TCM, Acupuncture & Tuina Dept, Chengdu, Sichuan, Peoples R China E-mail Address: matingtingcn at yahoo.com.cn Cited References: KONG J, 2009, NEUROIMAGE, V45, P940, DOI 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.12.025. LEE A, 2009, COCHRANE DB SYST REV, DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD003281. LINDE K, 2009, COCHRANE DB SYST REV, ARTN CD007587. LINDE K, 2009, COCHRANE DB SYST REV, DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD001218. Cited Reference Count: 4 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: OXFORD UNIV PRESS; GREAT CLARENDON ST, OXFORD OX2 6DP, ENGLAND Subject Category: Obstetrics & Gynecology; Reproductive Biology ISSN: 0268-1161 DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dep352 IDS Number: 523JN ________________________________ *Record 13 of 17. Search terms matched: FACTOR(4); IMPACT(4) *Click Here to View Full Record *Order Full Text [ ] Title: A Comparison of Impact Factor, Clinical Query Filters, and Pattern Recognition Query Filters in Terms of Sensitivity to Topic Authors: Fu, LD; Wang, L; Aphinyanagphongs, Y; Aliferis, CF Author Full Names: Fu, Lawrence D.; Wang, Lily; Aphinyanagphongs, Yindalon; Aliferis, Constantin F. Editor(s): Kuhn, KA; Warren, JR; Leong, TY Source: MEDINFO 2007: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 12TH WORLD CONGRESS ON HEALTH (MEDICAL) INFORMATICS, PTS 1 AND 2 129: 716-720 2007 Book series title: Studies in Health Technology and Informatics Language: English Document Type: Proceedings Paper KeyWords Plus: MEDLINE Abstract: Evaluating journal quality and finding high-quality articles in the biomedical literature are challenging information retrieval tasks. The most widely used method for journal evaluation is impact factor, while novel approaches for finding articles are PubMed's clinical query filters and machine learning-based filter models. The related literature has focused on the average behavior of these methods over all topics. The present study evaluates the variability of these approaches for different topics. We find that impact factor and clinical query filters are unstable for different topics while a topic-specific impact factor and machine learning-based filter models appear more robust. Thus when using the less stable methods for a specific topic, researchers should realize that their performance may diverge from expected average performance. Better yet, the more stable methods should be preferred whenever applicable. Reprint Address: Fu, LD, Vanderbilt Univ, Dept Biomed Informat, Nashville, TN 37235 USA. Research Institution addresses: [Fu, Lawrence D.; Aphinyanagphongs, Yindalon; Aliferis, Constantin F.] Vanderbilt Univ, Dept Biomed Informat, Nashville, TN 37235 USA Cited References: PUBMED CLIN QUERIES. *NAT LIB MED, MESH BROWS. *THOMS SCI, ISI IMP FACT. *THOMS SCI, ISI WEB KNOWL. APHINYANAPHONGS Y, 2005, J AM MED INFORM ASSN, V12, P207, DOI 10.1197/jamia.M1641. APHINYANAPHONGS Y, 2006, J AM MED INFORM ASSN, V13, P446, DOI 10.1197/jamia.M2031. BLAND JM, 1986, LANCET, V307, P310. BURGES CJC, 1998, DATA MIN KNOWL DISC, V2, P121. GARFIELD E, 1965, CAN CITATION INDEXIN. GARFIELD E, 1972, SCIENCE, V178, P471. GARFIELD E, 2006, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V295, P90. GLANZEL W, 2002, SCIENTOMETRICS, V53, P171. HAYNES RB, 1994, J AM MED INFORM ASSN, V1, P447. TAKAHASHI K, 1999, OCCUP MED-OXFORD, V49, P57. UEHARA M, 2003, J OCCUP HEALTH, V45, P248. Cited Reference Count: 15 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: I O S PRESS; NIEUWE HEMWEG 6B, 1013 BG AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0926-9630 IDS Number: BMF03 ________________________________ *Record 14 of 17. Search terms matched: FACTOR(1); IMPACT(1) *Click Here to View Full Record *Order Full Text [ ] Title: BJN impact factor rises Authors: Calder, PC Author Full Names: Calder, Philip C. Source: BRITISH JOURNAL OF NUTRITION 102 (9): 1243-1245 NOV 14 2009 Language: English Document Type: Editorial Material KeyWords Plus: EPIGENETIC REGULATION; RESTRICTED DIET; WOMEN; DETERMINANTS; METHYLATION; CONSUMPTION; ABSORPTION; METABOLITE; NUTRITION; ADULTS Reprint Address: Calder, PC, Univ Southampton, Sch Med, Inst Human Nutr, Southampton, Hants, England. Research Institution addresses: Univ Southampton, Sch Med, Inst Human Nutr, Southampton, Hants, England E-mail Address: pcc at soton.ac.uk Cited References: ARNAUD J, 2006, BRIT J NUTR, V95, P313, DOI 10.1079/BJN20051528. BERGSTROM C, 2009, METHODS EIGENFACTOR. BURDGE GC, 2007, BRIT J NUTR, V97, P1036, DOI 10.1017/S0007114507682920. BURDGE GC, 2007, BRIT J NUTR, V97, P435, DOI 10.1017/S0007114507352392. CALDER PC, 2006, BRIT J NUTR, V95, P1, DOI 10.1079/BJN20051654. CALDER PC, 2006, BRIT J NUTR, V96, P774, DOI 10.1079/BJN20061917. GILCAMPOS M, 2006, BRIT J NUTR, V96, P201, DOI 10.1079/BJN20061787. GOLAN M, 2006, BRIT J NUTR, V95, P1008, DOI 10.1079/BJN20061757. GOYENECHEA E, 2006, BRIT J NUTR, V96, P965, DOI 10.1017/BJN20061901. KAMPHUIS CBM, 2006, BRIT J NUTR, V96, P620, DOI 10.1079/BJN20061896. KOLETZKO B, 2007, BRIT J NUTR, V98, P873, DOI 10.1017/S0007114507764747. LI P, 2007, BRIT J NUTR, V98, P237, DOI 10.1017/S000711450769936X. LILLYCROP KA, 2007, BRIT J NUTR, V97, P1064, DOI 10.1017/S000711450769196X. MULLEN W, 2006, BRIT J NUTR, V96, P107, DOI 10.1079/BJN20061809. ROE MA, 2007, BRIT J NUTR, V97, P544, DOI 10.1017/S0007114507336829. SALVINI S, 2006, BRIT J NUTR, V95, P742, DOI 10.1079/BJN20051674. THIJSSEN HHW, 2006, BRIT J NUTR, V95, P260, DOI 10.1079/BJN20051630. Cited Reference Count: 17 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS; EDINBURGH BLDG, SHAFTESBURY RD, CB2 8RU CAMBRIDGE, ENGLAND Subject Category: Nutrition & Dietetics ISSN: 0007-1145 DOI: 10.1017/S0007114509991619 IDS Number: 522TT ________________________________ *Record 15 of 17. Search terms matched: FACTOR(2); IMPACT(2) *Click Here to View Full Record *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Evolution of the quality and dissemination of a Spanish scientific journal of Psychology: Anales de Psicologia, 25 volumes published per year (1984-2009). Authors: Medina, AR Author Full Names: Medina, Agustin Romero Source: ANALES DE PSICOLOGIA 25 (2): 181-198 DEC 2009 Language: Spanish Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Anales de Psicologia journal; editorial quality; scientific journals; psychology journals; impact factor; dissemination of journals KeyWords Plus: IMPACT FACTOR; INDICATORS Abstract: The celebration of the 25 annual volumes of the Anales de Psicologia journal in 2009 serves as a pretext to review the history of this journal and its evolution in terms of: aims and editorial policy, organizational structure, format and layout, content selection, dissemination and impact. All this in the context of scientific journals of psychology in Spain and the growing trend by journal editors and advisory boards, documentation centers, and institutions and agencies (national and regional) for research assessment, to improve the criteria for evaluating the quality of journals and increasingly closer to international standards. Anales de Psicologia journal is in that way, as demonstrated in all of publishing quality data analyzed in this work. Reprint Address: Medina, AR, Univ Murcia, Fac Psicol, Dept Psicol Basica & Metodol, Campus Espinardo,Aptdo 4021, Murcia 30080, Spain. Research Institution addresses: Univ Murcia, Fac Psicol, Dept Psicol Basica & Metodol, Murcia 30080, Spain E-mail Address: agustinr at um.es Cited References: 2008, INFOCOPONLINE 1127. ALEIXANDREBENAVENT R, 2007, PROF INFORM, V16, P4. ALONSO AL, 2004, ANALES PSICOLOGIA, V20, P241. AMOROS MO, 2003, ANALES PSICOLOGIA, V19, P193. ARAGON RS, 2003, ANALES PSICOLOGIA, V19, P257. ARRONDO VM, 2001, ANALES PSICOLOGIA, V17, P287. AVLIA A, 1990, ANALES PSICOLOGIA, V6, P37. BARCO AN, 2004, ANAL PSICOLOGIA, V20, P205. BORREGO A, 2006, INFORM CULTURA SOCIE, P11. BUELACASAL G, 2001, PAPELES PSICOLOGO, V79, P53. BUELACASAL G, 2003, INFOCOP REV PSICOLOG. BUELACASAL G, 2003, PSICOTHEMA, V15, P23. BUELACASAL G, 2004, PSICOTHEMA, V16, P680. BUELACASAL G, 2005, REV LATINOAMERICANA, V37, P211. CANGAS AJ, 2006, INT J PSYCHOL PSYCHO, V6, P417. CARBONELL X, 2009, AN PSICOL, V25, P209. COLMENERO JM, 2001, ANALES PSICOLOGIA, V17, P45. CORBELLA S, 2003, ANALES PSICOLOGIA, V19, P205. DELGADO E, 2006, EDICION REV CIENTIFI. GARFIELD E, 2003, INT J CLIN HLTH PSYC, V3, P363. GONZALEZ JJZ, 1996, ANALES PSICOLOGIA, V12, P41. GRANDEGARCIA I, 2009, AN PSICOL, V25, P1. LINARES ET, 2002, ANALES PSICOLOGIA, V18, P45. MERIDA JAM, 1991, ANALES PSICOLOGIA, V7, P57. MIGUELTOBAL JJ, 1994, ANAL PSICOLOGIA, V10, P199. OROS LB, 2005, ANALES PSICOLOGIA, V21, P294. ORTEGA MP, 2004, ANALES PSICOLOGIA, V21, P181. OSCALLUCH J, 2005, ANALES DOCUMENTACION, V8, P165. OSCALLUCH J, 2009, PSICOTHEMA, V21, P300. PARRA A, 2002, AN PSICOL, V18, P215. PARTEARROYO MDA, 1998, PAPELES PSICOLOGO, V70, P35. PASCUAL AC, 2002, ANALES PSICOLOGIA, V18, P111. PENARANDAORTEGA, 2009, ANALES PSICOLOGIA, V25, P199. RAMIREZ FC, 2001, ANALES PSICOLOGIA, V17, P37. ROMAN A, 2003, 3 TALL OBT IND BIBL. RUIZPEREZ R, 2006, INT J CLIN HLTH PSYC, V6, P401. SANCHEZ A, 1995, ANALES PSICOLOGIA, V11, P1. SANCHEZCUBILLO I, 2004, AN PSICOL, V20, P273. SANCHEZNAVARRO JP, 2004, AN PSICOL, V20, P223. YUNTA LR, 2009, REV ESPANOLAS WOS. Cited Reference Count: 40 Times Cited: 1 Publisher: UNIV MURCIA; SERVICIO DE PUBLICACIONES, CALLE VISTALEGRE S/N, MURCIA, 30007, SPAIN Subject Category: Psychology; Psychology, Multidisciplinary ISSN: 0212-9728 IDS Number: 523GZ ________________________________ *Record 16 of 17. Search terms matched: FACTOR(2); IMPACT(2) *Click Here to View Full Record *Order Full Text [ ] Title: The Spanish psychology journals: How to choose the right journal to publish. Authors: Carbonell, X; Calvo, N Author Full Names: Carbonell, Xavier; Calvo, Noemi Source: ANALES DE PSICOLOGIA 25 (2): 209-216 DEC 2009 Language: Spanish Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Impact factor; scientific communication; research evaluation; IN-RECS; Latindex; Indexation in data bases KeyWords Plus: INTEGRATED EVALUATION; SCIENTIFIC JOURNALS; HUMAN-SCIENCES; QUALITY Abstract: The quality, prestige and influence of a psychological journal are not easy to determine. The most widespread and best known assessment criterion is the impact factor (IF) by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI of nomson-Reuters). Nevertheless, despite its undoubted qualities, the IF has many limitations and to use only IF to assess the Spanish psychology journals is confounding. From these considerations, our work is aimed at revising the criteria to assess Spanish psychology journals in order to help authors to choose the suitable journal and thus obtain the best dissemination, prestige and visibility for their work. Reprint Address: Carbonell, X, Blanquerna Univ Ramon Llull, FPCEE, C Cister 34, Barcelona 08022, Spain. Research Institution addresses: [Carbonell, Xavier; Calvo, Noemi] Univ Ramon Llull, Barcelona, Spain E-mail Address: xaviercs at blanquerna.url.edu Cited References: *AG AND EV, ACR PROF. *ANECA, 2008, COM CUMPL AP IND CAL. *APA, 2008, AM PSYCHOL, V63, P490. *AQU, CRIT EM ACR REC AV. *IN RECS, 2009, INDICE IMPACTO REV E. *ISOC, 2007, INFORM ISOC REV CIEN. *LAT, 2007, LAT SIST REG INF LIN. *MIN ED CIENC, 2005, B OF EST, V266, P36470. *PROY ERCE, 2006, EV REV CIENT ESP HUM. ALCAIN MD, 2005, PSICOTHEMA, V17, P179. ALCAIN MD, 2005, PSICOTHEMA, V17, P676. BUELACASAL G, 2003, PSICOTHEMA, V15, P23. BUELACASAL G, 2004, PSICOTHEMA, V2, P525. CAMPANARIO JM, 2005, EXISTE ALGUN SESGO B. CANGAS AJ, 2006, INT J PSYCHOL PSYCHO, V6, P417. CARRETERODIOS H, 2005, PSICOTHEMA, V17, P669. DELACUEVA A, 2001, FONTS INFORM CIENCIE. GARCIA JN, 2005, INFANCIA APRENDIZAJE, V28, P81. GARFIELD E, 2003, INT J CLIN HLTH PSYC, V3, P363. LAMARCA G, 2005, B ANABAD, V55, P377. OSCALLUCH J, 2005, ANALES DOCUMENTACION, V8, P165. RUIZPEREZ R, 2006, INT J CLIN HLTH PSYC, V6, P401. URBANO C, 2005, P 1 JORN ESP IND EV. Cited Reference Count: 23 Times Cited: 2 Publisher: UNIV MURCIA; SERVICIO DE PUBLICACIONES, CALLE VISTALEGRE S/N, MURCIA, 30007, SPAIN Subject Category: Psychology; Psychology, Multidisciplinary ISSN: 0212-9728 IDS Number: 523GZ ________________________________ *Record 17 of 17. Search terms matched: FACTOR(1); IMPACT(1) *Click Here to View Full Record *Order Full Text [ ] Title: The Quality of Meta-Analyses of Genetic Association Studies: A Review With Recommendations Authors: Minelli, C; Thompson, JR; Abrams, KR; Thakkinstian, A; Attia, J Author Full Names: Minelli, Cosetta; Thompson, John R.; Abrams, Keith R.; Thakkinstian, Ammarin; Attia, John Source: AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY 170 (11): 1333-1343 DEC 1 2009 Language: English Document Type: Review Author Keywords: epidemiologic methods; genetics; meta-analysis; principal component analysis KeyWords Plus: RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED-TRIALS; PAPER-BASED JOURNALS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS; CRITICAL-APPRAISAL; PUBLICATION BIAS; COCHRANE REVIEWS; METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY; MOLECULAR ASSOCIATION; DISEASE ASSOCIATIONS; PATIENT-LEVEL Abstract: Although there has been a rapid rise in the publication of meta-analyses of genetic association studies, little is known about their methodological quality. The authors reviewed the quality of 120 randomly selected genetic meta-analyses published between 2005 and 2007. Data extracted included issues of general relevance and other issues specific to genetic epidemiology. Quality was markedly poorer in the 26% of the meta-analyses that accompanied a report on a primary study. Such meta-analyses were predominantly published in specialist journals, and their quality was positively associated with the impact factor of the journal. Among the meta-analyses that did not accompany a primary study, Human Genome Epidemiology reviews tended to score better than the others, although the comparison was limited by relatively small numbers. Comparison of the overall quality with that of genetic meta-analyses published before 2000 showed improvement in both conduct and reportin! g. However, the quality of the handling of specific genetic issues remains disappointingly low. For a few key general quality issues, the authors compared their findings with findings in other fields of medicine and found that general quality was similar. On the basis of this review, the authors provide practical recommendations for the conduct and reporting of genetic meta-analyses. Reprint Address: Minelli, C, EURAC Res, Inst Med Genet, Viale Druso 1, I-39100 Bolzano, Italy. Research Institution addresses: [Minelli, Cosetta] EURAC Res, Inst Med Genet, I-39100 Bolzano, Italy; [Thompson, John R.; Abrams, Keith R.] Univ Leicester, Dept Hlth Sci, Sch Med, Leicester, Leics, England; [Thakkinstian, Ammarin] Mahidol Univ, Sect Clin Epidemiol & Biostat, Fac Med, Ramathibodi Hosp, Bangkok 10700, Thailand; [Attia, John] Univ Newcastle, Ctr Clin Epidemiol & Biostat, Newcastle, NSW 2308, Australia; [Attia, John] John Hunter Hosp, Hunter Med Res Inst, Newcastle, NSW, Australia; [Attia, John] John Hunter Hosp, Dept Gen Med, Newcastle, NSW, Australia E-mail Address: cosetta.minelli at eurac.edu Cited References: ASSENDELFT WJJ, 1995, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V274, P1942. ATTIA J, 2003, J CLIN EPIDEMIOL, V56, P297, DOI 10.1016/S0895-4356(03)00011-8. BERLIN JA, 2002, STAT MED, V21, P371. BHANDARI M, 2001, J BONE JOINT SURG A, V83, P15. BOGARDUS ST, 1999, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V281, P1919. BOLUYT N, 2007, PEDIATRICS, V120, P1334, DOI 10.1542/peds.2006-3381. BROOKES ST, 2004, J CLIN EPIDEMIOL, V57, P229, DOI 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2003.08.009. CHOI PT, 2001, ANESTH ANALG, V92, P700. COLHOUN HM, 2003, LANCET, V361, P865. COLLIER A, 2006, BRIT J DERMATOL, V155, P1230, DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2006.07496.x. DELANEY A, 2005, CRIT CARE, V9, R575, DOI 10.1186/cc3803. DELANEY A, 2007, CRIT CARE MED, V35, P589. DEVELLIS RF, 2003, SCALE DEV THEORY APP. DEVITO C, 2007, VACCINE, V25, P8794, DOI 10.1016/j.vaccine.2007.10.034. DIXON E, 2005, ANN SURG, V241, P450, DOI 10.1097/01.sla.0000154258.30305.df. FISHBAIN D, 2000, CLIN J PAIN, V16, P73. FLORESMIR C, 2006, AM J ORTHOD DENTOFAC, V130, P214, DOI 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.02.028. GERBER S, 2007, J CLIN EPIDEMIOL, V60, P773, DOI 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.10.022. GOLDER S, 2006, BMC MED RES METHODOL, V6, P3. HERBISON P, 2006, J CLIN EPIDEMIOL, V59, P1249, DOI 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.008. HIGGINS JPT, 2002, STAT MED, V21, P1539. HIGGINS JPT, 2003, BRIT MED J, V327, P560. IOANNIDIS JPA, 1998, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V279, P281. IOANNIDIS JPA, 2001, NAT GENET, V29, P306. JADAD AR, 1996, CONTROL CLIN TRIALS, V17, P1. JADAD AR, 1998, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V280, P278. JADAD AR, 2000, BRIT MED J, V320, P537. JORGENSEN AW, 2006, BRIT MED J, V333, P782, DOI 10.1136/bmj.38973.444699.0B. JUNHUA Z, 2007, J ALTERN COMPLEM MED, V13, P797. KAZEEM GR, 2005, ANN HUM GENET 3, V69, P329, DOI 10.1046/j.1529-8817.2005.00156.x. KELLY KD, 2001, ANN EMERG MED, V38, P518. KHOURY MJ, 2004, HUMAN GENOME EPIDEMI. LAMBERT PC, 2002, J CLIN EPIDEMIOL, V55, P86. LAWSON ML, 2005, J CLIN EPIDEMIOL, V58, P777, DOI 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.08.022. LI DW, 2006, EUR J HUM GENET, V14, P1130, DOI 10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201680. LIN PI, 2007, AM J HUM GENET, V80, P531, DOI 10.1086/512133. LITTLE J, 2002, AM J EPIDEMIOL, V156, P300, DOI 10.1093/aje/kwf054. LITTLE J, 2006, HUGENET HUGE REV HDB. LOHMUELLER KE, 2003, NAT GENET, V33, P177, DOI 10.1038/ng1071. MINELLI C, 2005, INT J EPIDEMIOL, V34, P1319, DOI 10.1093/ije/dyi169. MINELLI C, 2005, STAT MED, V24, P3845, DOI 10.1002/sim.2393. MINELLI C, 2008, INT J EPIDEMIOL, V37, P136, DOI 10.1093/ije/dym234. MITCHELL LE, 2000, GENET EPIDEMIOL, V19, P193. MOHER D, 1999, LANCET, V354, P1896. MOHER D, 2002, BMC PEDIAT, V2, P3. MUNAFO MR, 2004, TRENDS GENET, V20, P439, DOI 10.1016/j.tig.2004.06.014. OXMAN AD, 1991, J CLIN EPIDEMIOL, V44, P91. PALMA S, 2005, J EPIDEMIOL COMMUN H, V59, P864, DOI 10.1136/jech.2005.033027. PETERS JL, 2006, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V295, P676. RUBIN DB, 1992, J EDUC STAT, V17, P363. SACKS HS, 1987, NEW ENGL J MED, V316, P450. SACKS HS, 1996, MT SINAI J MED, V63, P216. SALANTI G, 2005, GENET MED, V7, P13. SCHAID DJ, 1999, AM J EPIDEMIOL, V149, P706. SHEA B, 2002, EVAL HEALTH PROF, V25, P116. SHEA B, 2006, BMC MED RES METHODOL, V6, P27. SHEA B, 2006, J RHEUMATOL, V33, P9. SHEIKH L, 2007, BMC MED, V5, ARTN 10. SUTTON AJ, 2000, METHODS META ANAL ME. TERRIN N, 2005, J CLIN EPIDEMIOL, V58, P894, DOI 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.01.006. THAKKINSTIAN A, 2005, AM J EPIDEMIOL, V162, P201. TRIKALINOS TA, 2004, EUR J HUM GENET, V12, P762, DOI 10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201227. ZAYKIN DV, 2008, AM J HUM GENET, V82, P794, DOI 10.1016/j.ajhg.2008.02.001. ZINTZARAS E, 2008, J CLIN EPIDEMIOL, V61, P634, DOI 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.12.011. Cited Reference Count: 64 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC; JOURNALS DEPT, 2001 EVANS RD, CARY, NC 27513 USA Subject Category: Public, Environmental & Occupational Health ISSN: 0002-9262 DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwp350 IDS Number: 523JR ________________________________ Order Full Text All Customers Please contact your library administrator, or person(s) responsible for document delivery, to find out more about your organization's policy for obtaining the full text of the above articles. If your organization does not have a current document delivery provider, your administrator can contact ISI Document Solution at service at isidoc.com, or call 800-603-4367 or 734-459-8565. IDS Customers IDS customers can purchase the full text of an article (having page number, volume, and issue information) by returning this ENTIRE message as a Reply to Sender or Forward to orders at isidoc.com. Mark your choices with an X in the "Order Full Text: []" brackets for each item. For example, [X]. Please enter your account number here: ________________________________ Help Desk Contact Information If you have any questions, please visit the Thomson Scientific Technical Support Contact Information Web page. ________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amsciforum at GMAIL.COM Sun Jan 10 00:22:34 2010 From: amsciforum at GMAIL.COM (Stevan Harnad) Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 00:22:34 -0500 Subject: Whether Self-Selected or Mandated, Open Access Increases Citation Impact for Higher Quality Research In-Reply-To: <4B4749E3.20807@cornell.edu> Message-ID: On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 10:06 AM, Philip Davis wrote: > it is not clear whether your Odds Ratios are interpreted > correctly. ?Based on Figure 4, OA article are MORE LIKELY to receive zero > citations than 1-5 citations (or conversely, LESS LIKELY to receive 1-5 > citations than zero citations). > > You write: "For example, we can say for the first model that for a one unit > increase in OA, the odds of receiving 1-5 citations (versus zero citations) > increased by a factor of 0.957. Figure 4.. (p.9) > > Similarly in Figure 4 (if I understand the axes correctly), CERN article are > more than twice as likely to be in the 20+ citation category than in the 1-5 > citation category, a fact that may distort further interpretation of your > data as it may be that institutional effects may explain your Mandated OA > effect. ?See comments by Patrick Gaule and Ludo Waltman on the review > http://j.mp/8LK57u > > Philip M. Davis > PhD Student > Department of Communication > Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853 Yassine Gargouri replied: Thank you for your comments. As noted on page 9 of our draft, in the first model, for a one-unit increase in OA, the odds of receiving 1-5 citations (versus zero citations) increased by a factor of 0.957. The dependent variables are: Cit_a_0&1-5 = 1 (and not 0 as Davis seems interpret) if the citation count (minus self-citations) is between 1 and 5 and Cit_a_0&1-5 = 0 if the citation count (minus self-citations) = 0. As noted in the paper, we re-analyzed the results with and without CERN, and the result pattern were the same. If the referees request it, we will include both analyses. Also, the formula on page 6 should read: OM/OS = 1/n * S log(OM/OS) There was an inadvertent error in how we described (not how we computed) this formula in the text (and we are grateful for this open feedback which allowed us to detect and correct it!). There is an advantage in favor of OM when the log of the ratio is greater then 0, and in favor of OS otherwise. The log transformation was used to normalize the data and attenuate the effect of articles with relatively high citation counts, compared to the whole sample. For example, to compare mandated OA (OM) with self-selected OA (OS), we computed the log of the ratio OM/OS for each journal and then we computed the arithmetic mean of all the logs of those ratios for each journal. From pmd8 at CORNELL.EDU Mon Jan 11 12:37:51 2010 From: pmd8 at CORNELL.EDU (Philip Davis) Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 12:37:51 -0500 Subject: Whether Self-Selected or Mandated, Open Access Increases Citation Impact for Higher Quality Research Message-ID: Yassine, Thank you for your response. I find your odds ratio methodology unnecessarily complex and unintuitive but now understand your explanation, thank you. Changing how you report your citation ratios, from the ratio of log citations TO the log of citation ratios is a very substantial change to your paper and I am surprised that you point out this reporting error at this point. While it normalizes the distribution of the ratios, it is not without problems, such as: 1. Small citation differences have very large leverage in your calculations. Example, A=2 and B=1, log (A/B)=0.3 2. Similarly, any ratio with zero in the denominator must be thrown out of your dataset. The paper does not inform the reader on how much data was ignored in your ratio analysis and we have no information on the potential bias this may have on your results. Have you attempted to analyze your citation data as continuous variables rather than ratios or categories? --Phil Davis On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 10:06 AM, Philip Davis <[log in to unmask] > wrote: > it is not clear whether your Odds Ratios are interpreted > correctly. Based on Figure 4, OA article are MORE LIKELY to receive zero > citations than 1-5 citations (or conversely, LESS LIKELY to receive 1-5 > citations than zero citations). > > You write: "For example, we can say for the first model that for a one unit > increase in OA, the odds of receiving 1-5 citations (versus zero citations) > increased by a factor of 0.957. Figure 4.. (p.9) > > Similarly in Figure 4 (if I understand the axes correctly), CERN article are > more than twice as likely to be in the 20+ citation category than in the 1-5 > citation category, a fact that may distort further interpretation of your > data as it may be that institutional effects may explain your Mandated OA > effect. See comments by Patrick Gaule and Ludo Waltman on the review > http://j.mp/8LK57u > > Philip M. Davis > PhD Student > Department of Communication > Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853 Yassine Gargouri replied: Thank you for your comments. As noted on page 9 of our draft, in the first model, for a one-unit increase in OA, the odds of receiving 1-5 citations (versus zero citations) increased by a factor of 0.957. The dependent variables are: Cit_a_0&1-5 = 1 (and not 0 as Davis seems interpret) if the citation count (minus self-citations) is between 1 and 5 and Cit_a_0&1-5 = 0 if the citation count (minus self-citations) = 0. As noted in the paper, we re-analyzed the results with and without CERN, and the result pattern were the same. If the referees request it, we will include both analyses. Also, the formula on page 6 should read: OM/OS = 1/n * S log(OM/OS) There was an inadvertent error in how we described (not how we computed) this formula in the text (and we are grateful for this open feedback which allowed us to detect and correct it!). There is an advantage in favor of OM when the log of the ratio is greater then 0, and in favor of OS otherwise. The log transformation was used to normalize the data and attenuate the effect of articles with relatively high citation counts, compared to the whole sample. For example, to compare mandated OA (OM) with self-selected OA (OS), we computed the log of the ratio OM/OS for each journal and then we computed the arithmetic mean of all the logs of those ratios for each journal. -- Philip M. Davis PhD Student Department of Communication 301 Kennedy Hall Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853 email: pmd8 at cornell.edu phone: 607 255-2124 https://confluence.cornell.edu/display/~pmd8/resume http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/author/pmd8/ From lutz.bornmann at GESS.ETHZ.CH Fri Jan 15 09:50:23 2010 From: lutz.bornmann at GESS.ETHZ.CH (Bornmann Lutz) Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 15:50:23 +0100 Subject: New paper on peer review Message-ID: Dear colleague: You might be interested in our new paper on journal peer review: Bornmann, L. & Daniel, H.-D. (2010). The manuscript reviewing process - empirical research on review requests, review sequences and decision rules in peer review. Library & Information Science Research, 32(1), 5-12. Abstract: In peer review research, no study has been performed to date that has opened the "black box" of manuscript reviewing and dealt with the internal mechanisms of the process. Using as an example the peer review system of Angewandte Chemie International Edition (AC-IE), this study investigates which review requests are assigned by the editors to external reviewers, which sequences of review steps typically occur, and which rules are used by the editors to decide whether to accept or reject a manuscript for publication. For the investigation, information has been used on a total of 1899 manuscripts that were reviewed in the year 2000. The results show that in the majority of the manuscripts, the editors follow a so-called "clear-cut" rule: A manuscript is only accepted for publication if it has been positively assessed beforehand by two independent reviewers with regard to the importance of the results and the suitability of publication of the manuscript. For about a fifth of the manuscripts, the editors (a) consulted a top adviser for manuscript review, (b) asked a reviewer to review a manuscript revised by the author, or (c) asked a reviewer to read an appeal that an author filed against the rejection of his/her manuscript. Kind regards, Lutz Bornmann ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr. Lutz Bornmann ETH Zurich, D-GESS Professorship for Social Psychology and Research on Higher Education Z?hringerstr. 24 / ZAE CH-8092 Zurich Phone: +41 44 632 48 25 Fax: +41 44 632 12 83 Skype: lutz.bornmann http://www.psh.ethz.ch bornmann at gess.ethz.ch ResearcherID: http://www.researcherid.com/rid/A-3926-2008 Download of publications: www.lutz-bornmann.de -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: RuleBornmann.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 618185 bytes Desc: RuleBornmann.pdf URL: From umutal at HACETTEPE.EDU.TR Sat Jan 16 03:53:23 2010 From: umutal at HACETTEPE.EDU.TR (Umut AL) Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2010 10:53:23 +0200 Subject: International Symposium on Information Management in a Changing World (Ankara, Turkey) submission deadline extended to February 1st, 2010 Message-ID: Dear Colleagues, Due to numerous requests from potential authors, the submission deadline for the 2nd International Symposium on Information Management in a Changing World is extended to February 1st. You can submit your papers by using the following address http://by2010.bilgiyonetimi.net/paper_submission.html Looking forward to your contributions to and participation in the Symposium. Ya?ar Tonta, Chair of the Organizing Committee Serap Kurbano?lu, Chair of the Programme Committee Hacettepe University Department of Information Management 06800 Beytepe, Ankara, Turkey Tel: 0312 297 82 00 Fax: 0312 299 20 14 E-mail: tonta at hacettepe.edu.tr, serap at hacettepe.edu.tr -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ricardo.arencibia at CNIC.EDU.CU Tue Jan 19 15:31:05 2010 From: ricardo.arencibia at CNIC.EDU.CU (MSc. Ricardo Arencibia Jorge) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 15:31:05 -0500 Subject: Second call for papers - International Workshop on Scientometric Studies related to the Biomedical Sciences Message-ID: International Workshop on Scientometric Studies related to the Biomedical Sciences http://www.congresocniccuba.com/index.php?module=general6 Second Call for Papers Dear Colleagues, The National Center for Scientific Research (CNIC) is pleased to invite you to participate at the 15th International Scientific Congress CNIC'2010 which will take place from June 28th through July 1st, 2010, at the International Convention Center, in Havana, Cuba, in the framework of the 45th Anniversary of our Center's foundation. During the congress, our Network of Scientometric Studies for Higher Education (REDEC) will organize an International Workshop on Scientometric Studies related to the Biomedical Sciences, sponsored by the Cuban Ministry of Higher Education (MES), the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics (ISSI), the Alpha Institute of Biomedical Sciences (AIBS, Greece) and the International Network for the Avaibility of Sientific Publications (INASP). The main objective of the workshop will be the presentation of national and international experiences in the use and validation of scientometric indicators and techniques of bibliometric mapping for the analysis of biomedical domains. Papers must be proposed as oral presentations or posters. Authors are invited to send the organizing committee, in Word or rtf format, the following information: . title of the paper . name and institutional affiliation of the author(s) . a structured abstract (no more than 500 words) . from three to five keywords . postal address and e-mail of the first author Abstracts, as well as any information requests or questions related to the Workshop and the Congress, must be sent to the following e-mail addresses: xvc at cnic.edu.cu ricardo.arencibia at cnic.edu.cu Happy new year and friendly greetings, Ricardo Arencibia-Jorge, Coordinator of the Workshop. (PS: See the preliminary program) Workshop Program Tuesday, June 29, 2010 9:00 - 9:10 Opening Words 9:10 - 9:15 Introduction to the Workshop Program 9:15 - 10:00 Opening Lecture Comparison of Research Productivity of World Areas in Various Biomedical Fields Matthew E. Falagas, MD, MSc, DSc Director, Alfa Institute of Biomedical Sciences (AIBS), Athens, Greece. Adjunct Associate Professor of Medicine, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts. Director, Infectious Diseases Clinic, "Henry Dunant" Hospital, Athens, Greece. 10:15 - 10:30 Coffee break 10:30 - 13:30 Session I: Bibliometric Research and Health Sciences: Realities and Perspectives. Wednesday, June 30, 2010 9:00 - 11:00 Session II: Bibliometric Mapping of Biomedical Domains. 11:00 - 11:30 Coffee break 11:30 - 14:00 Session III: Bibliometric Indicators and Research Evaluation: experiences in the Health Sector. Thursday, July 1, 2010 9:00 - 10:00 Poster session 10:00 - 10:30 Coffee break 10:30 - 12:00 Closing Session We invite you to participate in the XV International Scientific Congress CNIC'2010. Organized by the National Center for Scientific Research. http://www.congresocniccuba.com >From June 28th to July 1st, 2010 in Havana, Cuba. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Le invitamos a participar en el XV Congreso Cient?fico Internacional CNIC?2010 Organizado por el Centro Nacional de Investigaciones Cient?ficas. http://www.congresocniccuba.com Del 28 de junio al 1ro de julio, en Ciudad de La Habana, Cuba. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Thu Jan 21 12:57:06 2010 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 11:57:06 -0600 Subject: Percentile Rank and Author Superiority Indexes for Evaluating Individual Journal articles by A. I. Pudovkin and E Garfield Message-ID: http://garfield.library.upenn.edu/papers/aipegdalianchina2009.pdf Percentile Rank and Author Superiority Indexes for Evaluating Individual Journal Articles and the Author's Overall Citation Performance Abstract In this paper we propose two new indexes to quantify the citation status of papers and authors. The Percentile Rank Index (PRI) indicates the citation rank of the author's individual papers among the papers published in the same year and source (journal or multi-authored monograph or book.) PRI is independent of the paper's age, specialty, or source journal size. The Author's Superiority Index (ASI) is determined by the number of the author's papers with a PRI at or above a specified value (99, 95, or 75). ASI allows comparisons across specialties and different time periods. The data necessary to calculate both the PRI and ASI can be obtained from Thomson-Reuters database Web of Science (www.isiknowledge.com) or other comparable databases. This is pre-print of paper that has been accepted for COLLNET journal. ------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------ Eugene Garfield, PhD. email: garfield at codex.cis.upenn.edu home page: www.eugenegarfield.org Tel: 215-243-2205 Fax: 610-560-4749 Chairman Emeritus, Thomson Reuters Scientific (formerly ISI) 1500 Spring Garden Street, Philadelphia, PA 19130-4067 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.asist.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Mon Jan 25 15:26:51 2010 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 15:26:51 -0500 Subject: Abt, HA."Reviewing and Revision Times for The Astrophysical Journal." PUBLICATIONS OF THE ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY OF THE PACIFIC. 121 (885): 1291-1293. 2009 Message-ID: Abt, HA. 2009. "Reviewing and Revision Times for The Astrophysical Journal." PUBLICATIONS OF THE ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY OF THE PACIFIC 121 (885): 1291-1293. CHICAGO, UNIV CHICAGO PRESS . Author Full Name(s): Abt, Helmut A. Document Type: Article Abstract: From a study of the editorial log for 251 manuscripts submitted in 2006, we learn that 6% are rejected, 5% are withdrawn, and 88% are eventually accepted for publication. Of the accepted articles, 30% are reviewed once, 58% twice, and 12% are reviewed 3-5 times. The mean time for the first review is 31 days and for the first revision is 44 days. The spread in total reviewing times (dispersion of 16 days) is much shorter than in total revision times (54 days). Important articles, those receiving 31-193 citations in 2 yr, are not reviewed more promptly than others nor revised more promptly. Only in the subfield of high-energy objects do the authors revise their manuscripts marginally more promptly than others. Addresses: Kitt Peak Natl Observ, Tucson, AZ 85726 USA Reprint Address: Abt, HA, Kitt Peak Natl Observ, Tucson, AZ 85726 USA. E-mail Address: abt at noao.edu ISSN: 0004-6280 From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Mon Jan 25 15:36:48 2010 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 15:36:48 -0500 Subject: Cassady-Cain, RL; Appleford, JM; Patel, J; Aulakh, M; Norton, ML. 2009. A vision of the future for BMC Medicine: serving science, medicine and authors. BMC MEDICINE 7: art. no.-55 Message-ID: Cassady-Cain, RL; Appleford, JM; Patel, J; Aulakh, M; Norton, ML. 2009. A vision of the future for BMC Medicine: serving science, medicine and authors. BMC MEDICINE 7: art. no.-55. LONDON, BIOMED CENTRAL LTD . Author Full Name(s): Cassady-Cain, Robin L.; Appleford, Joanne M.; Patel, Jigisha; Aulakh, Mick; Norton, Melissa L. Document Type: Editorial Material Abstract: In June 2009, BMC Medicine received its first official impact factor of 3.28 from Thomson Reuters. In recognition of this landmark event, the BMC Medicine editorial team present and discuss the vision and aims of the journal. Addresses: [Cassady-Cain, Robin L.; Appleford, Joanne M.; Patel, Jigisha; Aulakh, Mick; Norton, Melissa L.] BioMed Cent Ltd, BMC Med Editorial Team, London WC1X 8HL, England Reprint Address: Cassady-Cain, RL, BioMed Cent Ltd, BMC Med Editorial Team, 236 Grays Inn Rd, London WC1X 8HL, England. E-mail Address: robin.cassady-cain at biomedcentral.com; jo.appleford at biomedcentral.com; jigisha.patel at biomedcentral.com; mick.aulakh at biomedcentral.com; Melissa.Norton at biomedcentral.com ISSN: 1741-7015 DOI: 10.1186/1741-7015-7-55 From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Mon Jan 25 15:42:53 2010 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 15:42:53 -0500 Subject: Dandona, L; Raban, MZ; Guggilla, RK; Bhatnagar, A; Dandona, R. 2009. Trends of public health research output from India during 2001-2008. BMC MEDICINE 7: art. no.-59 Message-ID: Dandona, L; Raban, MZ; Guggilla, RK; Bhatnagar, A; Dandona, R. 2009. Trends of public health research output from India during 2001-2008. BMC MEDICINE 7: art. no.-59. LONDON, BIOMED CENTRAL LTD. Author Full Name(s): Dandona, Lalit; Raban, Magdalena Z.; Guggilla, Rama K.; Bhatnagar, Aarushi; Dandona, Rakhi Document Type: Letter Abstract: Background: An understanding of how public health research output from India is changing in relation to the disease burden and public health priorities is required in order to inform relevant research development. We therefore studied the trends in the public health research output from India during 2001-2008 that was readily available in the public domain. Methods: The scope and type of the published research from India in 2007 that was included in the PubMed database was assessed and compared with a previous similar assessment for 2002. Papers were classified based on the review of abstracts and original public health research papers were assessed in detail. Impact factors for the journals were used to compute quality-adjusted research output. The websites of governmental organizations, academic and research institutions and international organizations were searched in order to identify and review reports on original public health research produced in India from 2001 to 2008. The reports were classified based on the topics covered and quality and their trends over time were assessed. Results: The number of original health research papers from India in PubMed doubled from 4494 in 2002 to 9066 in 2007. This included a 3.1-fold increase in public health research papers, but these comprised only 5% of the total papers in 2007. Within public health, the increase was lowest for the health system and policy category. Several major causes of disease burden in India continued to be underrepresented in the quality-adjusted public health research output in 2007. The number of papers evaluating population health interventions increased from 2002 to 2007, but there were none on the leading non-communicable causes of disease burden or on road traffic injuries. The number of identified original public health research reports increased by 64.7% from 204 in 2001-2004 to 336 in 2005-2008. The proportion of reports on reproductive and child health was very high but decreased slightly from 38.7% of the total in 2001-2004 to 31.5% in 2005-2008 (P = 0.09); those on the leading chronic non-communicable conditions and injuries increased from 6.4% to 13.4% (P = 0.01) but this was still much lower than their contribution to the disease burden. Health system/policy issues were the topic in 27.4% reports but health information issues were covered in a miniscule 0.6% reports. The proportion of reports that were evaluations increased slightly from 26% in 2001-2004 to 31.5% in 2005-2008, with this proportion being higher among the reports commissioned by international organizations (P < 0.001). The proportion of reports commissioned by Indian governmental organizations alone, or in collaboration with international organizations, doubled from 2001-2004 to 2005-2008 (P < 0.001). Only 25% of the total 540 reports had a quality score of adequate or better. The quality of reports produced by collaborations between Indian and international organizations was higher than those produced by Indian or international organizations alone (P < 0.001). Conclusion: This is the first analysis from India that includes research reports in addition to published papers. It provides the most up-to-date understanding of public health research output from India. The increase in available public health research output and the increase in commissioning of this research by Indian governmental organizations are encouraging. However, the distribution of research topics and the quality of research reports continue to be unsatisfactory. It is necessary for health policy to address these continuing deficits in public health research in order to reduce the very large disease burden in India. Addresses: [Dandona, Lalit; Raban, Magdalena Z.; Bhatnagar, Aarushi; Dandona, Rakhi] Publ Hlth Fdn India, New Delhi, India; [Dandona, Lalit] Univ Washington, Inst Hlth Metr & Evaluat, Seattle, WA 98195 USA; [Dandona, Lalit; Raban, Magdalena Z.; Dandona, Rakhi] Univ Sydney, Sch Publ Hlth, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia; [Dandona, Lalit; Raban, Magdalena Z.; Dandona, Rakhi] Univ Sydney, George Inst Int Hlth, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia; [Dandona, Lalit; Guggilla, Rama K.; Dandona, Rakhi] George Inst Int Hlth, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, India Reprint Address: Dandona, L, Publ Hlth Fdn India, New Delhi, India. E-mail Address: lalit.dandona at phfi.org; mrab2647 at uni.sydney.edu.au; r.guggilla at george.org.in; aarushibhatnagar at gmail.com; rakhi.dandona at phfi.org ISSN: 1741-7015 DOI: 10.1186/1741-7015-7-59 From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Mon Jan 25 16:24:27 2010 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 16:24:27 -0500 Subject: Thelwall, M. 2009. "Bibliometrics and Citation Analysis: From the Science Citation Index to Cybermetrics (book review)." LIBRARY & INFORMATION SCIENCE RESEARCH 31 (4): 268-269. Message-ID: Thelwall, M. 2009. Bibliometrics and Citation Analysis: From the Science Citation Index to Cybermetrics. LIBRARY & INFORMATION SCIENCE RESEARCH 31 (4): 268-269. NEW YORK, ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC . Author Full Name(s): Thelwall, Mike Language: English Document Type: Book Review Addresses: [Thelwall, Mike] Wolverhampton Univ, Sch Comp & Informat Technol, Wolverhampton WV1 1SB, England Reprint Address: Thelwall, M, Wolverhampton Univ, Sch Comp & Informat Technol, Wulfruna St, Wolverhampton WV1 1SB, England. E-mail Address: m.thelwall at wlv.ac.uk ISSN: 0740-8188 DOI: 10.1016/j.lisr.2009.04.002 From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Mon Jan 25 16:28:17 2010 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 16:28:17 -0500 Subject: Kovacs, G; Spens, KM; Vellenga, DB. 2008. Academic publishing in the Nordic countries - a survey of logistics and supply chain related journal rankings. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LOGISTICS-RESEARCH AND APPLICATIONS 11 (4): 313-329. Message-ID: Kovacs, G; Spens, KM; Vellenga, DB. 2008. Academic publishing in the Nordic countries - a survey of logistics and supply chain related journal rankings. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LOGISTICS-RESEARCH AND APPLICATIONS 11 (4): 313-329. ABINGDON, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD . Author Full Name(s): Kovacs, Gyongyi; Spens, Karen M.; Vellenga, David B. Language: English Document Type: Article Abstract: This paper reports a journal quality ranking survey of Nordic logistics and supply chain management faculty. The findings are compared with previous studies on journal rankings, which have primarily been conducted in the US. The paper examines the use of formal rankings as well as explores the attitudes towards open access (OA) publishing and discusses the relevance of journal rankings for assessing faculty research performance. The perspective taken is that of the Nordic countries, where arguably traditions regarding the type of research conducted in logistics and approaches to publishing differ from other geographical regions. Results show that formal journal rankings are increasing in significance in the Nordic countries, at the same time as OA publishing is gaining momentum. Yet, Nordic rankings for logistics and supply chain related journals differ from their US counterparts. Nordic rankings differentiate between three groups of logistics-related journals: business logistics journals, transportation journals, and operations research/operations management journals. Addresses: [Kovacs, Gyongyi; Spens, Karen M.] Swedish Sch Econ & Business Adm, Dept Mkt, Helsinki, Finland; [Vellenga, David B.] Maine Maritime Acad, Oro Valley, AZ USA Reprint Address: Kovacs, G, Swedish Sch Econ & Business Adm, Dept Mkt, Helsinki, Finland. E-mail Address: gyongyi.kovacs at hanken.fi ISSN: 1367-5567 DOI: 10.1080/13675560802120816 From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Mon Jan 25 16:34:49 2010 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 16:34:49 -0500 Subject: Garcia-Perez, MA. 2009. The Hirsch h Index in a Non-Mainstream Area: Methodology of the Behavioral Sciences in Spain. SPANISH JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY 12 (2): 833-849. Message-ID: Garcia-Perez, MA. 2009. The Hirsch h Index in a Non-Mainstream Area: Methodology of the Behavioral Sciences in Spain. SPANISH JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY 12 (2): 833-849. MADRID, UNIV COMPLUTENSE MADRID, SERVICIO PUBLICACIONES . Author Full Name(s): Garcia-Perez, Miguel A. Language: English Document Type: Article Abstract: The h index has advantages over journal impact factors for assessing the research performance of individuals, and it is becoming a reference tool for career assessment that is starting to be considered by some agencies as an aid in decisions for promotion, allocation, and funding. The h index has been reported to have adequate properties as a measure of the research accomplishments of individuals in areas where h values are usually high (i.e., at or above 40), but some concerns have been raised that its validity in other non-mainstream research areas is suspect. This paper presents data from an exhaustive computation and analysis of h indices for 204 faculty members in the area of Methodology of the Behavioral Sciences in Spain, an area where h indices tend to be low worldwide. The results indicate that the h index is substantially increased by self-citations and that the average h of full professors is not meaningfully larger than the average h of associate professors. Other interesting relations between h indices and demographic and academic variables are described, including the gender and age bias of h. In this field, but perhaps also in other fields where the average h is low, little justification is found for the use of the h index as a fair measure of research performance that can aid in funding or promotion decisions. Addresses: Univ Complutense, Fac Psicol, Dept Metodol, Madrid 28223, Spain Reprint Address: Garcia-Perez, MA, Univ Complutense, Fac Psicol, Dept Metodol, Campus Somosaguas, Madrid 28223, Spain. E-mail Address: miguel at psi.ucm.es ISSN: 1138-7416 From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Mon Jan 25 16:36:37 2010 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 16:36:37 -0500 Subject: Webster, GD; Jonason, PK; Schember, TO. 2009. Hot Topics and Popular Papers in Evolutionary Psychology: Analyses of Title Words and Citation Counts in Evolution and Human Behavior, 1979-2008. EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGY 7 (3): 348-362. Message-ID: Webster, GD; Jonason, PK; Schember, TO. 2009. Hot Topics and Popular Papers in Evolutionary Psychology: Analyses of Title Words and Citation Counts in Evolution and Human Behavior, 1979-2008. EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGY 7 (3): 348-362. DAVIE, EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOL . Author Full Name(s): Webster, Gregory D.; Jonason, Peter K.; Schember, Tatiana Orozco Language: English Document Type: Article Abstract: What do evolutionary psychologists study, which are their most highly cited articles, and which variables predict high citation counts? These are important questions for any emerging science. To help answer these questions, we present new empirical research on publication trends in evolutionary psychology's flagship journal, Evolution and Human Behavior (and its predecessor, Ethology and Sociobiology), from its inception in 1979 to 2008. First, analyses of 8,631 title words published in these journals between 1979 and 2008 (808 articles) show an increasing interest in researching sex, sex differences, faces, and attractiveness. For example, during the Ethology and Sociobiology era (1979-1996), the most frequent title words were "evolutionary," "human," "behavior," "reproductive," "evolution," "selection," and "altruism," whereas during the Evolution and Human Behavior era (1997-2008), they were "sex," "attractiveness," "differences," "sexual," "human," "male," and "facial." Second, we reveal the 20 most-cited articles in these journals, which show the importance of research teams. Third, citation analyses for these journals between 1979 and 2002 (562 articles) suggest articles that cite more references are in turn cited more themselves (r = .44, R-2 = .19). Lastly, we summarize recent research that suggests evolutionary psychology is not only surviving, but also thriving, as a new interdisciplinary science. Addresses: [Webster, Gregory D.; Schember, Tatiana Orozco] Univ Florida, Dept Psychol, Gainesville, FL 32611 USA; [Jonason, Peter K.] New Mexico State Univ, Dept Psychol, Las Cruces, NM 88003 USA Reprint Address: Webster, GD, Univ Florida, Dept Psychol, Gainesville, FL 32611 USA. E-mail Address: gdwebs at gmail.com; pjonason at nmsu.edu; tschember at ufl.edu ISSN: 1474-7049 From amsciforum at GMAIL.COM Tue Jan 26 09:22:50 2010 From: amsciforum at GMAIL.COM (Stevan Harnad) Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 09:22:50 -0500 Subject: Fwd: Leiden Conference in May: Open Access and Impact Metrics Message-ID: Begin forwarded message: From: Date: January 26, 2010 6:37:09 AM EST (CA) European Conference on Scientific Publishing in Biomedicine and Medicine http://www.lumc.nl/con/2009/90312014738221/ 27 ? 29 May 2010 Leiden University Medical Center, the Netherlands 3 major themes: Open Access and beyond Impact of science Translational Medicine Registration is open! For a detailed program please visit our website http://www.lumc.nl/ecsp2010 We hope to welcome you at ECSP 2010! Thanking you in advance. Sincerely yours, Han Belt =============================== J.H.J. Belt Head Walaeus Library Leiden University Medical Center T +31 (0)71 526 2483 / 3890 F +31 (0)71 5261543 E J.H.J.Belt--lumc.nl http://www.lumc.nl/walaeus PO Box 9600 2300 RC Leiden The Netherlands http://www.lumc.nl/ecsp register for third European Conference on Scientific Publishing in Biomedicine and Medicine From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Tue Jan 26 11:27:17 2010 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 11:27:17 -0500 Subject: Marriner, N. 2009. Currents and trends in the archaeological sciences. JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL SCIENCE 36 (12): 2811-2815. Message-ID: Marriner, N. 2009. Currents and trends in the archaeological sciences. JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL SCIENCE 36 (12): 2811-2815. Author Full Name(s): Marriner, Nick Language: English Document Type: Article Abstract: Here I use ISI Web of Knowledge to build on a recent paper by Butzer (2009) and track current trends in the archaeological sciences. I researched eight thematic keywords replete in the title, abstract, keywords and main body of archaeological science literature for the period 1970-2008. For all keywords investigated a steady rise in archaeological science research is evidenced after 1980, with pronounced growth occurring after 2000. I attribute this pattern to the standardisation of research production and academic evaluation, in addition to the democratisation of new information technologies, notably the Internet. The evolution of 10 leading archaeological science journals was also tracked. Since the 1970s, the bibliometric data show that nine of the ten journals have successfully expanded on an annual basis. I found that the biggest growers (the Journal of Archaeological Science [JAS], the Journal of Human Evolution and the Journal of Anthropological Archaeology) are all published by Elsevier. In 2008, the JAS was ranked first for five of the eight thematic keywords by ISI, underlining the popularity and interdisciplinary scope of the journal. According to the 2008 journal Citation Reports, the JAS ranks second for total citations (4219) in archaeological science and third for its overall impact factor (1.779). (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Addresses: Univ Aix Marseille, CNRS, CEREGE, UMR 6635, F-13545 Aix En Provence 04, France Reprint Address: Marriner, N, Univ Aix Marseille, CNRS, CEREGE, UMR 6635, BP 80, F-13545 Aix En Provence 04, France. E-mail Address: marriner at cerege.fr ISSN: 0305-4403 DOI: 10.1016/j.jas.2009.09.009 From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Tue Jan 26 14:53:02 2010 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 14:53:02 -0500 Subject: Zhang CT. 2009. elationship of the h-index, g-index, and e-index. JASIST online Message-ID: Relationship of the h-index, g-index, and e-index Chun-Ting Zhang Department of Physics, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China email: Chun-Ting Zhang (ctzhang at tju.edu.cn) Index Terms citation analysis ? author productivity ? scientometrics Abstract Of h-type indices available now, the g-index is an important one in that it not only keeps some advantages of the h-index but also counts citations from highly cited articles. However, the g-index has a drawback that one has to add fictitious articles with zero citation to calculate this index in some important cases. Based on an alternative definition without introducing fictitious articles, an analytical method has been proposed to calculate the g-index based approximately on the h-index and the e-index. If citations for a scientist are ranked by a power law, it is shown that the g-index can be calculated accurately by the h-index, the e-index, and the power parameter. The relationship of the h-, g-, and e-indices presented here shows that the g-index contains the citation information from the h-index, the e-index, and some papers beyond the h-core. Received: 25 August 2009; Revised: 14 October 2009; Accepted: 14 October 2009 Digital Object Identifier (DOI) 10.1002/asi.21274 URL: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/123196153/abstract From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Tue Jan 26 14:55:18 2010 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 14:55:18 -0500 Subject: Zhang, CT. 2009. The e-Index, Complementing the h-Index for Excess Citations. PLOS ONE 4 (5): art. no.-e5429. Message-ID: Zhang, CT. 2009. The e-Index, Complementing the h-Index for Excess Citations. PLOS ONE 4 (5): art. no.-e5429. Author Full Name(s): Zhang, Chun-Ting Language: English Document Type: Article Abstract: Background: The h-index has already been used by major citation databases to evaluate the academic performance of individual scientists. Although effective and simple, the h-index suffers from some drawbacks that limit its use in accurately and fairly comparing the scientific output of different researchers. These drawbacks include information loss and low resolution: the former refers to the fact that in addition to h 2 citations for papers in the h-core, excess citations are completely ignored, whereas the latter means that it is common for a group of researchers to have an identical h-index. Methodology/Principal Findings: To solve these problems, I here propose the e-index, where e 2 represents the ignored excess citations, in addition to the h 2 citations for h-core papers. Citation information can be completely depicted by using the h-index together with the e-index, which are independent of each other. Some other h-type indices, such as a and R, are h-dependent, have information redundancy with h, and therefore, when used together with h, mask the real differences in excess citations of different researchers. Conclusions/Significance: Although simple, the e-index is a necessary h-index complement, especially for evaluating highly cited scientists or for precisely comparing the scientific output of a group of scientists having an identical h-index. X h X h X h Reprint Address: Zhang, CT, Tianjin Univ, Dept Phys, Tianjin 300072, Peoples R China. E-mail Address: ctzhang at tju.edu.cn ISSN: 1932-6203 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0005429 URL: http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0005429 From garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU Tue Jan 26 15:06:51 2010 From: garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Eugene Garfield) Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 15:06:51 -0500 Subject: Yang, YJ; Chiu, CY. 2009. Mapping the Structure and Dynamics of Psychological Knowledge: Forty Years of APA Journal Citations (1970-2009). REVIEW OF GENERAL PSYCHOLOGY. Message-ID: Yang, YJ; Chiu, CY. 2009. Mapping the Structure and Dynamics of Psychological Knowledge: Forty Years of APA Journal Citations (1970-2009). REVIEW OF GENERAL PSYCHOLOGY 13 (4): 349-356. Author Full Name(s): Yang, Yung-Jui; Chiu, Chi-yue E-mail Address: yjyang at illinois.edu Language: English Document Type: Article Abstract: To understand how subfields of psychology relate to each other as a whole, we analyzed 40 years (from 1979 to 2009) of journal citation data collected from 17 American Psychological Association journals. The results reveal two stable underlying dimensions of psychological knowledge-basic versus applied, and population-specific versus population-general-that organize subfields of psychology. Within the structure, personality and social psychology is located at the heart of psychological knowledge. Analysis of the dynamic flow of knowledge between subfields of psychology further reveals that although the subfields engage in clear division of labor, they also engage in dynamic transactions of knowledge. Finally, an emergent subfield would first obtain its intellectual nutrients from the established disciplines. Once it has found its own niche, it turns into a spin-off and starts to assume the role of knowledge supplier. The implications of these results for psychology as a science are discussed. Addresses: [Yang, Yung-Jui; Chiu, Chi-yue] Univ Illinois, Dept Psychol, Urbana, IL 61801 USA; [Chiu, Chi-yue] Nanyang Technol Univ, Nanyang Business Sch, Singapore, Singapore Reprint Address: Yang, YJ, 603 E Daniel St, Champaign, IL 61820 USA. ISSN: 1089-2680 DOI: 10.1037/a0017195 paper URL: http://psycnet.apa.org/?fa=main.doiLanding&doi=10.1037/a0017195 From isidro.aguillo at CCHS.CSIC.ES Wed Jan 27 04:01:24 2010 From: isidro.aguillo at CCHS.CSIC.ES (Isidro F. Aguillo) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 10:01:24 +0100 Subject: Ranking Web of Repositories: January 2010 edition Message-ID: The new edition of the Ranking Web of repositories (http://repositories.webometrics.info) has just been published. The records have been updated and now the Excel files (xls) are included in the calculation of the number of documents deposited. We have included some suggestions regarding the role of librarians in the Open Access movement. Some of the current techniques are making difficult the use of the repositories for citing purposes, so end users (scientists, researchers, scholars)are not able to add and URL in their bibliographic references. We publicly acknowledge the work done by librarians worldwide but we would like to offer some suggestions to improve the impact of the OAI: -The institutional repository is a very important asset of the institution as a whole, not only of the library. We recommend the following syntax for the institutional repository web address: http://repository.university.country/ and not http://repository.library.university.country/ -Collective catalogues are well suited for library purposes, but although harvesters and consortium repositories may be very useful, they should be considered always as secondary systems, mainly for purposes of increasing visibility and searchability. Even for very small institutions it is feasible to set up their own repository that is, as mentioned before, the main research asset for the institution. - Repositories consist of full text papers, not bibliographic records. That means that the link to the full text file should be clearly marked in the web page of each record. Some repository designs makes difficult to locate such links. - For scientists it is important that the link to the full text would be easily citable. So it should be avoided the following situations: Very long URLs. URLs with nonsense characters that have no meaning. We suggest to use, for example, the last name of the first author and the publication year. File names without suffix indicating the type (.pdf, .doc, .ps, etc). -All the scientific production, formal and informal, draft or definitive, published or unpublished, should be available from a unique web site. Results show already well known patterns, as the large thematic repositories still lead the ranking (CiteseerX, Arxiv, RepEc). National repositories, consisting of records coming from different institutions (HAL) are also in top positions. -- ************************************* Isidro F. Aguillo, HonPhD Cybermetrics Lab CCHS - CSIC Albasanz, 26-28, 3C1. 28037 Madrid. Spain Ph. 91-602 2890. Fax: 91-602 2971 isidro.aguillo @ cchs.csic.es www. webometrics.info ************************************* From loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET Wed Jan 27 15:44:29 2010 From: loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET (Loet Leydesdorff) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 21:44:29 +0100 Subject: Mapping the Geography of Science Message-ID: Mapping the Geography of Science: Distribution Patterns and Networks of Relations among Cities and Institutes Using Google Earth, Google Maps and/or network visualization programs such as Pajek, one can overlay the network of relations among addresses in scientific publications on the geographic map. We discuss the pros en cons of the various options, and provide software (freeware) for bridging existing gaps between the Science Citation Indices and Scopus, on the one side, and these various visualization tools, on the other. At the level of city names, the global map can be drawn reliably on the basis of the available address information. At the level of the names of organizations and institutes, there are problems of unification both in the ISI-databases and Scopus. Pajek enables us to combine the visualization with statistical analysis, whereas the Google Maps and its derivates provide superior tools at the Internet. Pdf-version at http://www.leydesdorff.net/maps/Geography_of_Science.pdf Html at http://www.leydesdorff.net/maps/Geography_of_Science.htm Loet Leydesdorff, Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR), University of Amsterdam, Kloveniersburgwal 48, 1012 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands; loet at leydesdorff.net. Olle Persson, Department of Sociology, Ume? University, SE 901 87 Ume?, Sweden; Olle.Persson at soc.umu.se. ** apologies for cross-postings From katy at INDIANA.EDU Thu Jan 28 21:19:06 2010 From: katy at INDIANA.EDU (Katy Borner) Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:19:06 -0500 Subject: NAS Report "Data on Federal Research and Development Investments: A Pathway to Modernization" Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: