From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Tue Nov 1 15:24:20 2011 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 19:24:20 +0000 Subject: of possible interest to SIG Metics readers Message-ID: ========================== TITLE: Patterns of Iranian co-authorship networks in social sciences: A comparative study (Article, English) AUTHOR: Nikzad, M; Jamali, HR; Hariri, N SOURCE: LIBRARY & INFORMATION SCIENCE RESEARCH 33 (4). OCT 2011. p.313-319 ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC, NEW YORK SEARCH TERM(S): PRICE DJD rauth KEYWORDS+: SCIENTIFIC COLLABORATION; MULTIPLE AUTHORSHIP; CITATION RATES; IMPACT; QUALITY; SINGLE; CHEMISTRY; ARTICLES ABSTRACT: Collaboration in science is a process in which two or more authors share their ideas, resources and data to create a joint work. This research compares coauthorship networks of Iranian articles in library and information science (LIS), psychology (PSY), management (MNG), and economics (ECO) in the ISI Web of Knowledge database during 2000-2009, and uses network analysis for the visualization of coauthorship networks. Data include all articles with at least one Iranian author and indexed in ISI's Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) for the fields of US, PSY, MNG, and ECO. Indicators such as the Collaborative Index (CI), Degree of Collaboration (DC) and Collaboration Coefficient (CC) were calculated for each discipline. Results show that two or three authors were the most common number of authors per paper, and authors of PSY tended to have more multi-authored articles, compared to the other disciplines. LIS had the lowest rank regarding CC. MNG had the densest coauthorship network. and PSY had the sparsest. Iranian authors in the field of PSY mostly collaborated with those in the U.S.. while LIS and MNG authors tended to collaborate with U.K. authors, and ECO authors tended to collaborate with Canadians. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. AUTHOR ADDRESS: M Nikzad, Islamic Azad Univ, LIS Dept, Sci & Res Branch, Tehran, Iran -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Application of the Distribution of Citations Among Publications in Scientometric Evaluations (Article, English) AUTHOR: Vinkler, P SOURCE: JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 62 (10). OCT 2011. p.1963-1978 WILEY-BLACKWELL, MALDEN SEARCH TERM(S): GARFIELD E rauth; GROSS PLK SCIENCE 66:385 1927; HIRSCH JE P NATL ACAD SCI USA 102:16569 2005; SEGLEN PO J AM SOC INFORM SCI 45:1 1994; SEGLEN PO J AM SOC INFORM SCI 43:628 1992; SCIENTOMETRIC* item_title; CITATION* item_title; GARFIELD E AM DOC 14:195 1963; GARFIELD E NATURE 264:609 1976 KEYWORDS+: HIGHLY CITED PAPERS; H-INDEX; IMPACT FACTOR; BIBLIOMETRIC INDICATORS; SCIENTIFIC PERFORMANCE; JOURNAL IMPACT; HIRSCH INDEX; R-INDEX; SCIENCE; PHYSICISTS ABSTRACT: The pi-indicator (or pi(v)-indicator) of a set of journal papers is equal to a hundredth of the total number of citations obtained by the elite set of publications. The number of publications in the elite set P(pi) is calculated as the square root of total papers. For greater sets the following equation is used: P(pi(v))=(10 log P) - 10, where P is the total number of publications. For sets comprising a single or several extreme frequently cited paper, the pi-index may be distorted. Therefore, a new indicator based on the distribution of citations is suggested. Accordingly, the publications are classified into citation categories, of which lower limits are given as 0, and (2(n) + 1), whereas the upper limits as 2(n) (n = 0, 2, 3, etc.). The citations distribution score (CDS) index is defined as the sum of weighted numbers of publications in the individual categories. The CDS-index increases logarithmically with the increasing number of citations. The citation distribution rate indicator is introduced by relating the actual CDS-index to the possible maximum. Several size-dependent and size-independent indicators were calculated. It has been concluded that relevant, already accepted scientometric indicators may validate novel indices through resulting in similar conclusions ("converging validation of indicators"). AUTHOR ADDRESS: P Vinkler, Hungarian Acad Sci, Chem Res Ctr, Pusztaszeri Ut 59-67, H-1025 Budapest, Hungary -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Ranking of the Subject Areas of Scopus (Article, English) AUTHOR: Garcia, JA; Rodriguez-Sanchez, R; Fdez-Valdivia, J SOURCE: JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 62 (10). OCT 2011. p.2013-2023 WILEY-BLACKWELL, MALDEN SEARCH TERM(S): GARFIELD E rauth; GARFIELD E JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC 295:90 2006 KEYWORDS+: JOURNAL IMPACT FACTOR; INDICATOR; POVERTY ABSTRACT: Here, we show a longitudinal analysis of the ranking of the subject areas of Elsevier's Scopus. To this aim, we present three summary measures based on the journal ranking scores for academic journals in each subject area. This longitudinal study allows us to analyze developmental trends over times in different subject areas with distinct citation and publication patterns. We evaluate the relative performance of each subject area by using the overall prestige for the most important journals with ranking score above a given threshold (e.g., in the first quartile) as well as the overall prestige gap for the less important journals with ranking score below a given threshold (e.g., below the top 10 journals). Thus, we propose that it should be possible to study different subject areas by means of appropriate summary measures of the journal ranking scores, which provide additional information beyond analyzing the inequality of the whole ranking-score distribution for academic journals in each subject area. It allows us to investigate whether subject areas with high levels of overall prestige for the first quartile journals also tended to achieve low levels of overall prestige gap for the journals below the top 10. AUTHOR ADDRESS: JA Garcia, Univ Granada, CITIC UGR, Dept Ciencias Comp & IA, E-18071 Granada, Spain -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: A multilevel modelling approach to investigating the predictive validity of editorial decisions: do the editors of a high profile journal select manuscripts that are highly cited after publication? (Article, English) AUTHOR: Bornmann, L; Mutz, R; Marx, W; Schier, H; Daniel, HD SOURCE: JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY SERIES A-STATISTICS IN SOCIETY 174 (Pt 4). 2011. p.857-879 WILEY-BLACKWELL, MALDEN SEARCH TERM(S): PENDLEBURY DA rauth; WILSON JD J CLIN INVEST 61:1697 1978; CITED item_title; JOURNAL item_title KEYWORDS: Chemistry; Editorial decisions; Multilevel modelling; Peer review; Predictive validity; Reference standard KEYWORDS+: ANGEWANDTE-CHEMIE; CITATION ANALYSIS; IMPACT FACTOR; SCIENTIFIC EXCELLENCE; RESEARCH PERFORMANCE; LONGITUDINAL DATA; INDICATORS; INDEX; DISTRIBUTIONS; UNIVERSALITY ABSTRACT: Scientific journals must deal with the following questions concerning the predictive validity of editorial decisions. Is the best scientific work selected from submitted manuscripts? Does selection of the best manuscripts also mean selecting papers that after publication show top citation performance within their fields? Taking the journal Angewandte Chemie International Edition as an example, this study proposes a new methodology for investigating whether manuscripts that are most worthy of publication are in fact selected validly. First, the influence on citation of the accepted and rejected but then published elsewhere manuscripts was appraised on the basis of percentile impact classes scaled in a subfield of chemistry and, second, the association between the decisions on selection and the influence on citation of the manuscripts was determined by using a multilevel logistic regression for ordinal categories. This approach has many advantages over methodologies that were used in previous research studies on the predictive validity of editorial selection decisions. AUTHOR ADDRESS: L Bornmann, Max Planck Soc, Hofgartenstr 8, D-80539 Munich, Germany ------------------------------------------ From gemma.derrick at CCHS.CSIC.ES Wed Nov 2 06:39:06 2011 From: gemma.derrick at CCHS.CSIC.ES (Gemma Derrick) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 11:39:06 +0100 Subject: Wikiscience In-Reply-To: <4928689828488E458AECE7AFDCB52CFE64D97D@email003.lsu.edu> Message-ID: Hola de Espa?a Stephen, Thank you so much for this email and for sharing the results of you study with us. Although, I found it very interesting would like to point out something that may be of interest. You say that the Nobel Prize winners were usually ranked far down the authorship list and that this reflects how authorship position is not indicative of an authors importance. Whereas this would be extremely interesting if it were true, I thought that I should point out that in many scientific disciplines, chemistry included, there is a specific cultural practice surrounding authorship order. Authorship order is not always done by ?importance? nor is it done in order of contribution to the paper ? with the author who contributed the most to the paper ranked first and so on and so forth until the last author is the one who contributed the least. Instead, chemistry included, usually the last author is the most senior member of the team. More often than not, the first author is the main contributor, but the last author may also be a major contributor but he is put last because he is usually the head of the laboratory (the most senior author). Since Nobel Prize winners, I can safely assume, are heads of large laboratories by the time their Nobel Prize is announced, this finding does not surprise me. I hope that this may help in the interpretation of your results. Authorship practice and the difference between fields is something that interests me greatly and I look forward to hearing more of your results. Sincerely, Gemma Dr Gemma Derrick PhD (ANU) | JAE Postdoctoral Research Fellow Institute of Public Goods and Policies | Centre for Human and Social Sciences | Spanish National Research Council C/-Albasanz, 26-28 | Madrid | Espana (Spain) | 28037 T +34 91 602 23 89 | M +34 650 697 832 | F +34 91 602 29 71 E gemma.derrick at cchs.csic.es | W www.ipp.csic.es De: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] En nombre de Stephen J Bensman Enviado el: Monday, 31 October 2011 6:50 PM Para: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Asunto: [SIGMETRICS] Wikiscience I have been using the Publish or Perish software, which was created by Anne-Wil Harzing, to study the h-index publications of the winners of the Nobel Prize in chemistry. These publications fulfilled the stipulation Garfield?s law of concentration by all being articles published in the few elite journals highest in total cites. The median rank of these journals by total cites was 22. What struck me most about these publication was the amount of co-authorship of these articles and the fact that the winners of the Nobel prize most often were not the primary authors but ranked far down the authorship list. It struck me that breakthrough chemical research was highly collaborative and authorship position is not indicative of the author?s importance. One of these papers had 22 co-authors, and the prize winner was last. It struck me that attributing citations to one author or another in certain fields is archaic as we are dealing with collectives or what I call ?wikiscience.? For this reason, I found the Wall Street Journal article below of extreme interest. It seems that, to evaluate a scientist?s true importance, you must use something like Google Scholar, which can retrieve the scientist?s works no matter what her/his authorship position. Harzing?s Publish or Perish software can be downloaded for free from the following Web site: http://www.harzing.com/. Stephen J Bensman LSU Libraries Lousiana State University Baton Rouge, LA 70803 Description: The Wall Street Journal LIFE & CULTURE OCTOBER 29, 2011 The New Einsteins Will Be Scientists Who Share >From cancer to cosmology, researchers could race ahead by working together?online and in the open By MICHAEL NIELSEN In January 2009, a mathematician at Cambridge University named Tim Gowers decided to use his blog to run an unusual social experiment. He picked out a difficult mathematical problem and tried to solve it completely in the open, using his blog to post ideas and partial progress. He issued an open invitation for others to contribute their own ideas, hoping that many minds would be more powerful than one. He dubbed the experiment the Polymath Project. Description: [science]Alex Nabaum On an experimental blog, a far-flung group of mathematicians cracked a tough problem in weeks. Several hours after Mr. Gowers opened up his blog for discussion, a Canadian-Hungarian mathematician posted a comment. Fifteen minutes later, an Arizona high-school math teacher chimed in. Three minutes after that, the UCLA mathematician Terence Tao commented. The discussion ignited, and in just six weeks, the mathematical problem had been solved. Other challenges have followed, and though the polymaths haven't found solutions every time, they have pioneered a new approach to problem-solving. Their work is an example of the experiments in networked science that are now being done to study everything from galaxies to dinosaurs. These projects use online tools as cognitive tools to amplify our collective intelligence. The tools are a way of connecting the right people to the right problems at the right time, activating what would otherwise be latent expertise. Networked science has the potential to speed up dramatically the rate of discovery across all of science. We may well see the day-to-day process of scientific research change more fundamentally over the next few decades than over the past three centuries. But there are major obstacles to realizing this goal. Though you might think that scientists would aggressively adopt new tools for discovery, they have been surprisingly inhibited. Ventures such as the Polymath Project remain the exception, not the rule. Consider the idea of sharing scientific data online. The best-known example of this is the human genome project, whose data may be downloaded by anyone. When you read in the news that a certain gene is associated with a particular disease, you're almost certainly seeing a discovery made possible by the project's open-data policy. Despite the value of open data, most labs make no systematic effort to share data with other scientists. As one biologist told me, he had been "sitting on [the] genome" for an entire species of life for more than a year. A whole species of life! Just imagine the vital discoveries that other scientists could have made if that genome had been uploaded to an online database. Why don't scientists share? If you're a scientist applying for a job or a grant, the biggest factor determining your success will be your record of scientific publications. If that record is stellar, you'll do well. If not, you'll have a problem. So you devote your working hours to tasks that will lead to papers in scientific journals. Even if you personally think it would be far better for science as a whole if you carefully curated and shared your data online, that is time away from your "real" work of writing papers. Except in a few fields, sharing data is not something your peers will give you credit for doing. There are other ways in which scientists are still backward in using online tools. Consider, for example, the open scientific wikis launched by a few brave pioneers in fields like quantum computing, string theory and genetics (a wiki allows the sharing and collaborative editing of an interlinked body of information, the best-known example being Wikipedia). Specialized wikis could serve as up-to-date reference works on the latest research in a field, like rapidly evolving super-textbooks. They could include descriptions of major unsolved scientific problems and serve as a tool to find solutions. But most such wikis have failed. They have the same problem as data sharing: Even if scientists believe in the value of contributing, they know that writing a single mediocre paper will do far more for their careers. The incentives are all wrong. If networked science is to reach its potential, scientists will have to embrace and reward the open sharing of all forms of scientific knowledge, not just traditional journal publication. Networked science must be open science. But how to get there? A good start would be for government grant agencies (like the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation) to work with scientists to develop requirements for the open sharing of knowledge that is discovered with public support. Such policies have already helped to create open data sets like the one for the human genome. But they should be extended to require earlier and broader sharing. Grant agencies also should do more to encourage scientists to submit new kinds of evidence of their impact in their fields?not just papers!?as part of their applications for funding. The scientific community itself needs to have an energetic, ongoing conversation about the value of these new tools. We have to overthrow the idea that it's a diversion from "real" work when scientists conduct high-quality research in the open. Publicly funded science should be open science. Improving the way that science is done means speeding us along in curing cancer, solving the problem of climate change and launching humanity permanently into space. It means fundamental insights into the human condition, into how the universe works and what it's made of. It means discoveries not yet dreamt of. In the years ahead, we have an astonishing opportunity to reinvent discovery itself. But to do so, we must first choose to create a scientific culture that embraces the open sharing of knowledge. ?Mr. Nielsen is a pioneer in the field of quantum computing and the author of "Reinventing Discovery: The New Era of Networked Science," from which this is adapted. Copyright 2011 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 2151 bytes Desc: image001.gif URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 41229 bytes Desc: image002.jpg URL: From dwojick at HUGHES.NET Wed Nov 2 07:22:29 2011 From: dwojick at HUGHES.NET (David Wojick) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 11:22:29 +0000 Subject: Wikiscience Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wkoehler at VALDOSTA.EDU Wed Nov 2 07:31:15 2011 From: wkoehler at VALDOSTA.EDU (wallace koehler) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 07:31:15 -0400 Subject: Wikiscience In-Reply-To: <1702193624.74802.1320232949348.JavaMail.mail@webmail07> Message-ID: On this same note, order of authorship may reflect other social agreements as well. My father was a reasonably well known and well published physicist at Oak Ridge National Lab. It was the practice of the team with whom he often published to rotate the author order without respect to seniority or contribution. Wallace Koehler, PhD Director/Professor Master of Library and Information Science Program Odum Library Valdosta State University 1500 N. Patterson St Valdosta, GA 31698-0150 email - wkoehler at valdosta.edu voice: 229 333 5860 fax 229 259 5055 "I ain't no physicisk, but I knows what matters." Popeye the Sailor Man (aka Robin Williams, 1980) On 11/2/2011 7:22 AM, David Wojick wrote: > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html Indeed Gemma, an extreme > case of this is when one is senoir faculty at a universtity, as many > Nobelists are. One may co-author many papers a year in last position > because they are derived from the multiple doctoral theses one has > directed. This is quite common, so much so that it is difficult to > determine the actual research focus of the senior faculty member. It > may also be true for post-docs one supervises, but I have not studied > that case. > > David > > On Nov 2, 2011, *Gemma Derrick* wrote: > > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > Hola de Espa?a Stephen, > > Thank you so much for this email and for sharing the results of > you study with us. Although, I found it very interesting would > like to point out something that may be of interest. > > You say that the Nobel Prize winners were usually ranked far down > the authorship list and that this reflects how authorship position > is not indicative of an authors importance. Whereas this would be > extremely interesting if it were true, I thought that I should > point out that in many scientific disciplines, chemistry included, > there is a specific cultural practice surrounding authorship > order. Authorship order is not always done by ?importance? nor is > it done in order of contribution to the paper ? with the author > who contributed the most to the paper ranked first and so on and > so forth until the last author is the one who contributed the > least. Instead, chemistry included, usually the last author is > the most senior member of the team. More often than not, the > first author is the main contributor, but the last author may also > be a major contributor but he is put last because he is usually > the head of the laboratory (the most senior author). Since Nobel > Prize winners, I can safely assume, are heads of large > laboratories by the time their Nobel Prize is announced, this > finding does not surprise me. > > I hope that this may help in the interpretation of your results. > Authorship practice and the difference between fields is something > that interests me greatly and I look forward to hearing more of > your results. > > Sincerely, > > Gemma > > Dr Gemma Derrick PhD (ANU) | JAE Postdoctoral Research Fellow > Institute of Public Goods and Policies | Centre for Human and > Social Sciences | Spanish National Research Council > C/-Albasanz, 26-28 | Madrid | Espana (Spain) | 28037 > T +34 91 602 23 89 | M +34 650 697 832 | F +34 91 602 29 71 > E gemma.derrick at cchs.csic.es > | W www.ipp.csic.es > > *De:* ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics > [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] *En nombre de *Stephen J Bensman > *Enviado el:* Monday, 31 October 2011 6:50 PM > *Para:* SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU > > *Asunto:* [SIGMETRICS] Wikiscience > > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > I have been using the Publish or Perish software, which was > created by Anne-Wil Harzing, to study the h-index publications of > the winners of the Nobel Prize in chemistry. These publications > fulfilled the stipulation Garfield?s law of concentration by all > being articles published in the few elite journals highest in > total cites. The median rank of these journals by total cites was > 22. What struck me most about these publication was the amount of > co-authorship of these articles and the fact that the winners of > the Nobel prize most often were not the primary authors but ranked > far down the authorship list. It struck me that breakthrough > chemical research was highly collaborative and authorship position > is not indicative of the author?s importance. One of these papers > had 22 co-authors, and the prize winner was last. It struck me > that attributing citations to one author or another in certain > fields is archaic as we are dealing with collectives or what I > call ?wikiscience.? For this reason, I found the /Wall Street > Journal /article below of extreme interest. It seems that, to > evaluate a scientist?s true importance, you must use something > like Google Scholar, which can retrieve the scientist?s works no > matter what her/his authorship position. Harzing?s Publish or > Perish software can be downloaded for free from the following Web > site: http://www.harzing.com/. > > Stephen J Bensman > > LSU Libraries > > Lousiana State University > > Baton Rouge, LA 70803 > > Description: The Wall Street Journal > > LIFE & CULTURE > > > OCTOBER 29, 2011 > > The New Einsteins Will Be Scientists Who Share > > From cancer to cosmology, researchers could race ahead by working > together?online and in the open > > By MICHAEL NIELSEN > > > > In January 2009, a mathematician at Cambridge University named Tim > Gowers decided to use his blog to run an unusual social > experiment. He picked out a difficult mathematical problem and > tried to solve it completely in the open, using his blog to post > ideas and partial progress. He issued an open invitation for > others to contribute their own ideas, hoping that many minds would > be more powerful than one. He dubbed the experiment the Polymath > Project. > > Description: [science]Alex Nabaum > > On an experimental blog, a far-flung group of mathematicians > cracked a tough problem in weeks. > > Several hours after Mr. Gowers opened up his blog for discussion, > a Canadian-Hungarian mathematician posted a comment. Fifteen > minutes later, an Arizona high-school math teacher chimed in. > Three minutes after that, the UCLA mathematician Terence Tao > commented. The discussion ignited, and in just six weeks, the > mathematical problem had been solved. > > Other challenges have followed, and though the polymaths haven't > found solutions every time, they have pioneered a new approach to > problem-solving. Their work is an example of the experiments in > networked science that are now being done to study everything from > galaxies to dinosaurs. > > These projects use online tools as cognitive tools to amplify our > collective intelligence. The tools are a way of connecting the > right people to the right problems at the right time, activating > what would otherwise be latent expertise. > > Networked science has the potential to speed up dramatically the > rate of discovery across all of science. We may well see the > day-to-day process of scientific research change more > fundamentally over the next few decades than over the past three > centuries. > > But there are major obstacles to realizing this goal. Though you > might think that scientists would aggressively adopt new tools for > discovery, they have been surprisingly inhibited. Ventures such as > the Polymath Project remain the exception, not the rule. > > Consider the idea of sharing scientific data online. The > best-known example of this is the human genome project, whose data > may be downloaded by anyone. When you read in the news that a > certain gene is associated with a particular disease, you're > almost certainly seeing a discovery made possible by the project's > open-data policy. > > Despite the value of open data, most labs make no systematic > effort to share data with other scientists. As one biologist told > me, he had been "sitting on [the] genome" for an entire species of > life for more than a year. A whole species of life! Just imagine > the vital discoveries that other scientists could have made if > that genome had been uploaded to an online database. > > Why don't scientists share? > > If you're a scientist applying for a job or a grant, the biggest > factor determining your success will be your record of scientific > publications. If that record is stellar, you'll do well. If not, > you'll have a problem. So you devote your working hours to tasks > that will lead to papers in scientific journals. > > Even if you personally think it would be far better for science as > a whole if you carefully curated and shared your data online, that > is time away from your "real" work of writing papers. Except in a > few fields, sharing data is not something your peers will give you > credit for doing. > > There are other ways in which scientists are still backward in > using online tools. Consider, for example, the open scientific > wikis launched by a few brave pioneers in fields like quantum > computing, string theory and genetics (a wiki allows the sharing > and collaborative editing of an interlinked body of information, > the best-known example being Wikipedia). > > Specialized wikis could serve as up-to-date reference works on the > latest research in a field, like rapidly evolving super-textbooks. > They could include descriptions of major unsolved scientific > problems and serve as a tool to find solutions. > > But most such wikis have failed. They have the same problem as > data sharing: Even if scientists believe in the value of > contributing, they know that writing a single mediocre paper will > do far more for their careers. The incentives are all wrong. > > If networked science is to reach its potential, scientists will > have to embrace and reward the open sharing of all forms of > scientific knowledge, not just traditional journal publication. > Networked science must be open science. But how to get there? > > A good start would be for government grant agencies (like the > National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation) > to work with scientists to develop requirements for the open > sharing of knowledge that is discovered with public support. Such > policies have already helped to create open data sets like the one > for the human genome. But they should be extended to require > earlier and broader sharing. Grant agencies also should do more to > encourage scientists to submit new kinds of evidence of their > impact in their fields?not just papers!?as part of their > applications for funding. > > The scientific community itself needs to have an energetic, > ongoing conversation about the value of these new tools. We have > to overthrow the idea that it's a diversion from "real" work when > scientists conduct high-quality research in the open. Publicly > funded science should be open science. > > Improving the way that science is done means speeding us along in > curing cancer, solving the problem of climate change and launching > humanity permanently into space. It means fundamental insights > into the human condition, into how the universe works and what > it's made of. It means discoveries not yet dreamt of. > > In the years ahead, we have an astonishing opportunity to reinvent > discovery itself. But to do so, we must first choose to create a > scientific culture that embraces the open sharing of knowledge. > > ?Mr. Nielsen is a pioneer in the field of quantum computing and > the author of "Reinventing Discovery: The New Era of Networked > Science," from which this is adapted. > > Copyright 2011 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From notsjb at LSU.EDU Wed Nov 2 10:18:59 2011 From: notsjb at LSU.EDU (Stephen J Bensman) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 09:18:59 -0500 Subject: Wikiscience In-Reply-To: <005b01cc994b$a578dc20$f06a9460$@derrick@cchs.csic.es> Message-ID: Thank you all for your kind responses to my latest missive. I have printed them off and filed them with my papers, so that I may incorporate the comments in our article. Taking all things together, I do think that we are on the verge of some sort of revolutionary breakthrough that is going to alter everything. Partly this is due to a number of sessions given by Wikipedia Ambassadors that I attended. As a result of these, I gained a lot more respect for Wikipedia and its methods. It may be pioneering a new way of creating knowledge. Using Harzing's Publish or Perish software to access Google Scholar data gives you new perspectives on old questions, and I do think that a lot of things are going to have to be rethought. The Wall Street Journal article is one indication that this is taking place. We all may be becoming mere cogs in knowledge machines. I wrote of review of Harzing's software for Scientometrics, and I am attaching it in case you want to read it for my considerations on the questions it raises. Stephen J Bensman LSU Libraries Lousiana State University Baton Rouge, LA 70803 USA From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Gemma Derrick Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 5:39 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] Wikiscience Hola de Espa?a Stephen, Thank you so much for this email and for sharing the results of you study with us. Although, I found it very interesting would like to point out something that may be of interest. You say that the Nobel Prize winners were usually ranked far down the authorship list and that this reflects how authorship position is not indicative of an authors importance. Whereas this would be extremely interesting if it were true, I thought that I should point out that in many scientific disciplines, chemistry included, there is a specific cultural practice surrounding authorship order. Authorship order is not always done by 'importance' nor is it done in order of contribution to the paper - with the author who contributed the most to the paper ranked first and so on and so forth until the last author is the one who contributed the least. Instead, chemistry included, usually the last author is the most senior member of the team. More often than not, the first author is the main contributor, but the last author may also be a major contributor but he is put last because he is usually the head of the laboratory (the most senior author). Since Nobel Prize winners, I can safely assume, are heads of large laboratories by the time their Nobel Prize is announced, this finding does not surprise me. I hope that this may help in the interpretation of your results. Authorship practice and the difference between fields is something that interests me greatly and I look forward to hearing more of your results. Sincerely, Gemma Dr Gemma Derrick PhD (ANU) | JAE Postdoctoral Research Fellow Institute of Public Goods and Policies | Centre for Human and Social Sciences | Spanish National Research Council C/-Albasanz, 26-28 | Madrid | Espana (Spain) | 28037 T +34 91 602 23 89 | M +34 650 697 832 | F +34 91 602 29 71 E gemma.derrick at cchs.csic.es | W www.ipp.csic.es De: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] En nombre de Stephen J Bensman Enviado el: Monday, 31 October 2011 6:50 PM Para: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Asunto: [SIGMETRICS] Wikiscience I have been using the Publish or Perish software, which was created by Anne-Wil Harzing, to study the h-index publications of the winners of the Nobel Prize in chemistry. These publications fulfilled the stipulation Garfield's law of concentration by all being articles published in the few elite journals highest in total cites. The median rank of these journals by total cites was 22. What struck me most about these publication was the amount of co-authorship of these articles and the fact that the winners of the Nobel prize most often were not the primary authors but ranked far down the authorship list. It struck me that breakthrough chemical research was highly collaborative and authorship position is not indicative of the author's importance. One of these papers had 22 co-authors, and the prize winner was last. It struck me that attributing citations to one author or another in certain fields is archaic as we are dealing with collectives or what I call "wikiscience." For this reason, I found the Wall Street Journal article below of extreme interest. It seems that, to evaluate a scientist's true importance, you must use something like Google Scholar, which can retrieve the scientist's works no matter what her/his authorship position. Harzing's Publish or Perish software can be downloaded for free from the following Web site: http://www.harzing.com/. Stephen J Bensman LSU Libraries Lousiana State University Baton Rouge, LA 70803 LIFE & CULTURE OCTOBER 29, 2011 The New Einsteins Will Be Scientists Who Share >From cancer to cosmology, researchers could race ahead by working together-online and in the open By MICHAEL NIELSEN In January 2009, a mathematician at Cambridge University named Tim Gowers decided to use his blog to run an unusual social experiment. He picked out a difficult mathematical problem and tried to solve it completely in the open, using his blog to post ideas and partial progress. He issued an open invitation for others to contribute their own ideas, hoping that many minds would be more powerful than one. He dubbed the experiment the Polymath Project. Alex Nabaum On an experimental blog, a far-flung group of mathematicians cracked a tough problem in weeks. Several hours after Mr. Gowers opened up his blog for discussion, a Canadian-Hungarian mathematician posted a comment. Fifteen minutes later, an Arizona high-school math teacher chimed in. Three minutes after that, the UCLA mathematician Terence Tao commented. The discussion ignited, and in just six weeks, the mathematical problem had been solved. Other challenges have followed, and though the polymaths haven't found solutions every time, they have pioneered a new approach to problem-solving. Their work is an example of the experiments in networked science that are now being done to study everything from galaxies to dinosaurs. These projects use online tools as cognitive tools to amplify our collective intelligence. The tools are a way of connecting the right people to the right problems at the right time, activating what would otherwise be latent expertise. Networked science has the potential to speed up dramatically the rate of discovery across all of science. We may well see the day-to-day process of scientific research change more fundamentally over the next few decades than over the past three centuries. But there are major obstacles to realizing this goal. Though you might think that scientists would aggressively adopt new tools for discovery, they have been surprisingly inhibited. Ventures such as the Polymath Project remain the exception, not the rule. Consider the idea of sharing scientific data online. The best-known example of this is the human genome project, whose data may be downloaded by anyone. When you read in the news that a certain gene is associated with a particular disease, you're almost certainly seeing a discovery made possible by the project's open-data policy. Despite the value of open data, most labs make no systematic effort to share data with other scientists. As one biologist told me, he had been "sitting on [the] genome" for an entire species of life for more than a year. A whole species of life! Just imagine the vital discoveries that other scientists could have made if that genome had been uploaded to an online database. Why don't scientists share? If you're a scientist applying for a job or a grant, the biggest factor determining your success will be your record of scientific publications. If that record is stellar, you'll do well. If not, you'll have a problem. So you devote your working hours to tasks that will lead to papers in scientific journals. Even if you personally think it would be far better for science as a whole if you carefully curated and shared your data online, that is time away from your "real" work of writing papers. Except in a few fields, sharing data is not something your peers will give you credit for doing. There are other ways in which scientists are still backward in using online tools. Consider, for example, the open scientific wikis launched by a few brave pioneers in fields like quantum computing, string theory and genetics (a wiki allows the sharing and collaborative editing of an interlinked body of information, the best-known example being Wikipedia). Specialized wikis could serve as up-to-date reference works on the latest research in a field, like rapidly evolving super-textbooks. They could include descriptions of major unsolved scientific problems and serve as a tool to find solutions. But most such wikis have failed. They have the same problem as data sharing: Even if scientists believe in the value of contributing, they know that writing a single mediocre paper will do far more for their careers. The incentives are all wrong. If networked science is to reach its potential, scientists will have to embrace and reward the open sharing of all forms of scientific knowledge, not just traditional journal publication. Networked science must be open science. But how to get there? A good start would be for government grant agencies (like the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation) to work with scientists to develop requirements for the open sharing of knowledge that is discovered with public support. Such policies have already helped to create open data sets like the one for the human genome. But they should be extended to require earlier and broader sharing. Grant agencies also should do more to encourage scientists to submit new kinds of evidence of their impact in their fields-not just papers!-as part of their applications for funding. The scientific community itself needs to have an energetic, ongoing conversation about the value of these new tools. We have to overthrow the idea that it's a diversion from "real" work when scientists conduct high-quality research in the open. Publicly funded science should be open science. Improving the way that science is done means speeding us along in curing cancer, solving the problem of climate change and launching humanity permanently into space. It means fundamental insights into the human condition, into how the universe works and what it's made of. It means discoveries not yet dreamt of. In the years ahead, we have an astonishing opportunity to reinvent discovery itself. But to do so, we must first choose to create a scientific culture that embraces the open sharing of knowledge. -Mr. Nielsen is a pioneer in the field of quantum computing and the author of "Reinventing Discovery: The New Era of Networked Science," from which this is adapted. Copyright 2011 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 2151 bytes Desc: image001.gif URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 41229 bytes Desc: image002.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: HarzingScientometrics.pdf Type: application/octet-stream Size: 97813 bytes Desc: HarzingScientometrics.pdf URL: From notsjb at LSU.EDU Wed Nov 2 10:58:53 2011 From: notsjb at LSU.EDU (Stephen J Bensman) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 09:58:53 -0500 Subject: PS : [SIGMETRICS] Wikiscience Message-ID: Gemma, In reference to your last sentence, the data is part of two companion papers being written here at LSU on Nobel prize winners in chemistry and economics as well as winners of the Fields Medal in mathematics. The authorship patterns of these fields will be compared. Due to the notorious inability of mathematicians to communicate with each other, I do not expect to find "wikimathematics," and I have my doubts about economics. But you never know what you are going to find with Google Scholar. Stephen J Bensman LSU Libraries Lousiana State University Baton Rouge, LA 70803 From: Stephen J Bensman Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 9:19 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: RE: [SIGMETRICS] Wikiscience Thank you all for your kind responses to my latest missive. I have printed them off and filed them with my papers, so that I may incorporate the comments in our article. Taking all things together, I do think that we are on the verge of some sort of revolutionary breakthrough that is going to alter everything. Partly this is due to a number of sessions given by Wikipedia Ambassadors that I attended. As a result of these, I gained a lot more respect for Wikipedia and its methods. It may be pioneering a new way of creating knowledge. Using Harzing's Publish or Perish software to access Google Scholar data gives you new perspectives on old questions, and I do think that a lot of things are going to have to be rethought. The Wall Street Journal article is one indication that this is taking place. We all may be becoming mere cogs in knowledge machines. I wrote of review of Harzing's software for Scientometrics, and I am attaching it in case you want to read it for my considerations on the questions it raises. Stephen J Bensman LSU Libraries Lousiana State University Baton Rouge, LA 70803 USA From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Gemma Derrick Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 5:39 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] Wikiscience Hola de Espa?a Stephen, Thank you so much for this email and for sharing the results of you study with us. Although, I found it very interesting would like to point out something that may be of interest. You say that the Nobel Prize winners were usually ranked far down the authorship list and that this reflects how authorship position is not indicative of an authors importance. Whereas this would be extremely interesting if it were true, I thought that I should point out that in many scientific disciplines, chemistry included, there is a specific cultural practice surrounding authorship order. Authorship order is not always done by 'importance' nor is it done in order of contribution to the paper - with the author who contributed the most to the paper ranked first and so on and so forth until the last author is the one who contributed the least. Instead, chemistry included, usually the last author is the most senior member of the team. More often than not, the first author is the main contributor, but the last author may also be a major contributor but he is put last because he is usually the head of the laboratory (the most senior author). Since Nobel Prize winners, I can safely assume, are heads of large laboratories by the time their Nobel Prize is announced, this finding does not surprise me. I hope that this may help in the interpretation of your results. Authorship practice and the difference between fields is something that interests me greatly and I look forward to hearing more of your results. Sincerely, Gemma Dr Gemma Derrick PhD (ANU) | JAE Postdoctoral Research Fellow Institute of Public Goods and Policies | Centre for Human and Social Sciences | Spanish National Research Council C/-Albasanz, 26-28 | Madrid | Espana (Spain) | 28037 T +34 91 602 23 89 | M +34 650 697 832 | F +34 91 602 29 71 E gemma.derrick at cchs.csic.es | W www.ipp.csic.es De: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] En nombre de Stephen J Bensman Enviado el: Monday, 31 October 2011 6:50 PM Para: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Asunto: [SIGMETRICS] Wikiscience I have been using the Publish or Perish software, which was created by Anne-Wil Harzing, to study the h-index publications of the winners of the Nobel Prize in chemistry. These publications fulfilled the stipulation Garfield's law of concentration by all being articles published in the few elite journals highest in total cites. The median rank of these journals by total cites was 22. What struck me most about these publication was the amount of co-authorship of these articles and the fact that the winners of the Nobel prize most often were not the primary authors but ranked far down the authorship list. It struck me that breakthrough chemical research was highly collaborative and authorship position is not indicative of the author's importance. One of these papers had 22 co-authors, and the prize winner was last. It struck me that attributing citations to one author or another in certain fields is archaic as we are dealing with collectives or what I call "wikiscience." For this reason, I found the Wall Street Journal article below of extreme interest. It seems that, to evaluate a scientist's true importance, you must use something like Google Scholar, which can retrieve the scientist's works no matter what her/his authorship position. Harzing's Publish or Perish software can be downloaded for free from the following Web site: http://www.harzing.com/. Stephen J Bensman LSU Libraries Lousiana State University Baton Rouge, LA 70803 LIFE & CULTURE OCTOBER 29, 2011 The New Einsteins Will Be Scientists Who Share >From cancer to cosmology, researchers could race ahead by working together-online and in the open By MICHAEL NIELSEN In January 2009, a mathematician at Cambridge University named Tim Gowers decided to use his blog to run an unusual social experiment. He picked out a difficult mathematical problem and tried to solve it completely in the open, using his blog to post ideas and partial progress. He issued an open invitation for others to contribute their own ideas, hoping that many minds would be more powerful than one. He dubbed the experiment the Polymath Project. Alex Nabaum On an experimental blog, a far-flung group of mathematicians cracked a tough problem in weeks. Several hours after Mr. Gowers opened up his blog for discussion, a Canadian-Hungarian mathematician posted a comment. Fifteen minutes later, an Arizona high-school math teacher chimed in. Three minutes after that, the UCLA mathematician Terence Tao commented. The discussion ignited, and in just six weeks, the mathematical problem had been solved. Other challenges have followed, and though the polymaths haven't found solutions every time, they have pioneered a new approach to problem-solving. Their work is an example of the experiments in networked science that are now being done to study everything from galaxies to dinosaurs. These projects use online tools as cognitive tools to amplify our collective intelligence. The tools are a way of connecting the right people to the right problems at the right time, activating what would otherwise be latent expertise. Networked science has the potential to speed up dramatically the rate of discovery across all of science. We may well see the day-to-day process of scientific research change more fundamentally over the next few decades than over the past three centuries. But there are major obstacles to realizing this goal. Though you might think that scientists would aggressively adopt new tools for discovery, they have been surprisingly inhibited. Ventures such as the Polymath Project remain the exception, not the rule. Consider the idea of sharing scientific data online. The best-known example of this is the human genome project, whose data may be downloaded by anyone. When you read in the news that a certain gene is associated with a particular disease, you're almost certainly seeing a discovery made possible by the project's open-data policy. Despite the value of open data, most labs make no systematic effort to share data with other scientists. As one biologist told me, he had been "sitting on [the] genome" for an entire species of life for more than a year. A whole species of life! Just imagine the vital discoveries that other scientists could have made if that genome had been uploaded to an online database. Why don't scientists share? If you're a scientist applying for a job or a grant, the biggest factor determining your success will be your record of scientific publications. If that record is stellar, you'll do well. If not, you'll have a problem. So you devote your working hours to tasks that will lead to papers in scientific journals. Even if you personally think it would be far better for science as a whole if you carefully curated and shared your data online, that is time away from your "real" work of writing papers. Except in a few fields, sharing data is not something your peers will give you credit for doing. There are other ways in which scientists are still backward in using online tools. Consider, for example, the open scientific wikis launched by a few brave pioneers in fields like quantum computing, string theory and genetics (a wiki allows the sharing and collaborative editing of an interlinked body of information, the best-known example being Wikipedia). Specialized wikis could serve as up-to-date reference works on the latest research in a field, like rapidly evolving super-textbooks. They could include descriptions of major unsolved scientific problems and serve as a tool to find solutions. But most such wikis have failed. They have the same problem as data sharing: Even if scientists believe in the value of contributing, they know that writing a single mediocre paper will do far more for their careers. The incentives are all wrong. If networked science is to reach its potential, scientists will have to embrace and reward the open sharing of all forms of scientific knowledge, not just traditional journal publication. Networked science must be open science. But how to get there? A good start would be for government grant agencies (like the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation) to work with scientists to develop requirements for the open sharing of knowledge that is discovered with public support. Such policies have already helped to create open data sets like the one for the human genome. But they should be extended to require earlier and broader sharing. Grant agencies also should do more to encourage scientists to submit new kinds of evidence of their impact in their fields-not just papers!-as part of their applications for funding. The scientific community itself needs to have an energetic, ongoing conversation about the value of these new tools. We have to overthrow the idea that it's a diversion from "real" work when scientists conduct high-quality research in the open. Publicly funded science should be open science. Improving the way that science is done means speeding us along in curing cancer, solving the problem of climate change and launching humanity permanently into space. It means fundamental insights into the human condition, into how the universe works and what it's made of. It means discoveries not yet dreamt of. In the years ahead, we have an astonishing opportunity to reinvent discovery itself. But to do so, we must first choose to create a scientific culture that embraces the open sharing of knowledge. -Mr. Nielsen is a pioneer in the field of quantum computing and the author of "Reinventing Discovery: The New Era of Networked Science," from which this is adapted. Copyright 2011 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 2151 bytes Desc: image001.gif URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 41229 bytes Desc: image002.jpg URL: From gemma.derrick at CCHS.CSIC.ES Wed Nov 2 11:04:33 2011 From: gemma.derrick at CCHS.CSIC.ES (Gemma Derrick) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 16:04:33 +0100 Subject: PS : [SIGMETRICS] Wikiscience In-Reply-To: <4928689828488E458AECE7AFDCB52CFE64D988@email003.lsu.edu> Message-ID: Good luck with everything Stephen. I?m looking forward to reading those papers. Please do keep me in the loop. Best wishes, Gemma Dr Gemma Derrick | JAE Postdoctoral Research Fellow Institute of Public Goods and Policies | Centre for Human and Social Sciences | Spanish National Research Council C/-Albasanz, 26-28 | Madrid | Espana (Spain) | 28037 T +34 91 602 23 89 | M +34 650 697 832 | F +34 91 602 29 71 E gemma.derrick at cchs.csic.es | W www.ipp.csic.es De: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] En nombre de Stephen J Bensman Enviado el: Wednesday, 2 November 2011 3:59 PM Para: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Asunto: [SIGMETRICS] PS : [SIGMETRICS] Wikiscience Gemma, In reference to your last sentence, the data is part of two companion papers being written here at LSU on Nobel prize winners in chemistry and economics as well as winners of the Fields Medal in mathematics. The authorship patterns of these fields will be compared. Due to the notorious inability of mathematicians to communicate with each other, I do not expect to find ?wikimathematics,? and I have my doubts about economics. But you never know what you are going to find with Google Scholar. Stephen J Bensman LSU Libraries Lousiana State University Baton Rouge, LA 70803 From: Stephen J Bensman Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 9:19 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: RE: [SIGMETRICS] Wikiscience Thank you all for your kind responses to my latest missive. I have printed them off and filed them with my papers, so that I may incorporate the comments in our article. Taking all things together, I do think that we are on the verge of some sort of revolutionary breakthrough that is going to alter everything. Partly this is due to a number of sessions given by Wikipedia Ambassadors that I attended. As a result of these, I gained a lot more respect for Wikipedia and its methods. It may be pioneering a new way of creating knowledge. Using Harzing?s Publish or Perish software to access Google Scholar data gives you new perspectives on old questions, and I do think that a lot of things are going to have to be rethought. The Wall Street Journal article is one indication that this is taking place. We all may be becoming mere cogs in knowledge machines. I wrote of review of Harzing?s software for Scientometrics, and I am attaching it in case you want to read it for my considerations on the questions it raises. Stephen J Bensman LSU Libraries Lousiana State University Baton Rouge, LA 70803 USA From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Gemma Derrick Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 5:39 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] Wikiscience Hola de Espa?a Stephen, Thank you so much for this email and for sharing the results of you study with us. Although, I found it very interesting would like to point out something that may be of interest. You say that the Nobel Prize winners were usually ranked far down the authorship list and that this reflects how authorship position is not indicative of an authors importance. Whereas this would be extremely interesting if it were true, I thought that I should point out that in many scientific disciplines, chemistry included, there is a specific cultural practice surrounding authorship order. Authorship order is not always done by ?importance? nor is it done in order of contribution to the paper ? with the author who contributed the most to the paper ranked first and so on and so forth until the last author is the one who contributed the least. Instead, chemistry included, usually the last author is the most senior member of the team. More often than not, the first author is the main contributor, but the last author may also be a major contributor but he is put last because he is usually the head of the laboratory (the most senior author). Since Nobel Prize winners, I can safely assume, are heads of large laboratories by the time their Nobel Prize is announced, this finding does not surprise me. I hope that this may help in the interpretation of your results. Authorship practice and the difference between fields is something that interests me greatly and I look forward to hearing more of your results. Sincerely, Gemma Dr Gemma Derrick PhD (ANU) | JAE Postdoctoral Research Fellow Institute of Public Goods and Policies | Centre for Human and Social Sciences | Spanish National Research Council C/-Albasanz, 26-28 | Madrid | Espana (Spain) | 28037 T +34 91 602 23 89 | M +34 650 697 832 | F +34 91 602 29 71 E gemma.derrick at cchs.csic.es | W www.ipp.csic.es De: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] En nombre de Stephen J Bensman Enviado el: Monday, 31 October 2011 6:50 PM Para: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Asunto: [SIGMETRICS] Wikiscience I have been using the Publish or Perish software, which was created by Anne-Wil Harzing, to study the h-index publications of the winners of the Nobel Prize in chemistry. These publications fulfilled the stipulation Garfield?s law of concentration by all being articles published in the few elite journals highest in total cites. The median rank of these journals by total cites was 22. What struck me most about these publication was the amount of co-authorship of these articles and the fact that the winners of the Nobel prize most often were not the primary authors but ranked far down the authorship list. It struck me that breakthrough chemical research was highly collaborative and authorship position is not indicative of the author?s importance. One of these papers had 22 co-authors, and the prize winner was last. It struck me that attributing citations to one author or another in certain fields is archaic as we are dealing with collectives or what I call ?wikiscience.? For this reason, I found the Wall Street Journal article below of extreme interest. It seems that, to evaluate a scientist?s true importance, you must use something like Google Scholar, which can retrieve the scientist?s works no matter what her/his authorship position. Harzing?s Publish or Perish software can be downloaded for free from the following Web site: http://www.harzing.com/. Stephen J Bensman LSU Libraries Lousiana State University Baton Rouge, LA 70803 Description: The Wall Street Journal LIFE & CULTURE OCTOBER 29, 2011 The New Einsteins Will Be Scientists Who Share >From cancer to cosmology, researchers could race ahead by working together?online and in the open By MICHAEL NIELSEN In January 2009, a mathematician at Cambridge University named Tim Gowers decided to use his blog to run an unusual social experiment. He picked out a difficult mathematical problem and tried to solve it completely in the open, using his blog to post ideas and partial progress. He issued an open invitation for others to contribute their own ideas, hoping that many minds would be more powerful than one. He dubbed the experiment the Polymath Project. Description: [science]Alex Nabaum On an experimental blog, a far-flung group of mathematicians cracked a tough problem in weeks. Several hours after Mr. Gowers opened up his blog for discussion, a Canadian-Hungarian mathematician posted a comment. Fifteen minutes later, an Arizona high-school math teacher chimed in. Three minutes after that, the UCLA mathematician Terence Tao commented. The discussion ignited, and in just six weeks, the mathematical problem had been solved. Other challenges have followed, and though the polymaths haven't found solutions every time, they have pioneered a new approach to problem-solving. Their work is an example of the experiments in networked science that are now being done to study everything from galaxies to dinosaurs. These projects use online tools as cognitive tools to amplify our collective intelligence. The tools are a way of connecting the right people to the right problems at the right time, activating what would otherwise be latent expertise. Networked science has the potential to speed up dramatically the rate of discovery across all of science. We may well see the day-to-day process of scientific research change more fundamentally over the next few decades than over the past three centuries. But there are major obstacles to realizing this goal. Though you might think that scientists would aggressively adopt new tools for discovery, they have been surprisingly inhibited. Ventures such as the Polymath Project remain the exception, not the rule. Consider the idea of sharing scientific data online. The best-known example of this is the human genome project, whose data may be downloaded by anyone. When you read in the news that a certain gene is associated with a particular disease, you're almost certainly seeing a discovery made possible by the project's open-data policy. Despite the value of open data, most labs make no systematic effort to share data with other scientists. As one biologist told me, he had been "sitting on [the] genome" for an entire species of life for more than a year. A whole species of life! Just imagine the vital discoveries that other scientists could have made if that genome had been uploaded to an online database. Why don't scientists share? If you're a scientist applying for a job or a grant, the biggest factor determining your success will be your record of scientific publications. If that record is stellar, you'll do well. If not, you'll have a problem. So you devote your working hours to tasks that will lead to papers in scientific journals. Even if you personally think it would be far better for science as a whole if you carefully curated and shared your data online, that is time away from your "real" work of writing papers. Except in a few fields, sharing data is not something your peers will give you credit for doing. There are other ways in which scientists are still backward in using online tools. Consider, for example, the open scientific wikis launched by a few brave pioneers in fields like quantum computing, string theory and genetics (a wiki allows the sharing and collaborative editing of an interlinked body of information, the best-known example being Wikipedia). Specialized wikis could serve as up-to-date reference works on the latest research in a field, like rapidly evolving super-textbooks. They could include descriptions of major unsolved scientific problems and serve as a tool to find solutions. But most such wikis have failed. They have the same problem as data sharing: Even if scientists believe in the value of contributing, they know that writing a single mediocre paper will do far more for their careers. The incentives are all wrong. If networked science is to reach its potential, scientists will have to embrace and reward the open sharing of all forms of scientific knowledge, not just traditional journal publication. Networked science must be open science. But how to get there? A good start would be for government grant agencies (like the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation) to work with scientists to develop requirements for the open sharing of knowledge that is discovered with public support. Such policies have already helped to create open data sets like the one for the human genome. But they should be extended to require earlier and broader sharing. Grant agencies also should do more to encourage scientists to submit new kinds of evidence of their impact in their fields?not just papers!?as part of their applications for funding. The scientific community itself needs to have an energetic, ongoing conversation about the value of these new tools. We have to overthrow the idea that it's a diversion from "real" work when scientists conduct high-quality research in the open. Publicly funded science should be open science. Improving the way that science is done means speeding us along in curing cancer, solving the problem of climate change and launching humanity permanently into space. It means fundamental insights into the human condition, into how the universe works and what it's made of. It means discoveries not yet dreamt of. In the years ahead, we have an astonishing opportunity to reinvent discovery itself. But to do so, we must first choose to create a scientific culture that embraces the open sharing of knowledge. ?Mr. Nielsen is a pioneer in the field of quantum computing and the author of "Reinventing Discovery: The New Era of Networked Science," from which this is adapted. Copyright 2011 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 2151 bytes Desc: image001.gif URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 41229 bytes Desc: image002.jpg URL: From Christina.Pikas at JHUAPL.EDU Wed Nov 2 13:01:56 2011 From: Christina.Pikas at JHUAPL.EDU (Pikas, Christina K.) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 13:01:56 -0400 Subject: PS : [SIGMETRICS] Wikiscience In-Reply-To: <4928689828488E458AECE7AFDCB52CFE64D988@email003.lsu.edu> Message-ID: Ah, but having read Michael Nielsen's book prior to publication I can say that one of his prime examples is "wikimath." Specifically, he points to the Polymath project. Articles published as a result of that work have used a sign-up sheet for contributors to add their names. Contributors include Fields Medal winners and other notable mathematicians. If I recall correctly, they did want to list the author as "Polymath" or something (like Bourbaki) but were required to list names by the rather traditional journals they submitted to. Also, I think if we want to see more of this type of collaboration using social media and what impact that has on more traditional journal articles, we need to look farther than Google Scholar as it is a less transparent (if free) version of a general research database. Some of the altmetrics efforts are a start (see, for example, http://total-impact.org/ , or Euan Adie's new ScienceDirect App, or ScienceCard.org) but the area deserves more attention. Christina ---- Christina K Pikas Librarian The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory Christina.Pikas at jhuapl.edu (240) 228 4812 (DC area) (443) 778 4812 (Baltimore area) From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at listserv.utk.edu] On Behalf Of Stephen J Bensman Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 10:59 AM To: SIGMETRICS at listserv.utk.edu Subject: [SIGMETRICS] PS : [SIGMETRICS] Wikiscience Gemma, In reference to your last sentence, the data is part of two companion papers being written here at LSU on Nobel prize winners in chemistry and economics as well as winners of the Fields Medal in mathematics. The authorship patterns of these fields will be compared. Due to the notorious inability of mathematicians to communicate with each other, I do not expect to find "wikimathematics," and I have my doubts about economics. But you never know what you are going to find with Google Scholar. Stephen J Bensman LSU Libraries Lousiana State University Baton Rouge, LA 70803 From: Stephen J Bensman Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 9:19 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: RE: [SIGMETRICS] Wikiscience Thank you all for your kind responses to my latest missive. I have printed them off and filed them with my papers, so that I may incorporate the comments in our article. Taking all things together, I do think that we are on the verge of some sort of revolutionary breakthrough that is going to alter everything. Partly this is due to a number of sessions given by Wikipedia Ambassadors that I attended. As a result of these, I gained a lot more respect for Wikipedia and its methods. It may be pioneering a new way of creating knowledge. Using Harzing's Publish or Perish software to access Google Scholar data gives you new perspectives on old questions, and I do think that a lot of things are going to have to be rethought. The Wall Street Journal article is one indication that this is taking place. We all may be becoming mere cogs in knowledge machines. I wrote of review of Harzing's software for Scientometrics, and I am attaching it in case you want to read it for my considerations on the questions it raises. Stephen J Bensman LSU Libraries Lousiana State University Baton Rouge, LA 70803 USA From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Gemma Derrick Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 5:39 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] Wikiscience Hola de Espa?a Stephen, Thank you so much for this email and for sharing the results of you study with us. Although, I found it very interesting would like to point out something that may be of interest. You say that the Nobel Prize winners were usually ranked far down the authorship list and that this reflects how authorship position is not indicative of an authors importance. Whereas this would be extremely interesting if it were true, I thought that I should point out that in many scientific disciplines, chemistry included, there is a specific cultural practice surrounding authorship order. Authorship order is not always done by 'importance' nor is it done in order of contribution to the paper - with the author who contributed the most to the paper ranked first and so on and so forth until the last author is the one who contributed the least. Instead, chemistry included, usually the last author is the most senior member of the team. More often than not, the first author is the main contributor, but the last author may also be a major contributor but he is put last because he is usually the head of the laboratory (the most senior author). Since Nobel Prize winners, I can safely assume, are heads of large laboratories by the time their Nobel Prize is announced, this finding does not surprise me. I hope that this may help in the interpretation of your results. Authorship practice and the difference between fields is something that interests me greatly and I look forward to hearing more of your results. Sincerely, Gemma Dr Gemma Derrick PhD (ANU) | JAE Postdoctoral Research Fellow Institute of Public Goods and Policies | Centre for Human and Social Sciences | Spanish National Research Council C/-Albasanz, 26-28 | Madrid | Espana (Spain) | 28037 T +34 91 602 23 89 | M +34 650 697 832 | F +34 91 602 29 71 E gemma.derrick at cchs.csic.es | W www.ipp.csic.es De: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] En nombre de Stephen J Bensman Enviado el: Monday, 31 October 2011 6:50 PM Para: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Asunto: [SIGMETRICS] Wikiscience I have been using the Publish or Perish software, which was created by Anne-Wil Harzing, to study the h-index publications of the winners of the Nobel Prize in chemistry. These publications fulfilled the stipulation Garfield's law of concentration by all being articles published in the few elite journals highest in total cites. The median rank of these journals by total cites was 22. What struck me most about these publication was the amount of co-authorship of these articles and the fact that the winners of the Nobel prize most often were not the primary authors but ranked far down the authorship list. It struck me that breakthrough chemical research was highly collaborative and authorship position is not indicative of the author's importance. One of these papers had 22 co-authors, and the prize winner was last. It struck me that attributing citations to one author or another in certain fields is archaic as we are dealing with collectives or what I call "wikiscience." For this reason, I found the Wall Street Journal article below of extreme interest. It seems that, to evaluate a scientist's true importance, you must use something like Google Scholar, which can retrieve the scientist's works no matter what her/his authorship position. Harzing's Publish or Perish software can be downloaded for free from the following Web site: http://www.harzing.com/. Stephen J Bensman LSU Libraries Lousiana State University Baton Rouge, LA 70803 [cid:image001.gif at 01CC995D.BA20C5E0] LIFE & CULTURE OCTOBER 29, 2011 The New Einsteins Will Be Scientists Who Share >From cancer to cosmology, researchers could race ahead by working together-online and in the open By MICHAEL NIELSEN In January 2009, a mathematician at Cambridge University named Tim Gowers decided to use his blog to run an unusual social experiment. He picked out a difficult mathematical problem and tried to solve it completely in the open, using his blog to post ideas and partial progress. He issued an open invitation for others to contribute their own ideas, hoping that many minds would be more powerful than one. He dubbed the experiment the Polymath Project. [cid:image002.jpg at 01CC995D.BA20C5E0]Alex Nabaum On an experimental blog, a far-flung group of mathematicians cracked a tough problem in weeks. Several hours after Mr. Gowers opened up his blog for discussion, a Canadian-Hungarian mathematician posted a comment. Fifteen minutes later, an Arizona high-school math teacher chimed in. Three minutes after that, the UCLA mathematician Terence Tao commented. The discussion ignited, and in just six weeks, the mathematical problem had been solved. Other challenges have followed, and though the polymaths haven't found solutions every time, they have pioneered a new approach to problem-solving. Their work is an example of the experiments in networked science that are now being done to study everything from galaxies to dinosaurs. These projects use online tools as cognitive tools to amplify our collective intelligence. The tools are a way of connecting the right people to the right problems at the right time, activating what would otherwise be latent expertise. Networked science has the potential to speed up dramatically the rate of discovery across all of science. We may well see the day-to-day process of scientific research change more fundamentally over the next few decades than over the past three centuries. But there are major obstacles to realizing this goal. Though you might think that scientists would aggressively adopt new tools for discovery, they have been surprisingly inhibited. Ventures such as the Polymath Project remain the exception, not the rule. Consider the idea of sharing scientific data online. The best-known example of this is the human genome project, whose data may be downloaded by anyone. When you read in the news that a certain gene is associated with a particular disease, you're almost certainly seeing a discovery made possible by the project's open-data policy. Despite the value of open data, most labs make no systematic effort to share data with other scientists. As one biologist told me, he had been "sitting on [the] genome" for an entire species of life for more than a year. A whole species of life! Just imagine the vital discoveries that other scientists could have made if that genome had been uploaded to an online database. Why don't scientists share? If you're a scientist applying for a job or a grant, the biggest factor determining your success will be your record of scientific publications. If that record is stellar, you'll do well. If not, you'll have a problem. So you devote your working hours to tasks that will lead to papers in scientific journals. Even if you personally think it would be far better for science as a whole if you carefully curated and shared your data online, that is time away from your "real" work of writing papers. Except in a few fields, sharing data is not something your peers will give you credit for doing. There are other ways in which scientists are still backward in using online tools. Consider, for example, the open scientific wikis launched by a few brave pioneers in fields like quantum computing, string theory and genetics (a wiki allows the sharing and collaborative editing of an interlinked body of information, the best-known example being Wikipedia). Specialized wikis could serve as up-to-date reference works on the latest research in a field, like rapidly evolving super-textbooks. They could include descriptions of major unsolved scientific problems and serve as a tool to find solutions. But most such wikis have failed. They have the same problem as data sharing: Even if scientists believe in the value of contributing, they know that writing a single mediocre paper will do far more for their careers. The incentives are all wrong. If networked science is to reach its potential, scientists will have to embrace and reward the open sharing of all forms of scientific knowledge, not just traditional journal publication. Networked science must be open science. But how to get there? A good start would be for government grant agencies (like the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation) to work with scientists to develop requirements for the open sharing of knowledge that is discovered with public support. Such policies have already helped to create open data sets like the one for the human genome. But they should be extended to require earlier and broader sharing. Grant agencies also should do more to encourage scientists to submit new kinds of evidence of their impact in their fields-not just papers!-as part of their applications for funding. The scientific community itself needs to have an energetic, ongoing conversation about the value of these new tools. We have to overthrow the idea that it's a diversion from "real" work when scientists conduct high-quality research in the open. Publicly funded science should be open science. Improving the way that science is done means speeding us along in curing cancer, solving the problem of climate change and launching humanity permanently into space. It means fundamental insights into the human condition, into how the universe works and what it's made of. It means discoveries not yet dreamt of. In the years ahead, we have an astonishing opportunity to reinvent discovery itself. But to do so, we must first choose to create a scientific culture that embraces the open sharing of knowledge. -Mr. Nielsen is a pioneer in the field of quantum computing and the author of "Reinventing Discovery: The New Era of Networked Science," from which this is adapted. Copyright 2011 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 2151 bytes Desc: image001.gif URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 41229 bytes Desc: image002.jpg URL: From notsjb at LSU.EDU Wed Nov 2 13:46:42 2011 From: notsjb at LSU.EDU (Stephen J Bensman) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 12:46:42 -0500 Subject: PS : [SIGMETRICS] Wikiscience Message-ID: Christina, You are right, and I was negligent on the point that one of the prime examples in the book was "wikimathematics." As a matter of local patriotism, here is what Larry Smolinsky, one of the LSU mathematicians working on the companion Fields Medalist paper, had to say about Tim Gowers: "One other thing - a point of trivia about the Wall Street Journal article. Tim Gowers spent a semester studying at LSU while he was a graduate student. His advisor, B?la Bollob?s, had a joint appointment at LSU and Cambridge for a number of years and would bring his students to LSU with him. Tim Gowers received a Fields medal in 1998." So a Fields Medalist is pioneering "wikiscience." We'll see what Larry digs up out of Google Scholar on the authorship structure of mathematics. One nice thing about Google Scholar-you can flash from the cited URL to the citing URL or from the cited pdf to the citing pdf in a whiffy. That is one reason I think that Google Scholar may become dominant-ease of movement around the literature at the desktop level. However, speaking as a catalog librarian, its primary fault is that it has no authority structure, making it almost impossible to do journal analyses and extremely difficult to deal with common names. The SCI has the latter fault also. Stephen J Bensman LSU Libraries Lousiana State University Baton Rouge, LA 70803 From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Pikas, Christina K. Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 12:02 PM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] PS : [SIGMETRICS] Wikiscience Ah, but having read Michael Nielsen's book prior to publication I can say that one of his prime examples is "wikimath." Specifically, he points to the Polymath project. Articles published as a result of that work have used a sign-up sheet for contributors to add their names. Contributors include Fields Medal winners and other notable mathematicians. If I recall correctly, they did want to list the author as "Polymath" or something (like Bourbaki) but were required to list names by the rather traditional journals they submitted to. Also, I think if we want to see more of this type of collaboration using social media and what impact that has on more traditional journal articles, we need to look farther than Google Scholar as it is a less transparent (if free) version of a general research database. Some of the altmetrics efforts are a start (see, for example, http://total-impact.org/ , or Euan Adie's new ScienceDirect App, or ScienceCard.org) but the area deserves more attention. Christina ---- Christina K Pikas Librarian The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory Christina.Pikas at jhuapl.edu (240) 228 4812 (DC area) (443) 778 4812 (Baltimore area) From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at listserv.utk.edu] On Behalf Of Stephen J Bensman Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 10:59 AM To: SIGMETRICS at listserv.utk.edu Subject: [SIGMETRICS] PS : [SIGMETRICS] Wikiscience Gemma, In reference to your last sentence, the data is part of two companion papers being written here at LSU on Nobel prize winners in chemistry and economics as well as winners of the Fields Medal in mathematics. The authorship patterns of these fields will be compared. Due to the notorious inability of mathematicians to communicate with each other, I do not expect to find "wikimathematics," and I have my doubts about economics. But you never know what you are going to find with Google Scholar. Stephen J Bensman LSU Libraries Lousiana State University Baton Rouge, LA 70803 From: Stephen J Bensman Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 9:19 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: RE: [SIGMETRICS] Wikiscience Thank you all for your kind responses to my latest missive. I have printed them off and filed them with my papers, so that I may incorporate the comments in our article. Taking all things together, I do think that we are on the verge of some sort of revolutionary breakthrough that is going to alter everything. Partly this is due to a number of sessions given by Wikipedia Ambassadors that I attended. As a result of these, I gained a lot more respect for Wikipedia and its methods. It may be pioneering a new way of creating knowledge. Using Harzing's Publish or Perish software to access Google Scholar data gives you new perspectives on old questions, and I do think that a lot of things are going to have to be rethought. The Wall Street Journal article is one indication that this is taking place. We all may be becoming mere cogs in knowledge machines. I wrote of review of Harzing's software for Scientometrics, and I am attaching it in case you want to read it for my considerations on the questions it raises. Stephen J Bensman LSU Libraries Lousiana State University Baton Rouge, LA 70803 USA From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Gemma Derrick Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 5:39 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] Wikiscience Hola de Espa?a Stephen, Thank you so much for this email and for sharing the results of you study with us. Although, I found it very interesting would like to point out something that may be of interest. You say that the Nobel Prize winners were usually ranked far down the authorship list and that this reflects how authorship position is not indicative of an authors importance. Whereas this would be extremely interesting if it were true, I thought that I should point out that in many scientific disciplines, chemistry included, there is a specific cultural practice surrounding authorship order. Authorship order is not always done by 'importance' nor is it done in order of contribution to the paper - with the author who contributed the most to the paper ranked first and so on and so forth until the last author is the one who contributed the least. Instead, chemistry included, usually the last author is the most senior member of the team. More often than not, the first author is the main contributor, but the last author may also be a major contributor but he is put last because he is usually the head of the laboratory (the most senior author). Since Nobel Prize winners, I can safely assume, are heads of large laboratories by the time their Nobel Prize is announced, this finding does not surprise me. I hope that this may help in the interpretation of your results. Authorship practice and the difference between fields is something that interests me greatly and I look forward to hearing more of your results. Sincerely, Gemma Dr Gemma Derrick PhD (ANU) | JAE Postdoctoral Research Fellow Institute of Public Goods and Policies | Centre for Human and Social Sciences | Spanish National Research Council C/-Albasanz, 26-28 | Madrid | Espana (Spain) | 28037 T +34 91 602 23 89 | M +34 650 697 832 | F +34 91 602 29 71 E gemma.derrick at cchs.csic.es | W www.ipp.csic.es De: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] En nombre de Stephen J Bensman Enviado el: Monday, 31 October 2011 6:50 PM Para: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Asunto: [SIGMETRICS] Wikiscience I have been using the Publish or Perish software, which was created by Anne-Wil Harzing, to study the h-index publications of the winners of the Nobel Prize in chemistry. These publications fulfilled the stipulation Garfield's law of concentration by all being articles published in the few elite journals highest in total cites. The median rank of these journals by total cites was 22. What struck me most about these publication was the amount of co-authorship of these articles and the fact that the winners of the Nobel prize most often were not the primary authors but ranked far down the authorship list. It struck me that breakthrough chemical research was highly collaborative and authorship position is not indicative of the author's importance. One of these papers had 22 co-authors, and the prize winner was last. It struck me that attributing citations to one author or another in certain fields is archaic as we are dealing with collectives or what I call "wikiscience." For this reason, I found the Wall Street Journal article below of extreme interest. It seems that, to evaluate a scientist's true importance, you must use something like Google Scholar, which can retrieve the scientist's works no matter what her/his authorship position. Harzing's Publish or Perish software can be downloaded for free from the following Web site: http://www.harzing.com/. Stephen J Bensman LSU Libraries Lousiana State University Baton Rouge, LA 70803 LIFE & CULTURE OCTOBER 29, 2011 The New Einsteins Will Be Scientists Who Share >From cancer to cosmology, researchers could race ahead by working together-online and in the open By MICHAEL NIELSEN In January 2009, a mathematician at Cambridge University named Tim Gowers decided to use his blog to run an unusual social experiment. He picked out a difficult mathematical problem and tried to solve it completely in the open, using his blog to post ideas and partial progress. He issued an open invitation for others to contribute their own ideas, hoping that many minds would be more powerful than one. He dubbed the experiment the Polymath Project. Alex Nabaum On an experimental blog, a far-flung group of mathematicians cracked a tough problem in weeks. Several hours after Mr. Gowers opened up his blog for discussion, a Canadian-Hungarian mathematician posted a comment. Fifteen minutes later, an Arizona high-school math teacher chimed in. Three minutes after that, the UCLA mathematician Terence Tao commented. The discussion ignited, and in just six weeks, the mathematical problem had been solved. Other challenges have followed, and though the polymaths haven't found solutions every time, they have pioneered a new approach to problem-solving. Their work is an example of the experiments in networked science that are now being done to study everything from galaxies to dinosaurs. These projects use online tools as cognitive tools to amplify our collective intelligence. The tools are a way of connecting the right people to the right problems at the right time, activating what would otherwise be latent expertise. Networked science has the potential to speed up dramatically the rate of discovery across all of science. We may well see the day-to-day process of scientific research change more fundamentally over the next few decades than over the past three centuries. But there are major obstacles to realizing this goal. Though you might think that scientists would aggressively adopt new tools for discovery, they have been surprisingly inhibited. Ventures such as the Polymath Project remain the exception, not the rule. Consider the idea of sharing scientific data online. The best-known example of this is the human genome project, whose data may be downloaded by anyone. When you read in the news that a certain gene is associated with a particular disease, you're almost certainly seeing a discovery made possible by the project's open-data policy. Despite the value of open data, most labs make no systematic effort to share data with other scientists. As one biologist told me, he had been "sitting on [the] genome" for an entire species of life for more than a year. A whole species of life! Just imagine the vital discoveries that other scientists could have made if that genome had been uploaded to an online database. Why don't scientists share? If you're a scientist applying for a job or a grant, the biggest factor determining your success will be your record of scientific publications. If that record is stellar, you'll do well. If not, you'll have a problem. So you devote your working hours to tasks that will lead to papers in scientific journals. Even if you personally think it would be far better for science as a whole if you carefully curated and shared your data online, that is time away from your "real" work of writing papers. Except in a few fields, sharing data is not something your peers will give you credit for doing. There are other ways in which scientists are still backward in using online tools. Consider, for example, the open scientific wikis launched by a few brave pioneers in fields like quantum computing, string theory and genetics (a wiki allows the sharing and collaborative editing of an interlinked body of information, the best-known example being Wikipedia). Specialized wikis could serve as up-to-date reference works on the latest research in a field, like rapidly evolving super-textbooks. They could include descriptions of major unsolved scientific problems and serve as a tool to find solutions. But most such wikis have failed. They have the same problem as data sharing: Even if scientists believe in the value of contributing, they know that writing a single mediocre paper will do far more for their careers. The incentives are all wrong. If networked science is to reach its potential, scientists will have to embrace and reward the open sharing of all forms of scientific knowledge, not just traditional journal publication. Networked science must be open science. But how to get there? A good start would be for government grant agencies (like the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation) to work with scientists to develop requirements for the open sharing of knowledge that is discovered with public support. Such policies have already helped to create open data sets like the one for the human genome. But they should be extended to require earlier and broader sharing. Grant agencies also should do more to encourage scientists to submit new kinds of evidence of their impact in their fields-not just papers!-as part of their applications for funding. The scientific community itself needs to have an energetic, ongoing conversation about the value of these new tools. We have to overthrow the idea that it's a diversion from "real" work when scientists conduct high-quality research in the open. Publicly funded science should be open science. Improving the way that science is done means speeding us along in curing cancer, solving the problem of climate change and launching humanity permanently into space. It means fundamental insights into the human condition, into how the universe works and what it's made of. It means discoveries not yet dreamt of. In the years ahead, we have an astonishing opportunity to reinvent discovery itself. But to do so, we must first choose to create a scientific culture that embraces the open sharing of knowledge. -Mr. Nielsen is a pioneer in the field of quantum computing and the author of "Reinventing Discovery: The New Era of Networked Science," from which this is adapted. Copyright 2011 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 2151 bytes Desc: image001.gif URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 41229 bytes Desc: image002.jpg URL: From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Thu Nov 3 13:55:44 2011 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 17:55:44 +0000 Subject: of possible interest to Sig Metrics readers Message-ID: *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000295953000006 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: What are we reading? A study of downloaded and cited articles from the British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery in 2010 Authors: Brennan, PA; Habib, A Author Full Names: Brennan, Peter A.; Habib, Ahmed Source: BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY 49 (7): 527-531 10.1016/j.bjoms.2011.05.010 OCT 2011 Language: English Document Type: Review Author Keywords: Online journal; Downloaded articles; Citation; Maxillofacial KeyWords Plus: SQUAMOUS-CELL CARCINOMA; TEMPOROMANDIBULAR-JOINT; MANAGEMENT; OSTEONECROSIS; JAWS; DISTRACTION; TOMOGRAPHY; GRANULOMA; THERAPY; MAXILLA Abstract: A large number of papers related to oral and maxillofacial surgery are published in many specialist journals. With the ever-increasing use of the internet it is easy to download them as part of a journal subscription on a fee per paper basis, or in some cases for free. Online access to the British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (BJOMS) is free to British Association (BAOMS) members with a $30 fee per paper down:toad for non-members. Many colleagues use the online version of the journal, and this provides valuable information about downloading trends. Other data on articles that have been cited in subsequent publications are also readily available, and they form the basis for the calculation of a journal's *impact factor*. We evaluated the top 50 downloaded papers from the BJOMS website in 2010 to ascertain which articles were being read online. We also obtained data on the number of citations for papers published in 2009-2010 to see whether these papers were similar to the articles being downloaded. In 2010 there were over 360 000 downloaded articles. The most popular papers were leading articles, reviews, and full length articles; only one short communication featured in the top 50 downloads. The papers most cited in subsequent publications were full length articles and leading articles or reviews, which represent 80% of the total citations of the 50 papers. Ten papers were in both the top 50 downloaded and most cited lists. We discuss the implications of this study for the journal and our readers. (C) 2011 The British Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Reprint Address: Brennan, PA (reprint author), Queen Alexandra Hosp, Maxillofacial Unit, Portsmouth PO6 3LY, Hants, England Queen Alexandra Hosp, Maxillofacial Unit, Portsmouth PO6 3LY, Hants, England E-mail Address: peter.brennan at porthosp.nhs.uk Cited Reference Count: 91 Publisher: CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE, JOURNAL PRODUCTION DEPT, ROBERT STEVENSON HOUSE, 1-3 BAXTERS PLACE, LEITH WALK, EDINBURGH EH1 3AF, MIDLOTHIAN, SCOTLAND DOI: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2011.05.010 Subject Category: Dentistry, Oral Surgery & Medicine; Surgery Unique ID: WOS:000295953000006 Cited References Abdel-Galil K, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P438 Spencer HR, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P544 Gartshore L, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P173 Demarosi F, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P535 Kanatas AN, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P579 Cousin GCS, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P521 Brennan PA, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P167 Gerber B, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P374 Kerawala CJ, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P633 Ribeiro ACP, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P95 Al-Qamachi LH, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P37 Rogers SN, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P598 Lauer G, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P532 Avery CME, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P245 Shekar K, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P594 Hamadah O, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P503 Samant S, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P417 Feng ZH, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P105 Rees J, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P52 Sidebottorn AJ, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P91 Mourouzis C, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P345 Gealh WC, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P23 Rehman KU, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P403 Chapireau D, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P338 HO MW, 2010, BR J ORAL MAXILL OCT, Heliotis M, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P511 Speculand B, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P37 Lizio G, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P455 Gosse EM, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P40 Pearce CS, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P530 Lerouxel E, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P602 Eggers G, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P450 McLeod NMH, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P301 Rauso R, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P356 Brown J, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P331 VOSS R, 2010, BR J ORAL MAXILLOFAC, V48, P121 McMahon J, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P84 Zhang SY, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P389 Yu HB, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P200 de Lang J, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P59 DING Y, 2009, BR J ORAL MAXILLOFAC, V47, P11 MAURER P, 2001, BR J ORAL MAXILLOFAC, V48, P100 Sun YY, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P393 Lyons A, 2008, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V46, P653 Drage NA, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P65 Manemi RV, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P159 Oeppen RS, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P412 Shaw RJ, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P5 Alkan A, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P310 Markose G, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P294 Abdel-Galil K, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P520 Ilankovan V, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P493 Williams RW, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P56 Kretschmer WB, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P446 Perdijk FBT, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P31 Kruse A, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P302 Laverick S, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P196 Carvalho ACGD, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P153 Goodson ML, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P507 BRENNAN PA, 2010, BR J ORAL MAXILLOFAC, V48, P411 Tan NCW, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P135 Ferretti C, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P536 Zhang J, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P549 Gao Z, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P116 MCLEOD NM, 2010, BR J ORAL MAXILL SEP, Avery CME, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P253 Gallego L, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P67 Godden D, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P575 PATEL V, 2010, BR J ORAL MAXILL JUN, Taylor KH, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P221 Fu KY, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P281 Nakano H, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P222 Ozawa N, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P622 Liu FY, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P291 Abdel-Galil K, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P351 Sethi A, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P572 Bisase B, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P352 Cunningham SJ, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P274 Ferlito A, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P5 Prado FO, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P555 Speight PM, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P587 Saravana GHL, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P318 Ferreira EJ, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P218 Pinto ASR, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P323 Hameed H, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P643 Rustemeyer J, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P271 Pilling E, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P527 Abdel-Galil K, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P397 Rogers SN, 2010, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V48, P498 Brosnam T, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P186 Niu XG, 2009, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, V47, P106 =========================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000295265100032 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Characterizing and Modeling Citation Dynamics Authors: Eom, YH; Fortunato, S Author Full Names: Eom, Young-Ho; Fortunato, Santo Source: this is an Open Access journal PLOS ONE 6 (9): 10.1371/journal.pone.0024926 SEP 22 2011 Language: English Document Type: Article KeyWords Plus: PREFERENTIAL ATTACHMENT; SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATION; RANDOM NETWORKS; DISTRIBUTIONS; COMPETITION; EVOLUTION; SCIENCE; IMPACT; TAILS Abstract: Citation distributions are crucial for the analysis and modeling of the activity of scientists. We investigated bibliometric data of papers published in journals of the American Physical Society, searching for the type of function which best describes the observed citation distributions. We used the goodness of fit with Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistics for three classes of functions: log-normal, simple power law and shifted power law. The shifted power law turns out to be the most reliable hypothesis for all citation networks we derived, which correspond to different time spans. We find that citation dynamics is characterized by bursts, usually occurring within a few years since publication of a paper, and the burst size spans several orders of magnitude. We also investigated the microscopic mechanisms for the evolution of citation networks, by proposing a linear preferential attachment with time dependent initial attractiveness. The model successfully reproduces the empirical ! citation distributions and accounts for the presence of citation bursts as well. Reprint Address: Eom, YH (reprint author), Inst Sci Interchange, Complex Networks & Syst Lagrange Lab, Turin, Italy Inst Sci Interchange, Complex Networks & Syst Lagrange Lab, Turin, Italy E-mail Address: fortunato at isi.it Funding Acknowledgement: European Commission[238597] Funding Text: This work was supported by the ICTeCollective, FET-Open grant number 238597 of the European Commission. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Cited Reference Count: 40 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE, 185 BERRY ST, STE 1300, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94107 USA ISSN: 1932-6203 Article Number: e24926 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0024926 Unique ID: WOS:000295265100032 Cited References Eom YH, 2008, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V77, GARFIELD E, 1979, CITATION INDEXING IT, Vazquez A, 2006, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V73, Ratkiewicz J, 2010, PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS, V105, KRYSSANOV VV, 2007, ARXIVCS0703115, Dorogovtsev SN, 2000, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V62, P1842 Jeong H, 2003, EUROPHYSICS LETTERS, V61, P567 PRICE DJD, 1975, SCI BABYLON, Dorogovtsev SN, 2001, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V63, SIMON HA, 1957, MODELS MAN SOCIAL RA, Dorogovtsev SN, 2000, PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS, V85, P4633 Barabasi AL, 1999, SCIENCE, V286, P509 Perc M, 2010, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V4, P358 VAZQUEZ A, 2001, ARXIVCONDMAT0105031, SEGLEN PO, 1992, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V43, P628 Wallace ML, 2009, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V3, P296 Vazquez A, 2005, PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS, V95, Stringer MJ, 2008, PLOS ONE, V3, Rodriguez-Navarro A, 2011, PLOS ONE, V6, Hajra KB, 2005, PHYSICA A-STATISTICAL MECHANICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS, V346, P44 GARFIELD E, 1955, SCIENCE, V122, P108 Wang MY, 2008, PHYSICA A-STATISTICAL MECHANICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS, V387, P4692 Yule GU, 1925, PHILOSOPHICAL TRANSACTIONS OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF LONDON SERIES B-CONTAINING PAPERS OF A BIOLOGICAL CHARACTER, V213, P21 van Raan AFJ, 2001, PHYSICA A, V298, P530 van Raan AFJ, 2001, SCIENTOMETRICS, V51, P347 Hajra KB, 2004, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V70, Zhu H, 2003, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V68, Tsallis C, 2000, EUROPEAN PHYSICAL JOURNAL B, V13, P777 Laherrere J, 1998, EUROPEAN PHYSICAL JOURNAL B, V2, P525 PRICE DJD, 1965, SCIENCE, V149, P510 Radicchi F, 2008, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V105, P17268 Redner S, 1998, EUROPEAN PHYSICAL JOURNAL B, V4, P131 Lehmann S, 2003, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V68, Clauset A, 2009, SIAM REVIEW, V51, P661 Bommarito MJ, 2010, PHYSICA A-STATISTICAL MECHANICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS, V389, P4195 Anastasiadis AD, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V83, P205 Redner S, 2005, PHYSICS TODAY, V58, P49 Barabasi AL, 2005, NATURE, V435, P207 Krapivsky PL, 2000, PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS, V85, P4629 PRICE DJD, 1976, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V27, P292 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000295438700003 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Correlation between Download and Citation and Download-citation Deviation Phenomenon for Some Papers in Chinese Medical Journals Authors: Liu, XL; Fang, HL; Wang, MY Author Full Names: Liu Xue-li; Fang Hong-ling; Wang Mei-ying Source: SERIALS REVIEW 37 (3): 157-161 10.1016/j.serrev.2011.02.001 SEP 2011 Language: English Document Type: Article KeyWords Plus: IMPACT FACTOR; OPEN ACCESS; METRICS; NUMBER Abstract: The authors collected the numbers of citations and downloads from 2005 to 2009 of papers in five Chinese general ophthalmological journals: Recent Advances in Ophthalmology, Chinese Ophthalmic Research, Ophthalmology in China, Journal of Clinical Ophthalmology and Chinese Journal of Practical Ophthalmology, published in 2005 from the Chinese Academic Journals Full-text Database and the Chinese Citation Database in Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) to determine the correlation between download and citation and the peak time of download frequency (OF). The citations from 2000 to 2009 of papers published in 2000 were collected to determine the peak time of citation frequency (CF) of medical papers. There is a highly positive correlation between OF and CF (r = 4.91, P = 0.000). Serials Review 2011; 37:157-161. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Reprint Address: Xinxiang Med Univ, Henan Res Ctr Sci Journals, Xinxiang 453003, Henan Province, Peoples R China Xinxiang Med Univ, Henan Res Ctr Sci Journals, Xinxiang 453003, Henan Province, Peoples R ChinaXinxiang Med Univ, Sch Management Sci, Xinxiang 453003, Henan Province, Peoples R China E-mail Address: liueditor at l63.com, fanghongling at xxmu.edu.cn, mywang1114 at 163.com Cited Reference Count: 27 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: ELSEVIER INC, 525 B STREET, STE 1900, SAN DIEGO, CA 92101-4495 USA ISSN: 0098-7913 DOI: 10.1016/j.serrev.2011.02.001 Subject Category: Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: 827OV Unique ID: WOS:000295438700003 Cited References HARNAD S, 2004, BRIT MED J RAPID SEP, HOLDEN G, 2006, MEDSCAPE GEN MED, V8, P21 ZHU Q, 2008, GUIDE CORE J CHINA, P61 Bollen J, 2005, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V41, P1419 WANG X, 2004, CHINESE J MICROSURGE, V27, P238 SUN YL, 2009, CHINESE J SCI TECHNI, V20, P146 GARFIELD E, 1955, SCIENCE, V122, P108 Wan JK, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V82, P555 QU QH, 2008, CHINESE J SCI TECHNI, V19, P984 Craig ID, 2007, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V1, P239 O'Leary DE, 2008, DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS, V45, P972 OLEARY D, 2008, INT J ACCOUNTING INF, V9, P61 TIAN DF, 2009, MODERN INFORM, V29, P20 LIU XL, 2010, CHINESE J SCI TECHNI, V21, P459 Garfield E, 2006, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V295, P90 Liu XL, 2010, LEARNED PUBLISHING, V23, P93 GUAN WP, 2009, CHINESE J SCI TECHNI, V20, P90 GARFIELD E, 1992, SCI PUBL POLICY, V19, P327 Brody T, 2006, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V57, P1060 Zavos C, 2008, MEDICAL HYPOTHESES, V70, P460 Smith R, 2006, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, V35, P1129 SAMAD J, 2007, MED HYPOTHESES, V69, P458 SHEN S, 2009, INFORM RES AUG, P7 Bollen J, 2008, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V59, P136 ZHU X, 2004, HIGHER ED SCI, P1 DIAMOND AM, 1986, JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCES, V21, P200 Harnad S, 2008, SERIALS REVIEW, V34, P36 ======================================================================= ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000295438700005 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Journal Self-citation Analysis of Some Chinese Sci-tech Periodicals Authors: Xia, XD; Wu, YW Author Full Names: Xia Xiao-dong; Wu Ya-wen Source: SERIALS REVIEW 37 (3): 171-173 10.1016/j.serrev.2011.02.002 SEP 2011 Language: English Document Type: Article KeyWords Plus: IMPACT FACTOR; PAGERANK; INDEX Abstract: This study investigates self-citation rates of 222 Chinese journals within seven groups including 76 journals of agronomy (34.2 percent), 57 of biology (25.7 percent), 28 of environmental science and technology (12.6 percent), 15 of forestry (6.8 percent), 24 of academic journals of agricultural university (10.8 percent), 9 of aquatic sciences (4.1 percent), and 13 of animal husbandry and veterinary medicine (5.9 percent). The average self-citation rates range from 2 percent to 67 percent in 2006, 1 percent to 68 percent in 2007 and 0 percent to 67 percent in 2008. There is a significant difference in self-citation rate between most groups of journals. The self-citation rate is positively and significantly correlated with the self-citation rate in 2006 for all 222 journals (N = 222, R(2) = 0.194, P = 0.004) (P<0.05). However, the self-citation rate is not significantly correlated with the journal's *impact factor* in 2007 (N = 222, R(2) = 0.114, P = 0.091) and 2008 (N = 222,! R(2) = 0.112, P = 0.096) (P<0.05) for the 222 journals. The relationship between self-citation rate and journal *impact factor* is discussed. Serials Review 2011; 37:171-173. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Reprint Address: China Natl Rice Res Inst, Editorial Off, Hangzhou 310006, Zhejiang, Peoples R China China Natl Rice Res Inst, Editorial Off, Hangzhou 310006, Zhejiang, Peoples R China E-mail Address: Xiaxd505 at sohu.com, cjrs278 at gmail.com Cited Reference Count: 18 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: ELSEVIER INC, 525 B STREET, STE 1900, SAN DIEGO, CA 92101-4495 USA ISSN: 0098-7913 DOI: 10.1016/j.serrev.2011.02.002 Subject Category: Information Science & Library Science Unique ID: WOS:000295438700005 Cited References Kurmis AP, 2003, JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, V85A, P2449 Dellavalle RP, 2007, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF DERMATOLOGY, V57, P116 Liu XL, 2010, LEARNED PUBLISHING, V23, P93 Chen P, 2007, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V1, P8 Garfield E, 2006, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V295, P90 PINSKI G, 1976, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V12, P297 Golubic R, 2008, SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS, V14, P41 Miller JB, 2002, SCIENTIST, V16, P11 Adam D, 2002, NATURE, V415, P726 BIHUI J, 2007, CHINESE SCI BULL, V52, P855 Bollen J, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P669 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Neuberger J, 2002, EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY, V14, P209 Egghe L, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P131 Opthof T, 1997, CARDIOVASCULAR RESEARCH, V33, P1 Sevinc A, 2004, SWISS MEDICAL WEEKLY, V134, P410 JENNINGS C, 1998, NAT NEUROSCI, V1, P641 Hobbs R, 2007, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V334, P569 ======================================================================= ======================================================================= . Search terms matched: IMPACT FACTOR(1); INDEX(1); INDIVIDUAL(1); OUTPUT(1); RESEARCH(1) *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000295804100029 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: How honest is the h-*index* in measuring *individual* *research* *output*? Authors: Patro, BK; Aggarwal, AK Author Full Names: Patro, B. K.; Aggarwal, A. K. Source: JOURNAL OF POSTGRADUATE MEDICINE 57 (3): 264-265 10.4103/0022-3859.85233 JUL-SEP 2011 Language: English Document Type: Letter KeyWords Plus: IMPACT FACTOR Reprint Address: Patro, BK (reprint author), PGIMER, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Community Med, Chandigarh, India PGIMER, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Community Med, Chandigarh, India E-mail Address: patrobinod at yahoo.co.in Cited Reference Count: 4 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: MEDKNOW PUBLICATIONS, B-9, KANARA BUSINESS CENTRE, OFF LINK RD, GHAKTOPAR-E, MUMBAI, 400075, INDIA ISSN: 0022-3859 DOI: 10.4103/0022-3859.85233 Subject Category: General & Internal Medicine IDS Number: 832KQ Unique ID: WOS:000295804100029 Cited References Garfield E, 2006, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V295, P90 Thompson DF, 2009, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICAL EDUCATION, V73, Seglen PO, 1997, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V314, P498 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000295521700002 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: A multilevel modelling approach *to* investigating the predictive validity of editorial decisions: do the editors of a high profile journal select manuscripts that are highly cited after publication? Authors: Bornmann, L; Mutz, R; Marx, W; Schier, H; Daniel, HD Author Full Names: Bornmann, Lutz; Mutz, Ruediger; Marx, Werner; Schier, Hermann; Daniel, Hans-Dieter Source: JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY SERIES A-STATISTICS IN SOCIETY 174 857-879 Part 4 10.1111/j.1467-985X.2011.00689.x 2011 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Chemistry; Editorial decisions; Multilevel modelling; Peer review; Predictive validity; Reference standard KeyWords Plus: ANGEWANDTE-CHEMIE; CITATION ANALYSIS; IMPACT FACTOR; SCIENTIFIC EXCELLENCE; RESEARCH PERFORMANCE; LONGITUDINAL DATA; INDICATORS; INDEX; DISTRIBUTIONS; UNIVERSALITY Abstract: Scientific journals must deal with the following questions concerning the predictive validity of editorial decisions. Is the best scientific work selected from submitted manuscripts? Does selection of the best manuscripts also mean selecting papers that after publication show top citation performance within their fields? Taking the journal Angewandte Chemie International Edition as an example, this study proposes a new methodology for investigating whether manuscripts that are most worthy of publication are in fact selected validly. First, the influence on citation of the accepted and rejected but then published elsewhere manuscripts was appraised on the basis of percentile impact classes scaled in a subfield of chemistry and, second, the association between the decisions on selection and the influence on citation of the manuscripts was determined by using a multilevel logistic regression for ordinal categories. This approach has many advantages over methodologies that were ! used in previous research studies on the predictive validity of editorial selection decisions. Reprint Address: Bornmann, L (reprint author), Max Planck Soc, Hofgartenstr 8, D-80539 Munich, Germany Max Planck Soc, D-80539 Munich, GermanyETH, Zurich, SwitzerlandMax Planck Inst Solid State Res, Stuttgart, GermanyUniv Zurich, CH-8006 Zurich, Switzerland E-mail Address: bornmann at gv.mpg.de Funding Acknowledgement: Max Planck Society (Munich, Germany) Funding Text: We thank Dr Peter Golitz, Editor-in-Chief of ACIE, the Editorial Board of Angewandte Chemie and the German Chemical Society for permission to conduct the evaluation of the peer review process of the journal and we express our thanks to the members of the editorial office for their generous support during the carrying out of the study. The entire research project, which is also investigating quality assurance at open access journals, is supported by the Max Planck Society (Munich, Germany). The authors express their gratitude to the reviewers, the Joint Editor and the Associate Editor for their helpful comments. Cited Reference Count: 85 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: WILEY-BLACKWELL, COMMERCE PLACE, 350 MAIN ST, MALDEN 02148, MA USA ISSN: 0964-1998 DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-985X.2011.00689.x Subject Category: Mathematical Methods In Social Sciences; Mathematics IDS Number: 828SA Unique ID: WOS:000295521700002 From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Thu Nov 3 14:05:21 2011 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 18:05:21 +0000 Subject: Of interest to Sig Metrics viewers Message-ID: 2 ========================== Start of Data ========================= TITLE: Comprehensive Citation Factor: A novel method in ranking medical journals (Article, English) AUTHOR: Wolthoff, A; Lee, Y; Ghohestani, RF SOURCE: EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY 21 (4). JUL-AUG 2011. p.495-500 JOHN LIBBEY EUROTEXT LTD, MONTROUGE SEARCH TERM(S): GARFIELD E rauth; JOURNALS item_title; CITATION item_title; CITATION* item_title; GARFIELD E JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC 295:90 2006; GARFIELD E CAN MED ASSOC J 161:979 1999 KEYWORDS: impact factor; comprehensive citation factor; citation KEYWORDS+: IMPACT FACTOR ABSTRACT: The Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) defines substantive articles as source items, which include only research and review (R&R) articles. This policy encourages some Journals to publish a significant number of original reports in the category of letters to the editor and reviews in the category of Editorials. Consequently, the Impact Factor (IF) fails to provide a fair comparison between medical journals. We introduce a new value, the Comprehensive Citation Factor (CCF), which would include in the denominator all original reports and review articles. We reassessed the 2007 ISI IF rankings of 39 dermatology journals using the CCF formula. Along with research and review articles, research letters, editorials and case reports were also included in the denominator value. The CCF was calculated for each journal and then compared with the IF provided by the ISI for 2007. The rank orders of 27/39 journals (69%) were altered by two or more places bi-directionally. Journals with a significant number of editorial and/or letters had a lower CCF. Only 4 of the 39 journals (10%) kept the same rank when evaluated with the new CCF formula. The CCF is a more accurate quantitative representation to use for individual journal comparison. This formula would encourage editors to publish more manuscripts as original or review articles, rather letters or editorials, and eliminate the need for the controversial subjective classification. AUTHOR ADDRESS: RF Ghohestani, Texas Inst Dermatol, 24165 W IH-10,Suite 102, San Antonio, TX 78257 USA -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Biblio-MetReS: A bibliometric network reconstruction application and server (Article, English) AUTHOR: Usie, A; Karathia, H; Teixido, I; Valls, J; Faus, X; Alves, R; Solsona, F SOURCE: BMC BIOINFORMATICS 12. OCT 5 2011. p.NIL_1-NIL_10 BIOMED CENTRAL LTD, LONDON This is an open access journal SEARCH TERM(S): BIBLIOMETR* item_title KEYWORDS+: FULL-TEXT ARTICLES; PROTEIN INTERACTIONS; INFORMATION EXTRACTION; BIOMEDICAL LITERATURE; BIOCREATIVE II.5; IDENTIFICATION; NORMALIZATION; CHALLENGE; BIOLOGY; SYSTEM ABSTRACT: Background: Reconstruction of genes and/or protein networks from automated analysis of the literature is one of the current targets of text mining in biomedical research. Some user-friendly tools already perform this analysis on precompiled databases of abstracts of scientific papers. Other tools allow expert users to elaborate and analyze the full content of a corpus of scientific documents. However, to our knowledge, no user friendly tool that simultaneously analyzes the latest set of scientific documents available on line and reconstructs the set of genes referenced in those documents is available. Results: This article presents such a tool, Biblio-MetReS, and compares its functioning and results to those of other user-friendly applications (iHOP, STRING) that are widely used. Under similar conditions, Biblio- MetReS creates networks that are comparable to those of other user friendly tools. Furthermore, analysis of full text documents provides more complete reconstructions than those that result from using only the abstract of the document. Conclusions: Literature-based automated network reconstruction is still far from providing complete reconstructions of molecular networks. However, its value as an auxiliary tool is high and it will increase as standards for reporting biological entities and relationships become more widely accepted and enforced. Biblio-MetReS is an application that can be downloaded from http://metres.udl.cat/. It provides an easy to use environment for researchers to reconstruct their networks of interest from an always up to date set of scientific documents. AUTHOR ADDRESS: R Alves, Univ Lleida, Dept Informat & Engn Ind, Av Jaume II 69, Lleida 25001, Spain -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Representation of chemical structures (Review, English) AUTHOR: Warr, WA SOURCE: WILEY INTERDISCIPLINARY REVIEWS-COMPUTATIONAL MOLECULAR SCIENCE 1 (4). JUL-AUG 2011. p.557-579 WILEY PERIODICALS, INC, MALDEN SEARCH TERM(S): GARFIELD E rauth; GARFIELD E J CHEM DOC 10:54 1970; GARFIELD E PURE APPL CHEM 49:1803 1977 KEYWORDS+: WISWESSER LINE NOTATION; WORLD-WIDE-WEB; PROTEIN DATA- BANK; 3-DIMENSIONAL MOLECULAR-STRUCTURES; CRYSTALLOGRAPHIC INFORMATION FILE; SUBSTANCE-RELATED STATISTICS; MARKUSH STRUCTURE STORAGE; COMPUTER-ASSISTED DESIGN; UNIVERSITY-OF-SHEFFIELD; IUPAC-COMPATIBLE NAMES ABSTRACT: At the root of applications for substructure and similarity searching, reaction retrieval, synthesis planning, drug discovery, and physicochemical property prediction is the need for a machine-readable representation of a structure. Systematic nomenclature is unsuitable, and notations and fragment codes have been superseded, except in certain specific applications. Connection tables are widely used, but there is no formal standard. Recently the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) International Chemical Identifier (InChI) has started to attract interest. This review also summarizes the representation of chemical reactions and three-dimensional structures. (C) 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. WIREs Comput Mol Sci 2011 1 557-579 DOI:10.1002/wcms.36 AUTHOR ADDRESS: WA Warr, Wendy Warr & Associates, Holmes Chapel, Cheshire, England -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: A Practitioner Handbook on Evaluation Preface (Editorial Material, English) AUTHOR: Stockmann, R SOURCE: PRACTITIONER HANDBOOK ON EVALUATION. 2011. p.IX-X,344-373 EDWARD ELGAR PUBLISHING LTD, CHELTENHAM SEARCH TERM(S): MERTON RK rauth; EDITORIAL doctype KEYWORDS+: PROGRAM EVALUATORS; COMPETENCES; PRESTIGE AUTHOR ADDRESS: R Stockmann, Univ Saarland, Ctr Evaluat CEval, Saarbrucken, Germany [ ]<-- Enter an X to order article (IDS: BTV17 00001) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Thu Nov 3 14:12:01 2011 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 18:12:01 +0000 Subject: Misc papers on scientometrics, etc Message-ID: -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Scholarly Productivity of United States Academic Cardiothoracic Anesthesiologists: Influence of Fellowship Accreditation and Transesophageal Echocardiographic Credentials on h-Index and Other Citation Bibliometrics (Article, English) AUTHOR: Pagel, PS; Hudetz, JA SOURCE: JOURNAL OF CARDIOTHORACIC AND VASCULAR ANESTHESIA 25 (5). OCT 2011. p.761-765 W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC, PHILADELPHIA SEARCH TERM(S): HIRSCH JE P NATL ACAD SCI USA 102:16569 2005; BIBLIOMETR* item_title; CITATION item_title; CITATION* item_title KEYWORDS: bibliometrics; cardiothoracic anesthesia; h-index; performance measures; scholarship KEYWORDS+: IMPACT; JOURNALS ABSTRACT: Objective: The h-index allows the evaluation of scholarly output in academics, but this bibliometric statistic has not been applied extensively to measure productivity in anesthesiology. The authors tested the hypothesis that the h-index is dependent on academic rank, American College of Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) accreditation of the training program, and National Board of Echocardiography credentials in perioperative transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) in United States academic cardiothoracic anesthesiologists. Design: Observational. Setting: Internet analysis. Participants: United States academic cardiothoracic anesthesiologists. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: Faculty members from 30 randomly selected fellowship programs with or without accreditation were identified using the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists web site. The status of each faculty member's credentials in perioperative TEE was defined using the "verify certification" function on the National Board of Echocardiography web site. Publications, citations, citations/publication, and the h-index for each faculty member were obtained using Scopus. Two hundred fifty-nine cardiothoracic anesthesiologists (204 men and 55 women) were identified (8 instructors [3%], 123 assistant professors [48%], 56 associate professors [22%], 63 professors [24%], and 9 chairpersons [3%]). The average cardiothoracic anesthesiologist had an h-index of 6 +/- 7 with 28 +/- 46 publications, 499 +/- 988 total citations, and 13 +/- 18 citations per publication. The h-index increased significantly (p < 0.05) among ranks (instructors [1 +/- 1], assistant professors [3 +/- 3], associate professors [7 +/- 5], professors [12 +/- 8], and chairpersons [18 +/- 13]). Significant differences in the number of publications and total citations also were observed among ranks. Differences in the h-index among ranks were observed regardless of program accreditation status or transesophageal echocardiographic credentials. Faculty members working in American College of Graduate Medical Education accredited programs had more publications and citations and higher h-indices than their counterparts in programs that were not accredited. Except for program directors, the scholarly output of academic cardiothoracic anesthesiologists with or without transesophageal echocardiographic credentials was similar within each academic rank. Conclusions: The results show that the h-index increases progressively with academic rank and is dependent on fellowship program accreditation status but not transesophageal echocardiographic credentials in United States academic cardiothoracic anesthesiologists. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. AUTHOR ADDRESS: PS Pagel, Clement J Zablocki Vet Affairs Med Ctr, Anesthesia Serv, 5000 W Natl Ave, Milwaukee, WI 53295 USA -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: FINANCIAL VALUE OF REPUTATION: EVIDENCE FROM THE eBAY AUCTIONS OF GMAIL INVITATIONS (Article, English) AUTHOR: Lei, Q SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS 59 (3). SEP 2011. p.422-456 WILEY-BLACKWELL, MALDEN SEARCH TERM(S): MERTON RK SCIENCE 159:56 1968; MERTON RK rauth KEYWORDS+: ELECTRONIC MARKETS; ADVERSE SELECTION; PRICE PREMIUMS; RESERVE PRICES; QUALITY; INTERNET; MECHANISM; INSIGHTS; MODEL; WINE ABSTRACT: In this article, I utilize a unique collection of auctions on eBay to study the influence of seller reputation on auction outcomes. In a market of homogeneous goods with non-enforceable contracts, I find that sellers who improve their reputation by one quintile from the lowest, experience a 6.2% higher probability of sale and a 6.1% hike in valuation after adjusting for truncation bias from failed auctions and explicitly controlling for unobservable seller heterogeneity. This study also shows that in addition to a dimension of reputation universal across different product markets, the product- specific dimension of reputation significantly affects the auction outcomes. AUTHOR ADDRESS: Q Lei, So Methodist Univ, Edwin L Cox Sch Business, Dept Finance, POB 750333, Dallas, TX 75275 USA -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Citation, Concretization, Transcription: Poetry Writing in the Age of Information-A Review of Marjorie Perloff's Unoriginal Genius: Poetry by Other Means in the New Century (Article, Chinese) AUTHOR: Fang, WK SOURCE: FOREIGN LITERATURE STUDIES 33 (4). AUG 2011. p.38-41 CENTRAL CHINA NORMAL UNIV, WUHAN SEARCH TERM(S): CITATION item_title; CITATION* item_title KEYWORDS: Marjorie Perloff; Unoriginal Genius: Poetry by Other Means in the New Century; concrete Poetry ABSTRACT: In her new work Unoriginal Genius: Poetry by Other Means in the New Century published in 2010 Marjorie Perloff traces the poetic tradition of unoriginality from paradigmatic works carefully and objectively, charts and summarizes different kinds of innovations and experiments in modern poetry generally, and shows us poetry by other means of great ingegnuity, wit, and complexity. Modern information techniques have changed the question of how one expresses oneself, so how already existing words and sentences are framed, recycled, approciated, cited, constrained, transcribed, copied, visualized and sounded has become new poetic strategies in the 20th and 21st centuries culture, which has changed the original content of "originality". AUTHOR ADDRESS: WK Fang, Jiangnan Univ, Foreign Language Coll, Wuxi 214122, Peoples R China -------------------------------------------------------------------------- From DOlivastro at PATENTBOARD.COM Fri Nov 4 11:33:47 2011 From: DOlivastro at PATENTBOARD.COM (Dominic Olivastro) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 11:33:47 -0400 Subject: Of interest to Sig Metrics viewers In-Reply-To: <1654640A36FE964C936514B2FD0B2CB406ED0C@EAGF-ERFPMBX42.ERF.thomson.com> Message-ID: All done, but two patents that you have for code 623136 are actually owned by codes 45964 (Verizon Labs, Inc) and 17144 (Intelligent Network services). These two patents were not moved. Dom |-----Original Message----- |From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics |[mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Eugene Garfield |Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2011 2:05 PM |To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU |Subject: [SIGMETRICS] Of interest to Sig Metrics viewers | |Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): |http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html | | | | | | | | 2 |========================== Start of Data ========================= | |TITLE: Comprehensive Citation Factor: A novel method in ranking | medical journals (Article, English) |AUTHOR: Wolthoff, A; Lee, Y; Ghohestani, RF |SOURCE: EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY 21 (4). JUL-AUG 2011. | p.495-500 JOHN LIBBEY EUROTEXT LTD, MONTROUGE | |SEARCH TERM(S): GARFIELD E rauth; JOURNALS item_title; | CITATION item_title; CITATION* item_title; | GARFIELD E JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC 295:90 |2006; | GARFIELD E CAN MED ASSOC J 161:979 1999 | |KEYWORDS: impact factor; comprehensive citation factor; citation |KEYWORDS+: IMPACT FACTOR | |ABSTRACT: The Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) defines |substantive articles as source items, which include only research and |review (R&R) articles. This policy encourages some Journals to publish a |significant number of original reports in the category of letters to the |editor and reviews in the category of Editorials. Consequently, the |Impact Factor (IF) fails to provide a fair comparison between medical |journals. We introduce a new value, the Comprehensive Citation Factor |(CCF), which would include in the denominator all original reports and |review articles. We reassessed the 2007 ISI IF rankings of 39 |dermatology journals using the CCF formula. Along with research and |review articles, research letters, editorials and case reports were also |included in the denominator value. The CCF was calculated for each |journal and then compared with the IF provided by the ISI for 2007. The |rank orders of |27/39 journals (69%) were altered by two or more places bi- |directionally. |Journals with a significant number of editorial and/or letters had a |lower CCF. Only 4 of the 39 journals (10%) kept the same rank when |evaluated with the new CCF formula. The CCF is a more accurate |quantitative representation to use for individual journal comparison. |This formula would encourage editors to publish more manuscripts as |original or review articles, rather letters or editorials, and eliminate |the need for the controversial subjective classification. | |AUTHOR ADDRESS: RF Ghohestani, Texas Inst Dermatol, 24165 W IH-10,Suite | 102, San Antonio, TX 78257 USA | | |------------------------------------------------------------------------ |-- | |------------------------------------------------------------------------ |-- |TITLE: Biblio-MetReS: A bibliometric network reconstruction | application and server (Article, English) |AUTHOR: Usie, A; Karathia, H; Teixido, I; Valls, J; Faus, X; | Alves, R; Solsona, F |SOURCE: BMC BIOINFORMATICS 12. OCT 5 2011. p.NIL_1-NIL_10 BIOMED | CENTRAL LTD, LONDON |This is an open access journal |SEARCH TERM(S): BIBLIOMETR* item_title | |KEYWORDS+: FULL-TEXT ARTICLES; PROTEIN INTERACTIONS; INFORMATION | EXTRACTION; BIOMEDICAL LITERATURE; BIOCREATIVE II.5; | IDENTIFICATION; NORMALIZATION; CHALLENGE; BIOLOGY; |SYSTEM | |ABSTRACT: Background: Reconstruction of genes and/or protein |networks from automated analysis of the literature is one of the current |targets of text mining in biomedical research. Some user-friendly tools |already perform this analysis on precompiled databases of abstracts of |scientific papers. Other tools allow expert users to elaborate and |analyze the full content of a corpus of scientific documents. However, |to our knowledge, no user friendly tool that simultaneously analyzes the |latest set of scientific documents available on line and reconstructs |the set of genes referenced in those documents is available. | |Results: This article presents such a tool, Biblio-MetReS, and compares |its functioning and results to those of other user-friendly applications |(iHOP, STRING) that are widely used. Under similar conditions, Biblio- |MetReS creates networks that are comparable to those of other user |friendly tools. Furthermore, analysis of full text documents provides |more complete reconstructions than those that result from using only the |abstract of the document. | |Conclusions: Literature-based automated network reconstruction is still |far from providing complete reconstructions of molecular networks. |However, its value as an auxiliary tool is high and it will increase as |standards for reporting biological entities and relationships become |more widely accepted and enforced. Biblio-MetReS is an application that |can be downloaded from http://metres.udl.cat/. It provides an easy to |use environment for researchers to reconstruct their networks of |interest from an always up to date set of scientific documents. | |AUTHOR ADDRESS: R Alves, Univ Lleida, Dept Informat & Engn Ind, Av Jaume |II | 69, Lleida 25001, Spain | | | | | | |------------------------------------------------------------------------ |-- |TITLE: Representation of chemical structures (Review, English) |AUTHOR: Warr, WA |SOURCE: WILEY INTERDISCIPLINARY REVIEWS-COMPUTATIONAL MOLECULAR | SCIENCE 1 (4). JUL-AUG 2011. p.557-579 WILEY | PERIODICALS, INC, MALDEN | |SEARCH TERM(S): GARFIELD E rauth; | GARFIELD E J CHEM DOC 10:54 |1970; | GARFIELD E PURE APPL CHEM 49:1803 1977 | |KEYWORDS+: WISWESSER LINE NOTATION; WORLD-WIDE-WEB; PROTEIN DATA- | BANK; 3-DIMENSIONAL MOLECULAR-STRUCTURES; | CRYSTALLOGRAPHIC INFORMATION FILE; SUBSTANCE-RELATED | STATISTICS; MARKUSH STRUCTURE STORAGE; COMPUTER-ASSISTED | DESIGN; UNIVERSITY-OF-SHEFFIELD; IUPAC-COMPATIBLE NAMES | |ABSTRACT: At the root of applications for substructure and |similarity searching, reaction retrieval, synthesis planning, drug |discovery, and physicochemical property prediction is the need for a |machine-readable representation of a structure. Systematic nomenclature |is unsuitable, and notations and fragment codes have been superseded, |except in certain specific applications. Connection tables are widely |used, but there is no formal standard. Recently the International Union |of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) International Chemical Identifier |(InChI) has started to attract interest. This review also summarizes the |representation of chemical reactions and three-dimensional structures. |(C) 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. WIREs Comput Mol Sci 2011 1 557-579 |DOI:10.1002/wcms.36 | |AUTHOR ADDRESS: WA Warr, Wendy Warr & Associates, Holmes Chapel, |Cheshire, | England | | |------------------------------------------------------------------------ |-- |TITLE: A Practitioner Handbook on Evaluation Preface (Editorial | Material, English) |AUTHOR: Stockmann, R |SOURCE: PRACTITIONER HANDBOOK ON EVALUATION. 2011. | p.IX-X,344-373 EDWARD ELGAR PUBLISHING LTD, CHELTENHAM | |SEARCH TERM(S): MERTON RK rauth; EDITORIAL doctype | |KEYWORDS+: PROGRAM EVALUATORS; COMPETENCES; PRESTIGE | |AUTHOR ADDRESS: R Stockmann, Univ Saarland, Ctr Evaluat CEval, |Saarbrucken, | Germany | |[ ]<-- Enter an X to order article (IDS: BTV17 00001) |------------------------------------------------------------------------ |-- | From DOlivastro at PATENTBOARD.COM Fri Nov 4 11:57:02 2011 From: DOlivastro at PATENTBOARD.COM (Dominic Olivastro) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 11:57:02 -0400 Subject: Of interest to Sig Metrics viewers In-Reply-To: <1654640A36FE964C936514B2FD0B2CB406ED0C@EAGF-ERFPMBX42.ERF.thomson.com> Message-ID: I very much apologize for sending out that last email to the sigmetrics group. I hit reply on the wrong email. Dom |-----Original Message----- |From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics |[mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Eugene Garfield |Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2011 2:05 PM |To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU |Subject: [SIGMETRICS] Of interest to Sig Metrics viewers | |Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): |http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html | | | | | | | | 2 |========================== Start of Data ========================= | |TITLE: Comprehensive Citation Factor: A novel method in ranking | medical journals (Article, English) |AUTHOR: Wolthoff, A; Lee, Y; Ghohestani, RF |SOURCE: EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY 21 (4). JUL-AUG 2011. | p.495-500 JOHN LIBBEY EUROTEXT LTD, MONTROUGE | |SEARCH TERM(S): GARFIELD E rauth; JOURNALS item_title; | CITATION item_title; CITATION* item_title; | GARFIELD E JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC 295:90 |2006; | GARFIELD E CAN MED ASSOC J 161:979 1999 | |KEYWORDS: impact factor; comprehensive citation factor; citation |KEYWORDS+: IMPACT FACTOR | |ABSTRACT: The Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) defines |substantive articles as source items, which include only research and |review (R&R) articles. This policy encourages some Journals to publish a |significant number of original reports in the category of letters to the |editor and reviews in the category of Editorials. Consequently, the |Impact Factor (IF) fails to provide a fair comparison between medical |journals. We introduce a new value, the Comprehensive Citation Factor |(CCF), which would include in the denominator all original reports and |review articles. We reassessed the 2007 ISI IF rankings of 39 |dermatology journals using the CCF formula. Along with research and |review articles, research letters, editorials and case reports were also |included in the denominator value. The CCF was calculated for each |journal and then compared with the IF provided by the ISI for 2007. The |rank orders of |27/39 journals (69%) were altered by two or more places bi- |directionally. |Journals with a significant number of editorial and/or letters had a |lower CCF. Only 4 of the 39 journals (10%) kept the same rank when |evaluated with the new CCF formula. The CCF is a more accurate |quantitative representation to use for individual journal comparison. |This formula would encourage editors to publish more manuscripts as |original or review articles, rather letters or editorials, and eliminate |the need for the controversial subjective classification. | |AUTHOR ADDRESS: RF Ghohestani, Texas Inst Dermatol, 24165 W IH-10,Suite | 102, San Antonio, TX 78257 USA | | |------------------------------------------------------------------------ |-- | |------------------------------------------------------------------------ |-- |TITLE: Biblio-MetReS: A bibliometric network reconstruction | application and server (Article, English) |AUTHOR: Usie, A; Karathia, H; Teixido, I; Valls, J; Faus, X; | Alves, R; Solsona, F |SOURCE: BMC BIOINFORMATICS 12. OCT 5 2011. p.NIL_1-NIL_10 BIOMED | CENTRAL LTD, LONDON |This is an open access journal |SEARCH TERM(S): BIBLIOMETR* item_title | |KEYWORDS+: FULL-TEXT ARTICLES; PROTEIN INTERACTIONS; INFORMATION | EXTRACTION; BIOMEDICAL LITERATURE; BIOCREATIVE II.5; | IDENTIFICATION; NORMALIZATION; CHALLENGE; BIOLOGY; |SYSTEM | |ABSTRACT: Background: Reconstruction of genes and/or protein |networks from automated analysis of the literature is one of the current |targets of text mining in biomedical research. Some user-friendly tools |already perform this analysis on precompiled databases of abstracts of |scientific papers. Other tools allow expert users to elaborate and |analyze the full content of a corpus of scientific documents. However, |to our knowledge, no user friendly tool that simultaneously analyzes the |latest set of scientific documents available on line and reconstructs |the set of genes referenced in those documents is available. | |Results: This article presents such a tool, Biblio-MetReS, and compares |its functioning and results to those of other user-friendly applications |(iHOP, STRING) that are widely used. Under similar conditions, Biblio- |MetReS creates networks that are comparable to those of other user |friendly tools. Furthermore, analysis of full text documents provides |more complete reconstructions than those that result from using only the |abstract of the document. | |Conclusions: Literature-based automated network reconstruction is still |far from providing complete reconstructions of molecular networks. |However, its value as an auxiliary tool is high and it will increase as |standards for reporting biological entities and relationships become |more widely accepted and enforced. Biblio-MetReS is an application that |can be downloaded from http://metres.udl.cat/. It provides an easy to |use environment for researchers to reconstruct their networks of |interest from an always up to date set of scientific documents. | |AUTHOR ADDRESS: R Alves, Univ Lleida, Dept Informat & Engn Ind, Av Jaume |II | 69, Lleida 25001, Spain | | | | | | |------------------------------------------------------------------------ |-- |TITLE: Representation of chemical structures (Review, English) |AUTHOR: Warr, WA |SOURCE: WILEY INTERDISCIPLINARY REVIEWS-COMPUTATIONAL MOLECULAR | SCIENCE 1 (4). JUL-AUG 2011. p.557-579 WILEY | PERIODICALS, INC, MALDEN | |SEARCH TERM(S): GARFIELD E rauth; | GARFIELD E J CHEM DOC 10:54 |1970; | GARFIELD E PURE APPL CHEM 49:1803 1977 | |KEYWORDS+: WISWESSER LINE NOTATION; WORLD-WIDE-WEB; PROTEIN DATA- | BANK; 3-DIMENSIONAL MOLECULAR-STRUCTURES; | CRYSTALLOGRAPHIC INFORMATION FILE; SUBSTANCE-RELATED | STATISTICS; MARKUSH STRUCTURE STORAGE; COMPUTER-ASSISTED | DESIGN; UNIVERSITY-OF-SHEFFIELD; IUPAC-COMPATIBLE NAMES | |ABSTRACT: At the root of applications for substructure and |similarity searching, reaction retrieval, synthesis planning, drug |discovery, and physicochemical property prediction is the need for a |machine-readable representation of a structure. Systematic nomenclature |is unsuitable, and notations and fragment codes have been superseded, |except in certain specific applications. Connection tables are widely |used, but there is no formal standard. Recently the International Union |of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) International Chemical Identifier |(InChI) has started to attract interest. This review also summarizes the |representation of chemical reactions and three-dimensional structures. |(C) 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. WIREs Comput Mol Sci 2011 1 557-579 |DOI:10.1002/wcms.36 | |AUTHOR ADDRESS: WA Warr, Wendy Warr & Associates, Holmes Chapel, |Cheshire, | England | | |------------------------------------------------------------------------ |-- |TITLE: A Practitioner Handbook on Evaluation Preface (Editorial | Material, English) |AUTHOR: Stockmann, R |SOURCE: PRACTITIONER HANDBOOK ON EVALUATION. 2011. | p.IX-X,344-373 EDWARD ELGAR PUBLISHING LTD, CHELTENHAM | |SEARCH TERM(S): MERTON RK rauth; EDITORIAL doctype | |KEYWORDS+: PROGRAM EVALUATORS; COMPETENCES; PRESTIGE | |AUTHOR ADDRESS: R Stockmann, Univ Saarland, Ctr Evaluat CEval, |Saarbrucken, | Germany | |[ ]<-- Enter an X to order article (IDS: BTV17 00001) |------------------------------------------------------------------------ |-- | From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Fri Nov 4 13:51:43 2011 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 17:51:43 +0000 Subject: Various papers of interest to SIG Metrics readers Message-ID: TITLE: Do discounted journal access programs help researchers in sub-Saharan Africa? A bibliometric analysis (Article, English) AUTHOR: Davis, PM SOURCE: LEARNED PUBLISHING 24 (4). OCT 2011. p.287-298 ASSOC LEARNED PROFESSIONAL SOC PUBL, W SUSSEX SEARCH TERM(S): MORAVCSIK MJ rauth; BIBLIOMETR* item_title; JOURNAL item_title KEYWORDS+: LOW-INCOME COUNTRIES; SCIENCE; IMPACT; CITATIONS; TEEAL; STRATEGIES; DATABASE; NATIONS; BIOLOGY; ONLINE ABSTRACT: Prior research has suggested that providing free and discounted access to the scientific literature to researchers in low- income countries increases article production and citation. Using traditional bibliometric indicators for institutions in sub-Saharan Africa, we analyze whether institutional access to TEEAL (a digital collection of journal articles in agriculture and allied subjects) increases: (i) article production; (ii) reference length; and (iii) number of citations to journals included in the TEEAL collection. Our analysis is based on nearly 20,000 articles containing half a million references published between 1988 and 2009 at 70 institutions in 11 African countries. We report that access to TEEAL does not appear to result in higher article production, although it does lead to longer reference lists (an additional 2.6 references per paper) and a greater frequency of citations to TEEAL journals (an additional 0.4 references per paper), compared to non-subscribing institutions. We discuss how traditional bibliometric indicators may not provide a full picture of the effectiveness of free and discounted literature programs. (C) Philip M. Davis 2011 AUTHOR ADDRESS: PM Davis, Cornell Univ, Dept Commun, Ithaca, NY 14853 USA -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: The extent of concentration in journal publishing (Article, English) AUTHOR: Didegah, F; Gazni, A SOURCE: LEARNED PUBLISHING 24 (4). OCT 2011. p.303-310 ASSOC LEARNED PROFESSIONAL SOC PUBL, W SUSSEX SEARCH TERM(S): JOURNAL item_title ABSTRACT: This study examines the extent of concentration in the journal publishing industry. A number of aspects are considered: publishers, journal impacts, countries, and languages. For journals indexed in JCR from 1997 to 2009, just 0.2% of publishers produce 50% of journals and articles, and 0.3% of publishers account for the top 50% of citations, impact factors and immediacy indices. More than a half of publishers in JCR are from four countries: USA, UK, Germany and Japan. In addition, more than a half of journals come from the USA and UK. Examining the publishers' interactions in terms of buying and selling journals shows the extent of change by acquisition, and the acquisition links between publishers. The findings confirm that the international market of journal publishing is essentially dominated by a few publishers. (C) Fereshteh Didegah and Ali Gazni 2011 AUTHOR ADDRESS: F Didegah, Wolverhampton Univ, Sch Technol, Res Inst Informat & Language Proc, Wolverhampton WV1 1LY, W Midlands, England -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: CELEBRATING 60 YEARS OF PUBLICATION OF THE BULLETIN OF MARINE SCIENCE: A BIBLIOMETRIC HISTORY (1951-2010) (Article, English) AUTHOR: Araujo, RJ; Shideler, G SOURCE: BULLETIN OF MARINE SCIENCE 87 (4). OCT 2011. p.707-726 ROSENSTIEL SCH MAR ATMOS SCI, MIAMI SEARCH TERM(S): BIBLIOMETR* item_title ABSTRACT: To commemorate the 60(th) anniversary of the Bulletin of Marine Science, we used a bibliometric approach to trace the history and present status of the journal. Our analysis included the 4303 papers and notes published from 1951 to 2010 and is based on data contained in the Thompson Reuters Web of Knowledge(SM) database, our in-house database, and miscellaneous online sources. The analysis revealed that through time, the publication has changed from a predominantly US-dominated journal to a more international outlet for science. Although current trends still rank the US at the top of most metrics (number of contributions, most authors, top institutions, top cities for online use, etc.), the journal has a strong international presence, with subscriptions in 46 countries, authors hailing from most geographical regions, and increasing numbers of emerging countries using our content and/or sending contributions to the journal. AUTHOR ADDRESS: RJ Araujo, Univ Miami, Rosenstiel Sch Marine & Atmospher Sci, Div Marine Biol & Fisheries, 4600 Rickenbacker Causeway, Miami, FL 33149 USA -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: SWEEPSTAKES REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS IN HIGHLY FECUND MARINE FISH AND SHELLFISH: A REVIEW AND COMMENTARY (Article, English) AUTHOR: Hedgecock, D; Pudovkin, AI SOURCE: BULLETIN OF MARINE SCIENCE 87 (4). OCT 2011. p.971-1002 ROSENSTIEL SCH MAR ATMOS SCI, MIAMI SEARCH TERM(S): GARFIELD E P ASIST ANNU 39:14 2002; GARFIELD E J AM SOC INF SCI TEC 54:400 2003 KEYWORDS+: EFFECTIVE POPULATION-SIZE; COD GADUS-MORHUA; TEMPORAL GENETIC-VARIATION; EEL ANGUILLA-ANGUILLA; URCHIN STRONGYLOCENTROTUS-PURPURATUS; SKEWED OFFSPRING DISTRIBUTION; MITOCHONDRIAL-DNA VARIATION; OYSTER CRASSOSTREA-GIGAS; NEW-ZEALAND SNAPPER; ADULT CENSUS SIZE ABSTRACT: Most marine animal species are very abundant, relatively long-lived, and late-maturing, with highly fecund adults adapted to spatially and temporally fluctuating ocean environments. Adults typically produce millions of small eggs that develop rapidly, without parental care, into planktonic larval stages that suffer high early mortality (Type III survivorship). Yet, large marine populations generally have only fractions of the genetic diversity expected from their sheer abundance, and despite widely dispersing larvae and geographically weakly structured adult populations, often show chaotic genetic heterogeneity on small spatial scales. These paradoxical observations can be explained by the hypothesis of Sweepstakes Reproductive Success (SRS), which posits extremely large variance in individual reproductive success, owing to sweepstakes-like chances of matching reproductive activity with oceanographic conditions conducive to gamete maturation, fertilization, larval development, settlement, and recruitment to the adult spawning population. The primary genetic consequence of SRS is reduction of N-e/N, the ratio of effective to actual population numbers, to a value usually much smaller than 0.01. Published nearly 30 yrs ago, SRS has gained traction, with numerous papers verifying specific predictions of the hypothesis in a broad array of marine animal taxa. Moreover, the hypothesis and empirical data from marine systems have stimulated modifications of coalescence population genetics theory, which can now account for low molecular diversity and chaotic patchiness. Here, we review the empirical and theoretical support for SRS, concluding that it plays a major role in shaping marine biodiversity, comment on issues related to hypothesis testing and data interpretation, and clarify some misconceptions. AUTHOR ADDRESS: D Hedgecock, Univ So Calif, Dept Biol Sci, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: The structure and evolution of business-to-business marketing: A citation and co-citation analysis (Article, English) AUTHOR: Backhaus, K; Lugger, K; Koch, M SOURCE: INDUSTRIAL MARKETING MANAGEMENT 40 (6 SP ISS). AUG 2011. p.940-951 ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC, NEW YORK SEARCH TERM(S): GARFIELD E rauth; SMALL H SCI STUD 4:17 1974; SMALL H J AM SOC INFORM SCI 24:265 1973; SMALL H SCIENTOMETRICS 2:277 1980; SMITH LC LIBR TRENDS 30:83 1981; WADE N SCIENCE 188:429 1975; WHITE HD J AM SOC INFORM SCI 32:163 1981; CITATION item_title; CITATION ANALYS* item_title; CITATION* item_title; CO CITATION* item_title; GARFIELD E SCIENTOMETRICS 1:359 1979 KEYWORDS: B2B marketing; Citation analysis; Author co-citation analysis; Intellectual development KEYWORDS+: BUYER-SELLER RELATIONSHIPS; INTELLECTUAL STRUCTURE; AUTHOR COCITATIONS; CONSUMER RESEARCH; RELATIVE PRESENCE; MANAGEMENT; NETWORKS; JOURNALS; BEHAVIOR; MODEL ABSTRACT: The field of business-to-business (B2B) marketing has grown considerably in the past four decades. However the state of knowledge about its structure and evolution remains limited. Who are the key players and what are the key papers in B2B marketing? What main research topics have been investigated over time? This article answers these questions by applying bibliometric methods for the first time to the existing body of scholarly B2B research. The key findings reveal a highly dynamic discipline in the 1970s and 1980s, when new knowledge was being intensively exchanged among an increasing number of B2B researchers. Since that time, the pace of development has slowed, and diversification in the discipline manifested itself in a distinctive number of core research subfields. Yet initial research topics such as organizational buying behavior, where much research is still undone, are to a large extent not addressed by modern B2B scholars. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. AUTHOR ADDRESS: K Backhaus, Univ Munster, Inst Business To Business Mkt, Stadtgraben 13-15, D-48143 Munster, Germany ------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: What do we know about buyer-seller negotiations in marketing research? A status quo analysis (Article, English) AUTHOR: Herbst, U; Voeth, M; Meister, C SOURCE: INDUSTRIAL MARKETING MANAGEMENT 40 (6 SP ISS). AUG 2011. p.967-978 ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC, NEW YORK SEARCH TERM(S): SMALL H J AM SOC INFORM SCI 50:799 1999 KEYWORDS: Buyer-seller negotiations; Status quo analysis; Content analysis; Co-citation analysis KEYWORDS+: BARGAINING BEHAVIOR; BUSINESS NEGOTIATIONS; EXCHANGE PROCESSES; INDUSTRIAL BUYERS; SALES NEGOTIATION; UNITED- STATES; OUTCOMES; POWER; COMMUNICATION; MODEL ABSTRACT: The main objective of this study is to provide an overview of the current status quo of negotiation research in marketing. In this context, we first conduct a quantitative analysis of existing literature on buyer-seller negotiations. Specifically, we undertake a screening of 10 high-ranking marketing journals so as to identify the body of negotiation-related articles within marketing. In a next step, the identified articles are subjected to both content and co-citation analyses. To this end, we modify the interaction model of the IMP Group in order to comprehensibly structure the existing findings. In a last step, these findings are presented to various negotiation experts to verify their practical relevance. From this multi-step procedure, we derive sound implications for research and practice. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. AUTHOR ADDRESS: U Herbst, Univ Tubingen, Dept Mkt, Nauklerstr 47, D-72074 Tubingen, Germany --------------------------------------- - ----------------------------------------------------------------- - From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Sat Nov 5 14:14:55 2011 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 18:14:55 +0000 Subject: Two papers related to Sig Metrics Message-ID: -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: The most cited works in major depression: The 'Citation classics' (Article, English) AUTHOR: Lipsman, N; Lozano, AM SOURCE: JOURNAL OF AFFECTIVE DISORDERS 134 (1-3). NOV 2011. p.39-44 ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM SEARCH TERM(S): GARFIELD E rauth; HIRSCH JE P NATL ACAD SCI USA 102:16569 2005; CITED item_title; CITATION item_title; CITATION* item_title; J AFFECT DISORDERS source_abbrev_20; GARFIELD E JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC 257:52 1987 KEYWORDS: Major Depression; Citation analysis ABSTRACT: Background: The biomedical literature is growing exponentially, with thousands of articles published each day. While the majority of published papers are of incremental value, every field also has a select, relatively small number of works that have presented important conceptual advances and have had a profound influence. We were interested in identifying such papers in the field of Major Depression. Objective: To determine which and what type of articles in the field of Major Depression are citation classics, defined as having received equal to or exceeding 400 citations in the biomedical literature, as a surrogate marker for their impact in the field. Methods: An online database of research publications was searched using a free, publicly accessible, and downloadable software. The terms "Depression" or "Depressive" were queried in the title of publications with no date restrictions. Out of scope publications not dealing with Major Depression or mood disorders were not considered. Results: 243 citation classics representing the top cited manuscripts (approximately 0.1% of 240,000) in the field of Major Depression were identified. These highly cited works fell into six categories: scales/measures, medical psychiatry, clinical trials/management, mechanisms/translational studies, imaging investigations and epidemiological/population health studies. The journals in which citation classics are published are diverse, but typically are general psychiatric or medical publications. Conclusions: Despite the size of the field, there is a relatively parsimonious collection of citation classics in the field of Major Depression. These deal primarily with the mechanisms and epidemiology of the disease, with papers dealing with depression management accounting for the fastest growing group of citation classics. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. AUTHOR ADDRESS: AM Lozano, Univ Toronto, Toronto Western Hosp, Div Neurosurg, 399 Bathurst St,4W-431, Toronto, ON M5S 1A1, Canada -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: An exploratory study on intercultural communication research contents and methods: A survey based on the international and domestic journal papers published from 2001 to 2005 (Article, English) AUTHOR: Hu, YH; Fan, WW SOURCE: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTERCULTURAL RELATIONS 35 (5). SEP 2011. p.554-566 PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD, OXFORD SEARCH TERM(S): JOURNAL item_title KEYWORDS: Intercultural communication research contents; Intercultural communication research methods; Empirical research; Qualitative research; Quantitative research ABSTRACT: With the progressive acceleration of globalization in the world, the study of intercultural communication is accordingly flourishing day by day on both domestic and international levels. In order to discern the current trends of intercultural communication research in China and abroad and furthermore provide suggestions for future research, the present study has made an analysis of 368 intercultural communication articles published between 2001 and 2005 in 11 major international and domestic academic journals, among which 203 articles are from 10 major domestic academic journals and 165 ones from the American journal entitled International Journal of Intercultural Relations. Each article is analyzed from two perspectives: the research contents and research methods. The results indicate that intercultural communication research in China is sharply different from research abroad with regards to research contents and methods. The main concern of researchers abroad is intercultural adaptation and intercultural training while the Chinese researchers are mainly concerned with cross-cultural pragmatics. As far as research methods are concerned, most studies abroad are conducted using empirical research methods, the majority of which adopt the quantitative research method. On the contrary, most studies in China are non-empirical research. Of the small number of empirical studies, considerable attention is paid to the mixed use of both qualitative and quantitative research methods. At the end of the paper, constructive suggestions are made for future research. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. AUTHOR ADDRESS: YH Hu, Huazhong Univ Sci & Technol, Sch Foreign Languages, Wuhan 430074, Peoples R China -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Sat Nov 5 14:17:41 2011 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 18:17:41 +0000 Subject: FW: Science CiteTrack: Unnamed Alert (in Science) Message-ID: Science 28 October 2011: Vol. 334 no. 6055 p. 443 DOI: 10.1126/science.334.6055.443 * News & Analysis Scientific Impact U.K. Scientific Papers Rank First in Citations 1. Eliot Marshall, 2. John Travis Summary The U.K. Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) released a citation analysis it commissioned from Elsevier, the scientific publishing company. The analysis, according to a BIS statement, found that the United Kingdom "attracts more citations per pound spent in overall research and development than any other country." A similar analysis, independently produced by Thomson Reuters, supports that basic theme: Scientific papers from Britain have the greatest impact in the world when the six most prolific nations are ranked by average number of citations. Read the Full Text ________________________________ ________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Mon Nov 7 10:41:12 2011 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 15:41:12 +0000 Subject: Various papers of interest to SIG Metrics Message-ID: ----------------------------- TITLE: The Scholarly Book Review in the Humanities AN ACADEMIC CINDERELLA? (Article, English) AUTHOR: East, JW SOURCE: JOURNAL OF SCHOLARLY PUBLISHING 43 (1). OCT 2011. p.52-67 UNIV TORONTO PRESS INC, TORONTO SEARCH TERM(S): GARFIELD E LIBRARY Q 50:40 1980 KEYWORDS: book reviews; humanities; scholarly journals ABSTRACT: This article examines the status of the book review as a form of scholarly publication in the humanities, looking at the role and characteristics of humanities book reviews and at who writes them and why. It examines evidence for the influence and impact of book reviews in the humanities and makes suggestions for the future of the scholarly book review in an online information environment. AUTHOR ADDRESS: JW East, Univ Queensland, Arts Fac, Brisbane, Qld 4072, Australia -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Journal des Savants FROM THE REPUBLIC OF LETTERS TO THE CLOUD LIBRARY (Article, English) AUTHOR: Potts, CH SOURCE: JOURNAL OF SCHOLARLY PUBLISHING 43 (1). OCT 2011. p.68-75 UNIV TORONTO PRESS INC, TORONTO SEARCH TERM(S): JOURNAL item_title KEYWORDS: academic publishing; cloud-sourced collections; demise of print; hybrid collections; European studies; cooperative collection development ABSTRACT: As more books, journals, and newspapers make the inevitable transition to the electronic format, academics get the sense that the only scholarly materials one really needs can be found in the digital realm. Through the imagined voice of the Journal des Savants-the world's oldest scholarly journal still active today this article brings to the surface valid concerns about print scarcity, familiar terrain for not only Europeanists but for anyone who works in area studies. It objects to conventional metrics for determining scholarly value and reconfirms known perils of relying solely on the mass-digitization efforts of Google Books. Most importantly, the article questions an over- reliance on digital preservation repositories such as LOCKSS, CLOCKSS, Portico, and HathiTrust-key players in the so-called Cloud Library, or external network of trusted digital library collection and service providers. The push toward cloud-sourced collections comes at a time when research libraries are hastily embarking on ambitious cooperative regional initiatives to systematically de-duplicate their costly, problematic, redundant, and very much terrestrial print collections. AUTHOR ADDRESS: CH Potts, Univ Calif Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720 USA -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Appraising Internationality in Spanish Communication Journals (Article, English) AUTHOR: Fernandez-Quijada, D SOURCE: JOURNAL OF SCHOLARLY PUBLISHING 43 (1). OCT 2011. p.90-109 UNIV TORONTO PRESS INC, TORONTO SEARCH TERM(S): JOURNALS item_title KEYWORDS: internationality; local journals; Spanish scholarly journals; journal evaluation; communication sciences KEYWORDS+: SCIENTIFIC JOURNALS; PSYCHOLOGY JOURNALS; SCHOLARLY JOURNALS; CITATION; SCIENCE; INDEX; HUMANITIES; LANGUAGE; FIELD ABSTRACT: This article explores how journals published in a language other than English achieve a degree of internationality and can increase our knowledge of scientific publication patterns. This author offers a case study focused on Spanish communication journals from a sample of 1182 articles published from 2007 to 2009. The article examines three variables in this sample: the number of non-Spanish scholars, the use of languages other than Spanish, and how often non-Spanish journals are referred to. The results show that (a) these journals find it difficult to attract foreign scholars, (b) open-language policies have had a limited effect, and (c) internationality is constrained to the Spanish geolinguistic region. AUTHOR ADDRESS: D Fernandez-Quijada, Univ Autonoma Barcelona, Dept Comunicacio Audiovisual & Publicitat 1, Barcelona, Spain -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Making the Journal Abstract More Concrete (Article, English) AUTHOR: Hartley, J SOURCE: JOURNAL OF SCHOLARLY PUBLISHING 43 (1). OCT 2011. p.110-115 UNIV TORONTO PRESS INC, TORONTO SEARCH TERM(S): JOURNAL item_title KEYWORDS: abstracts; structured abstracts; journals; social sciences; psychology ABSTRACT: This article describes how the author, when compiling sets of abstracts for psychology teachers, began to realize that such abstracts needed to be made more concrete if they were to be more helpful for their readers. Three examples are provided. AUTHOR ADDRESS: J Hartley, Univ Keele, Keele ST5 5BG, Staffs, England - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: A bibliometric analysis of malaria research in India during 1998-2009 (Article, English) AUTHOR: Gupta, BM; Bala, A SOURCE: JOURNAL OF VECTOR BORNE DISEASES 48 (3). SEP 2011. p.163-170 MALARIA RESEARCH CENTRE, INDIAN COUNCIL MEDICAL RESEARCH-ICMR, DELHI SEARCH TERM(S): BIBLIOMETR* item_title KEYWORDS: India; malaria research; publication output ABSTRACT: Objective: This study analyses the research output of India in malaria research in national and global context, as reflected in its publications output during 1998-2009. Methods: SCOPUS Citation database has been used to retrieve the publication data, which has been further analysed on several parameters including its growth, rank and global publications share, citation impact, overall share of international collaborative papers and share of major collaborative partners and patterns of research communication in most productive journals. The publications output, impact and collaborative publication share of India is also compared with South Africa, Brazil and China. Results: Indian scientists together have published 2786 papers in malaria research during 1998-2009 and registered an average citation per paper of 3.49. The country ranks 4th among the top 20 most productive countries in malaria research with its global publications share of 6.47% during 1998- 2009. Conclusion: Quantum of Indian research output in malaria research is high but its citations per paper is low compared to select developing countries, which can be improved by investing more funds in international and national collaborative research projects, as well as increasing the participation of researchers in such projects. AUTHOR ADDRESS: BM Gupta, Natl Inst Sci Technol & Dev Studies, New Delhi 110012, India -------------------------------------------------------------------------- From peter.ohly at GOOGLEMAIL.COM Tue Nov 8 09:43:02 2011 From: peter.ohly at GOOGLEMAIL.COM (Peter Ohly) Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 15:43:02 +0100 Subject: 5th. International Conference on Information Systems and Economic Intelligence, February 16 th., 17 th. and 18 th. 2012 in Djerba (Tunisia) Message-ID: Dear colleague, To provide additional time for potential authors, the deadline is extended to November 21st., 2011 Thank you to forward this information to your lab. and reasearchers to propose papers. Best regards, Marie-Christine Rousset, Malek Ghenima and Sahbi Sidhom. -- Conference Web sites: www.siie.fr and http://siie2012.loria.fr _____________________________________________________________________ CALL FOR PAPERS SIIE ? 2012 5th. International Conference on Information Systems and Economic Intelligence February 16 th., 17 th. and 18 th. 2012 in Djerba (Tunisia) Thematic keynotes & tutorials (Web Sites: www.siie.fr & http://siie2012.loria.fr) Important Dates: Paper submissions (deadline) : November 21st., 2011 (extended) Notification to authors: December 18th., 2011 Final version for accepted papers: January 8th., 2012 Registration for authors (deadline): January 15th., 2012 Conference SIIE?2012 in Djerba (Tunisia): February 16th., 17th. & 18th. , 2012 Best paper awards: February 18th., 2012 The conference aims to develop the dialogue between experts and researchers from public and private, to acquire basic and experimental on Information Systems and Business Intelligence (or economic intelligence (EI) in French terminology) (SIIE). This promotes, in a risk environment, technologies related to economic intelligence. The dynamic of EI depends on the control of knowledge and requires competences to design the best strategies and ensure that decision-makers take the right decisions. The international conference SIIE will be held in its fifth (5th.) edition in Djerba (Tunisia) in February 2012, after the fourth successful editions in Tunisia and Morocco. This conference is supported by the University of La Manouba (Tunisia), the University of Lorraine (France), the High Institute of Applied Engineering - IGA (Marocco), the University of Joseph Fourier Grenoble (France) and is sponsored by the Higher Education Ministry of Tunisia, and IEEE-Tunisia section. The fourth editions (2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011) have allowed academic researchers and economic actors to achieve completed projects. The goal of SIIE is to continue in this way by creating opportunities, ideas and innovative ways to enhance projects, and build connections between universities and industries on both sides of the Mediterranean Sea. SIIE'2012 includes lectures, tutorials, sessions and panels by experts, to identify new approaches and knowledge in economic intelligence, applied research and feedback. This will allow the emergence of new clusters in competitive intelligence. In a friendly framework, pleasant and cordial life context, the SIIE conference has always been thought to promote the weaving of trust networks between actors in academia, industry and politics, thus contributing to the training of the scientific community SIIE. The expert recommendations and advice will help the SIIE community to find solutions to their many questions and problems. Program days: 1 ? Keynotes & Tutorials: ? February 16, 17 and 18th., 2011 (AM.): each day a keynote and a tutorial in plenary session, given by guest speakers, experts in their field. The objective is to develop theory, models and applications. 2 ? Parallel sessions: ? February 16 and 17th., 2011 (PM.): twelve parallel sessions of oral presentations of the best research projects selected by the scientific committee. The presentations will bring together current work of senior and junior researchers from academia and industry (research, demonstrations, prototypes and softwares). 3 ? Panels: ? February 16 and 17th., 2011 (PM.): two thematic panels in plenary session on topical issues in the world of business and governance. Topics of interest: 1 - Information system and economic intelligence A. Conceptual models of information systems B. Data warehousing C. Data mining and information retrieval 2 - Collaborative information retrieval A. Trends in internal and external enterprise monitoring tools and E.I. tools B. Strategic information and economic intelligence systems C. Collaborative work and filtering, information collection and analysis in information retrieval systems 3 - Languages and knowledge industries A. Information heterogeneous or multilingual, process analysis and design corpus of information B. Mapping of resources, indexing and knowledge management C. Annotation and decision making 4 - Economic intelligence and management A. Integration of EI concepts in industry: experiences and case studies B. Concepts, processes and actions in EI: research and applications C. Key success factors of EI and performance measures 5 - Cognitive and social dimensions in watch and EI processes A. Multidimensional approaches of ?information need? notion B. Cognitive and social dimensions of information practices C. Integration of monitoring and EI tools 6 - Information management and knowledge sharing A. Enterprise organizational memory, management of operational know-how. B. Taking into consideration of adapted means of description: towards multimedia C. Information, competitive, and technological intelligence D. Managing information overload 7 - Intelligent e-Technology A. Intelligent Human-Web Interaction B. Semantics and Ontology Engineering C. Web Mining, Web agents and Web Services D. Security, Integrity, Privacy and Trust of systems 8 - Information systems governance A. Production of value and strategic alignment B. Resource management, risk measurement and performance of information systems C. Norms and methods 9 - System Development and community applications A. Architectures and business applications including finance, economics and management B. Communication networks: social networks, e-Business and e-Reputation C. Corporate Governance: quality, security, certification and performance From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Wed Nov 9 12:49:43 2011 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 17:49:43 +0000 Subject: Misc articles of interest to SigMetrics Message-ID: -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: The Modal Number of Citations to Political Science Articles Is Greater than Zero: Accounting for Citations in Articles and Books (Article, English) AUTHOR: Samuels, DJ SOURCE: PS-POLITICAL SCIENCE & POLITICS 44 (4). OCT 2011. p.783-792 CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS, NEW YORK SEARCH TERM(S): GARFIELD E rauth; PENDLEBURY DA rauth; HAMILTON DP SCIENCE 251:25 1991; CITATION* item_title; GARFIELD E SCIENTIST 12:10 1998 KEYWORDS+: HUMANITIES; RANKING; SEARCH ABSTRACT: Existing measures of article and journal. impact count citations that articles receive in other articles. Such metrics ignore citations that articles receive in monographs and edited-volume chapters. Counting article citations in books reveals that popular measures of article and journal impact discriminate against articles and journals that receive citations in books rather than (or in addition to) citations in other articles, thereby discriminating against the research, contributions of scholars who publish such articles. Analysis of citation patterns over 25 years reveals that citations in. books have declined in American politics research while citations in articles have increased; citations in both books and articles remain important in the other subfields. Findings suggest that political scientists should supplement indicators of journal impact based on citations in peer-reviewed articles with, measures that account for the citations that published articles receive in books. AUTHOR ADDRESS: DJ Samuels, Univ Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA [ ]<-- Enter an X to order article (IDS: 838CV 00016) ISSN: 1049-0965 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Is the h-index Predictive of Greater NIH Funding Success Among Academic Radiologists? (Article, English) AUTHOR: Rezek, I; McDonald, RJ; Kallmes, DF SOURCE: ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY 18 (11). NOV 2011. p.1337-1340 ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC, NEW YORK SEARCH TERM(S): HIRSCH JE P NATL ACAD SCI USA 102:16569 2005 KEYWORDS: H-index; academic productivity; NIH funding; Academic Radiology KEYWORDS+: OUTPUT; POWER ABSTRACT: Rationale and Objectives: Despite rapid adoption of the Hirsch index (h-index) as a measure of academic success, the correlations between the h-index and other metrics of productivity remain poorly understood. The aims of this study were to determine whether h-indices were associated with greater National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding success among academic radiologists. Materials and Methods: Using the Scopus database, h-indices were calculated for a random sample of academic radiologists with the rank of professor. Using the NIH tool Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Reports, we determined the number, classification, and total years of NIH grant funding as principal investigator for each radiologist. Differences in h-index, sorted by funding status, were determined using Wilcoxon's tests. Associations between h-index and funding status were determined using logistic regression. Significant correlations between h-index and grant metrics were determined using Spearman's rho. Results: Among 210 professors of radiology, 48(23%) secured at least one NIH grant. The mean h-index was significantly higher among individuals who secured at least one NIH grant (19.1) compared to those who did not (10.4) (P < .0001). Professors with h-indices < 10 compared to those with h-indices > 10 were significantly less likely to receive NIH funding (odds ratio, 0.07; P = .0321). However, h-indices > 10 were not significantly predictive of greater funding. No significant relationships were observed between h-index and the number of grant awards, years of prior funding, the amounts of grant awards, or grant classification. Conclusion: Having obtained at least one NIH grant was associated with a higher h-index, yet multiple or large grants, such as those for program projects, were not predictive of higher h-indices. AUTHOR ADDRESS: RJ McDonald, Mayo Clin, Coll Med, Dept Radiol, 200 1st St SW, Rochester, MN 55905 USA --------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: All Scale-Free Networks Are Sparse (Article, English) AUTHOR: Del Genio, CI; Gross, T; Bassler, KE SOURCE: PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS 107 (17). OCT 17 2011. p.NIL_175-NIL_178 AMER PHYSICAL SOC, COLLEGE PK SEARCH TERM(S): DESOLLAPRICE DJ rauth; PHYS REV LETT source_abbrev_20 KEYWORDS+: 1ST-ORDER PHASE-TRANSITIONS; COMPLEX NETWORKS; INTERNET; WEB ABSTRACT: We study the realizability of scale-free networks with a given degree sequence, showing that the fraction of realizable sequences undergoes two first-order transitions at the values 0 and 2 of the power- law exponent. We substantiate this finding by analytical reasoning and by a numerical method, proposed here, based on extreme value arguments, which can be applied to any given degree distribution. Our results reveal a fundamental reason why large scale-free networks without constraints on minimum and maximum degree must be sparse. AUTHOR ADDRESS: CI Del Genio, Max Planck Inst Phys Komplexer Syst, Nothnitzer Str 38, D-01187 Dresden, Germany -------------------------------------------------------------------------- - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Fri Nov 11 16:04:03 2011 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 21:04:03 +0000 Subject: Papers of interest to Sig Metrics readers Message-ID: TITLE: Gender and Science: Women Nobel Laureates (Article, English) AUTHOR: Charyton, C; Elliott, JO; Rahman, MA; Woodard, JL; DeDios, S SOURCE: JOURNAL OF CREATIVE BEHAVIOR 45 (3). 2011. p.203-214 CREATIVE EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC, HADLEY SEARCH TERM(S): ZUCKERMAN H rauth; COLE JR SCI AM 256:119 1987; GARFIELD E rauth KEYWORDS: Achievement in Science; Gender; Discovery; Innovation; Scientific Creativity and Nobel Prize KEYWORDS+: MATHEMATICAL REASONING ABILITY; SCIENTIFIC ACHIEVEMENT; FAMILY FORMATION; SEX-DIFFERENCES; BIRTH-ORDER; ROLE- MODELS; CAREER; PERSPECTIVES; ADOLESCENTS; PERFORMANCE ABSTRACT: Women and their creativity are underrepresented in science. To date, few women have been awarded the Nobel Prize in science. Eleven female Nobel laureates in physics, chemistry and physiology/medicine between 1901 and 2006 were compared with 37 males who received the Nobel Prize in the same area one year prior and one year after the women. Data analyzed included birth order, marital status, children, awards (Fulbright, Rhodes, and number of honorary awards received), highest education level and Nobel mentor. Results indicated that female Nobel laureates were significantly less likely to marry and have children. When female laureates had children, they had significantly fewer children than male laureates. Female laureates also had fewer publications than their male counterparts. Our findings suggest that eminent women scientists tend to choose the pursuit of scientific discovery over starting families more often than eminent male scientists. More resources are needed in order to nurture and enhance the recruitment and retention of women in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). AUTHOR ADDRESS: C Charyton, Ohio State Univ, Dept Psychol, 1835 Neil Ave, Columbus, OH 43210 USA ========================== ========================= TITLE: Probing the effect of author self-citations on h index: A case study of environmental engineering (Article, English) AUTHOR: Huang, MH; Lin, WYC SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMATION SCIENCE 37 (5). OCT 2011. p.453-461 SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD, LONDON SEARCH TERM(S): PENDLEBURY DA rauth; HIRSCH JE P NATL ACAD SCI USA 102:16569 2005; CITATION* item_title; J INF SCI source_abbrev_20 KEYWORDS: citation analysis; author self-citation; h index; authorship; environmental engineering KEYWORDS+: HIRSCH INDEX; SCIENTISTS; JOURNALS; RANKING; IMPACT; RESEARCHERS; PUBLICATION; INDICATORS; BUSINESS; SCIENCE ABSTRACT: This study evaluates the impact of author self-citations on h index by exploring 583 authors whose works appear in key periodicals in environmental engineering. The findings show that authors' h values have high correlation with authors' article number, total cited count, and their rankings. There is also a high correlation with h index values and rankings of h values. The study indicates that self-citations have little impact on the values of h index and the h index rankings, whether or not articles with authors' self-citation are included. Further investigations reveal that, for authors with high values in h index, the two h index values are both highly correlated and with significant difference either with self-citations or without. A similar pattern is seen in authors with low h values. The results suggest that there is no need to deliberately exclude self-citations in analysing or evaluating research performance in environmental engineering. AUTHOR ADDRESS: MH Huang, Natl Taiwan Univ, Dept Lib & Informat Sci, 1,Sec 4,Roosevelt Rd, Taipei 10764, Taiwan -------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: An unsupervised approach to automatic classification of scientific literature utilizing bibliographic metadata (Article, English) AUTHOR: Joorabchi, A; Mahdi, AE SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMATION SCIENCE 37 (5). OCT 2011. p.499-514 SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD, LONDON SEARCH TERM(S): BIBLIOGRAPHIC* ; J INF SCI source_abbrev_20; GARFIELD E SCIENCE 122:108 1955 KEYWORDS: Digital library organization; scientific literature classification; library classification schemes; citation networks; Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC); library Online Public Access Catalogues (OPACs); WorldCat; Google Book Search (GBS) KEYWORDS+: DEWEY-DECIMAL CLASSIFICATION; LIBRARY ABSTRACT: This article describes an unsupervised approach for automatic classification of scientific literature archived in digital libraries and repositories according to a standard library classification scheme. The method is based on identifying all the references cited in the document to be classified and, using the subject classification metadata of extracted references as catalogued in existing conventional libraries, inferring the most probable class for the document itself with the help of a weighting mechanism. We have demonstrated the application of the proposed method and assessed its performance by developing a prototype software system for automatic classification of scientific documents according to the Dewey Decimal Classification scheme. A dataset of 1000 research articles, papers, and reports from a well-known scientific digital library, CiteSeer, were used to evaluate the classification performance of the system. Detailed results of this experiment are presented and discussed. AUTHOR ADDRESS: AE Mahdi, Univ Limerick, Dept Elect & Comp Engn, Limerick, Ireland ------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Bibliometric analysis of Nigeria's social science and arts and humanities publications in Thomson Scientific databases (Article, English) AUTHOR: Nwagwu, W; Egbon, O SOURCE: ELECTRONIC LIBRARY 29 (4). 2011. p.438-456 EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LIMITED, BINGLEY SEARCH TERM(S): LINE MB rauth; SCI WAT* rwork; BIBLIOMETR* item_title KEYWORDS: Bibliographies; Arts and humanities citation index; Social science citation index; Citation analysis; Nigeria; Bibliometric analysis; Databases ABSTRACT: Purpose - This paper seeks to analyse publications on Nigeria indexed in Arts and Humanities Citation Index (AHCI) and Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) of Thomson Scientific databases respectively to understand the international perspective of aspects of research publication dynamics in both fields. Design/methodology/approach - Data covering the period 2002-2007 were collected from the SSCI and AHCI of the Web of Science, an online service of Thomson Scientific in June 2008. Findings - SSCI and AHCI indexed a total of 716 publications on Nigeria, 634 and 82 respectively. Paper production in each of these fields rose during 2002 to 2004 and 2005 respectively, and then started dropping. The publications received a total of 1,371 citations; the 82 AHCI documents received only six citations, while the 634 SSCI publications received 1,366 citations, equivalent to means of 0.06 and 2.15 citations per AHCI and SSCI document respectively. Only 6.1 per cent of the AHCI documents were cited compared with 46.7 per cent of SSCI publications; but citation of social science papers was consistently on the increase, while citation of arts and humanities publications, flattened in 200 humanities, was consistently on the increase. In both fields, article type of papers written in English dominated. Research limitations/implications - This research covers only a period of six years; a fuller picture would be obtained with a longer period. Practical implications - Publications in sources listed in international databases could illustrate the extent to which Nigerian scholars have addressed issues of global relevance. Originality/value - The paper uncovers the international status and perspective of Nigerian publications in social science and arts and humanities disciplines. AUTHOR ADDRESS: W Nwagwu, Univ Ibadan, Africa Reg Ctr Informat Sci, Ibadan, Nigeria From katy at INDIANA.EDU Sun Nov 13 14:08:34 2011 From: katy at INDIANA.EDU (Katy Borner) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2011 14:08:34 -0500 Subject: ASIS&T Webinar: Envisioning Science and Technology In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Income generated by the below event will help finance the upcoming* 8th Iteration of the Places & Spaces: Mapping Science Exhibit on "Science Maps for Kids" (2012)* http://scimaps.org Best regards, k On 11/9/2011 11:59 AM, ASIS&T Continuing Education wrote: > > Envisioning Science and Technology > > *Presented by: /Katy Borner, Author of Atlas of Science/* > > *//* > > > > > Join us for a Webinar on November 15 > *$20 for ASIS&T Member $49 Non Members* > > > > *Space is limited.* > Reserve your Webinar seat now at: > https://www3.gotomeeting.com/register/756023558 > > Recent developments in data mining, information visualization, and > science of science studies make it possible to study science and > technology (S&T) at multiple levels using a systems science approach. > At the micro-level, the impact of single individuals, specific works, > or legal frameworks can be examined. At the meso-level, the expertise > profiles of institutions can be compared or the trajectories of > student cohorts can be modeled. The macro-level provides a 10,000 foot > view of the continuously evolving geospatial and topical landscape of > science and technology and the global import/export activities, > innovation diffusion, and brain drain unfolding over both spaces. > Relevant works and maps are featured in the international Places & > Spaces: Mapping Science exhibit (http://scimaps.org) and the Atlas of > Science (http://scimaps.org/atlas). > > The first part of this talk will present research results and case > studies that aim to increase our scientific understanding of the inner > workings of S&T. The second part introduces novel approaches and tools > that improve information access, researcher networking, and research > management. The talk concludes with an overview of data services and > plug-and-play macroscope tools developed at the Cyberinfrastructure > for Network Science Center (http://cns.iu.edu) in support of data > mining and visualization. > > *Title:* Envisioning Science and Technology > *Date:* Tuesday, November 15, 2011 > *Time:* 11:30 AM - 12:30 PM EST > > After registering you will receive a confirmation email containing > information about joining the Webinar. > > *System Requirements* > PC-based attendees > Required: Windows? 7, Vista, XP or 2003 Server > > Macintosh?-based attendees > Required: Mac OS? X 10.5 or newer > > > > > > > -- Katy Borner Victor H. Yngve Professor of Information Science Director, CI for Network Science Center, http://cns.iu.edu Curator, Mapping Science exhibit, http://scimaps.org School of Library and Information Science, Indiana University Wells Library 021, 1320 E. Tenth Street, Bloomington, IN 47405, USA Phone: (812) 855-3256 Fax: -6166 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Mon Nov 14 13:58:01 2011 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 18:58:01 +0000 Subject: HistCite collection of all 3000+ items published in the journal Scientometrics Message-ID: http://garfield.library.upenn.edu/histcomp/scientometrics/index-tl.html HistCite software is available free of charge to any user of Web of Science. Some surprises when you sort this collection by citation frequency and by the list of references cited. E. Garfield -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Mon Nov 14 17:20:05 2011 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 22:20:05 +0000 Subject: a few papers involving bibliometrics Message-ID: ------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: A bibliometric analysis of published non-communicable disease research in India (Letter, English) AUTHOR: Mony, PK; Srinivasan, K SOURCE: INDIAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL RESEARCH 134 (2). AUG 2011. p.232-234 INDIAN COUNCIL MEDICAL RES, NEW DELHI SEARCH TERM(S): ARUNACHALAM S rauth; BIBLIOMETR* item_title; LETTER* doctype KEYWORDS+: EPIDEMIOLOGIC TRANSITION; PREVENTION AUTHOR ADDRESS: PK Mony, St Johns Res Inst, 100 Feet Rd, Bangalore 560034, Karnataka, India -------------------------------------- TITLE: The Retailing Literature as a Basis for Franchising Research: Using Intellectual Structure to Advance Theory (Article, English) AUTHOR: Chabowski, BR; Hult, GTM; Mena, JA SOURCE: JOURNAL OF RETAILING 87 (3 SP ISS). SEP 2011. p.269-284 ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC, NEW YORK SEARCH TERM(S): GARFIELD E rauth; SMALL H J DOC 36:183 1980; SMALL H J AM SOC INFORM SCI 50:799 1999 KEYWORDS: Retailing literature; Franchise structure; Consumer exchange; Strategic commitment; Intellectual structure; Multidimensional scaling; Hierarchical cluster analysis KEYWORDS+: STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT RESEARCH; AGENCY THEORY; ENTREPRENEURSHIP RESEARCH; CONSUMER PERCEPTIONS; ORGANIZATIONAL FORM; EMPIRICAL-ANALYSIS; RESOURCE SCARCITY; TRADE PROMOTIONS; NETWORK ANALYSIS; SERVICE QUALITY ABSTRACT: This study evaluates the foundational intellectual structure of franchising research over the last four decades. Based on I 718 articles from a sample of 40 journals, we use co-citation analysis, employed in both multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analysis, to evaluate 67,073 citations and determine the theoretical underpinnings of franchising research. As the results indicate, the retailing literature has had an integral influence on studies related to franchising. To advance this research domain, we develop a three- dimensional typology (franchise structure, consumer exchange, and strategic intention) based on established and emergent franchise-related topics. The typology indicates six suggested topics for examination to advance franchising research based on the domain's accomplishments to date. (C) 2011 New York University. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. AUTHOR ADDRESS: GTM Hult, Michigan State Univ, Eli Broad Coll Business, E Lansing, MI 48824 USA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Tue Nov 15 12:29:09 2011 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 17:29:09 +0000 Subject: Papers of potential interest to SIG Metrics Message-ID: -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: A "librarian-LIS faculty" divide in open access practice (Article, English) AUTHOR: Xia, JF; Wilhoite, SK; Myers, RL SOURCE: JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION 67 (5). 2011. p.791-805 EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LIMITED, BINGLEY SEARCH TERM(S): SEGLEN PO J AM SOC INFORM SCI 43:628 1992 KEYWORDS: Digital scholarly commtmication; Institutional libraries; Open access; Citations KEYWORDS+: INFORMATION-SCIENCE JOURNALS; THEORY-PRACTICE GAP; GOOGLE SCHOLAR; KOHL-DAVIS; ARTICLES; IMPACT; PRACTITIONERS; REPLICATION; ATTITUDES; DIRECTORS ABSTRACT: Purpose - This paper seeks to examine a librarian-faculty divide in authors' OA contributions with regard to article self-archiving and OA consumptions with regard to citation counts. Design/methodology/approach - This paper measures the OA availabilities and citations of scholarly articles from 20 top-ranked US journals published in 2006. A logistic regression analysis is taken to make the comparisons. Findings - It finds that there is no correlation between the numbers of OA articles and the professional status of the authors. However, librarian authors differ from faculty authors in the citation and self- citation rates of their articles. There are also differences between these two groups of authors in co-authorship and the numbers of article pages and references. Originality/value - This study takes a new approach to compare the publications of librarians and faculty in library and information science for their open access availability and citations. The findings may help OA advocates and administrators to make appropriate policy changes. AUTHOR ADDRESS: JF Xia, Indiana Univ, Sch Lib & Informat Sci, Indianapolis, IN 46204 USA -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Journal bibliometric analysis: a case study on the Journal of Documentation (Article, English) AUTHOR: Tsay, MY; Shu, ZY SOURCE: JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION 67 (5). 2011. p.806-822 EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LIMITED, BINGLEY SEARCH TERM(S): LIPETZ BA rauth; BIBLIOMETR* item_title; JOURNAL item_title KEYWORDS: Journal bibliometric study; Cited books; Cited journals; Subject analysis; Bibliographic systems; Information science; Journal of Documentation KEYWORDS+: INFORMATION-SCIENCE; JASIS ABSTRACT: Purpose - This study aims to explore the journal bibliometric characteristics of the Journal of Documentation (JOD) and the subject relationship with other disciplines by citation analysis. Design/methodology/approach - The citation data were drawn from references of each article of JOD during 1998 and 2008. Ulrich's Periodicals Directory, Library of Congress Subject Heading, retrieved from the WorldCat and LISA database were used to identify the main class, subclass and subject of cited journals and books. Findings - The results of this study revealed that journal articles are the most cited document, followed by books and book chapters, electronic resources, and conference proceedings, respectively. The three main classes of cited journals in JOD papers are library science, science, and social sciences. The three subclasses of non-LIS journals that were highly cited in JOD papers are Science, "Mathematics. Computer science", and "Industries. Land use. Labor". The three highly cited subjects of library and information science journals encompass searching, information work, and online information retrieval. The most cited main class of books in JOD papers is library and information science, followed by social sciences, science, "Philosophy. Psychology. Religion." The three highly cited subclasses of books in JOD papers are "Books (General). Writing. Paleography. Book industries and trade. Libraries. Bibliography," "Philology and linguistics," and Science, and the most cited subject of books is information storage and retrieval systems. Originality/value - Results for the present research found that information science, as represented by JOD, is a developing discipline with an expanding literature relating to multiple subject areas. AUTHOR ADDRESS: MY Tsay, Natl Chengchi Univ, Grad Inst Lib Informat & Archival Studies, 64 Chihnan Rd,Sec 2 Wenshan, Taipei 11623, Taiwan -------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------- TITLE: Two new scientometric indices for measurement of collaboration activities of departments and their researchers in academic institutions (Article, English) AUTHOR: Mohammadhassanzadeh, H; Samadikuchaksaraei, A; Saemi, N; Salimi-Asl, M SOURCE: MALAYSIAN JOURNAL OF LIBRARY & INFORMATION SCIENCE 16 (3). DEC 2011. p.1-7 UNIV MALAYA, FAC COMPUTER SCIENCE & INFORMATION TECH, KUALA LUMPUR SEARCH TERM(S): HIRSCH JE P NATL ACAD SCI USA 102:16569 2005; SCIENTOMETRIC* item_title KEYWORDS: Scientific collaboration; Evaluation indices; Scientometrics; Scientists; Research productivity ABSTRACT: In general, scientific collaboration represents the quality of research work of co-researchers and the related research institutes. Knowledge exchange is known as one of the principle methods of spreading the science. Lack of collaboration leads to research institutional isolation and prevents science expansion. The previous indices that have been proposed for measurement of the degree of scientific collaboration do not base their assessment on the context of the main goal of the research groups and their scientists. As a scientist's maximum achievement will happen when he/she work as part of a team with a defined goal, and a team succeeds when it focuses on a defined subject, only the collaborations that are formed for promotion of the goals of the team would be considered constructive. Here, we propose two new indices entitled "collaboration h-index" and "collaborative researchers h-index", to assess the extent of collaboration activities focused on the main goals of a research team. AUTHOR ADDRESS: H Mohammadhassanzadeh, Urmia Univ Med Sci, Emam Khomeini Hosp, Orumiyeh, Iran -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: An empirical relation between k-shells and the h-index in scale-free networks (Article, English) AUTHOR: Ye, FY; Zhao, SX; Rousseau, R SOURCE: MALAYSIAN JOURNAL OF LIBRARY & INFORMATION SCIENCE 16 (3). DEC 2011. p.9-16 UNIV MALAYA, FAC COMPUTER SCIENCE & INFORMATION TECH, KUALA LUMPUR SEARCH TERM(S): HIRSCH JE P NATL ACAD SCI USA 102:16569 2005 KEYWORDS: h-index; k-shells; Power laws; Graphs; Scale-free networks KEYWORDS+: HIRSCH-INDEX; MODEL; COLLABORATION; TOPOLOGY; CORE ABSTRACT: After clarifying the definitions of h-index and k-shells in a graph, it is shown that the largest k value for which there exists a non-empty k-shell, denoted as k(max)(G), satisfies the relation k(max)(G) <= h(G), where h(G) is the degree h-index of graph G. Next we determine an empirical relation between the h-index, the number of nodes in a small scale-free network, i.e. with maximum degree centrality <100, and the coreness and degree centrality of its nodes. In this contribution we embed the information sciences among other fields involved in network studies. AUTHOR ADDRESS: FY Ye, Zhejiang Univ, Dept Informat Resource Management, Hangzhou 310003, Zhejiang, Peoples R China -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Death of web citations: a serious alarm for authors (Article, English) AUTHOR: Tajeddini, O; Azimi, A; Sadatmoosavi, A; Sharif-Moghaddam, H SOURCE: MALAYSIAN JOURNAL OF LIBRARY & INFORMATION SCIENCE 16 (3). DEC 2011. p.17-29 UNIV MALAYA, FAC COMPUTER SCIENCE & INFORMATION TECH, KUALA LUMPUR KEYWORDS: Citation analysis; Web citations; URL accessibility; URL decay; Library and Information Science journals KEYWORDS+: UNIFORM RESOURCE LOCATORS; INFORMATION-SCIENCE; DECAY; JOURNALS; REFERENCES; INTERNET; ACCESSIBILITY; PERSISTENCE; PERMANENCE; STABILITY ABSTRACT: The study explores availability and/or decay of URLs cited in articles of six Library and Information Sciences (LIS) journals published by Emerald, Science Direct and Sage. The research was performed using a descriptive survey method. Initially, all issues of the six journals including Information Processing & Management, Library & Information Science Research, Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, Journal of Information Science, Online Information Review, and Journal of Documentation from 2005 to 2008 were downloaded directly from their publisher websites. Afterwards, all the journals' citations in either print or Web formats were calculated manually. Then, availability and/or decay of individual cited URLs were examined in the Web environments. Two groups of URLs were identified as accessible (without any accessibility error) or inaccessible (with accessibility errors). Two groups of accessible URLs were "accessible through first-check" and "accessible through second check". Research findings indicated that 66% of articles had web citations. Original accessibility of web citations was 66% which improved to 95% by second check availability using the Wayback Machine and the Google. Overall, from 4562 cited URLs 34% had error messages mostly related to "File error" type. The study recommends that the best solution to prevent decay or disappearance of Web citations and diminish URLs decay is to check availability of citations from while they are being published. The Wayback Archive and the Google can revive the decayed citations. AUTHOR ADDRESS: O Tajeddini, Islamic Azad Univ, Sci & Res Branch, Dept Lib & Informat Studies, Tehran, Iran - From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Wed Nov 16 18:49:21 2011 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 23:49:21 +0000 Subject: Papers from the journals Scieintometrics ( November 2011) and Journal of Informetrics ( October 2011) Message-ID: ========================== Start of Data ========================= TITLE: Agent-based computing from multi-agent systems to agent- based models: a visual survey (Article, English) AUTHOR: Niazi, M; Hussain, A SOURCE: SCIENTOMETRICS 89 (2). NOV 2011. p.479-499 SPRINGER, DORDRECHT SEARCH TERM(S): GRIFFITH BC SCI STUD 4:339 1974; SMALL H SCIENTOMETRICS 26:5 1993; SMALL H SCI STUD 4:17 1974; SMALL H J AM SOC INFORM SCI 24:265 1973; WHITE HD J AM SOC INFORM SCI 32:163 1981 KEYWORDS: Scientometrics; Visualization; Agent-based modeling; Multiagent systems; Individual-based modeling; CiteSpace KEYWORDS+: SCIENTIFIC LITERATURES; INTELLECTUAL STRUCTURE; AUTHOR COCITATION; TRIPLE-HELIX; SCIENCE; SCIENTOMETRICS; INNOVATION; KNOWLEDGE; DYNAMICS; CITATION ABSTRACT: Agent-based computing is a diverse research domain concerned with the building of intelligent software based on the concept of "agents". In this paper, we use Scientometric analysis to analyze all sub-domains of agent-based computing. Our data consists of 1,064 journal articles indexed in the ISI web of knowledge published during a 20 year period: 1990-2010. These were retrieved using a topic search with various keywords commonly used in sub-domains of agent-based computing. In our proposed approach, we have employed a combination of two applications for analysis, namely Network Workbench and CiteSpace-wherein Network Workbench allowed for the analysis of complex network aspects of the domain, detailed visualization-based analysis of the bibliographic data was performed using CiteSpace. Our results include the identification of the largest cluster based on keywords, the timeline of publication of index terms, the core journals and key subject categories. We also identify the core authors, top countries of origin of the manuscripts along with core research institutes. Finally, our results have interestingly revealed the strong presence of agent-based computing in a number of non-computing related scientific domains including Life Sciences, Ecological Sciences and Social Sciences. AUTHOR ADDRESS: M Niazi, COMSATS Inst IT, Dept Biosci, Islamabad, Pakistan -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Mapping of nanoscience and nanotechnology research in India: a scientometric analysis, 1990-2009 (Article, English) AUTHOR: Karpagam, R; Gopalakrishnan, S; Natarajan, M; Babu, BR SOURCE: SCIENTOMETRICS 89 (2). NOV 2011. p.501-522 SPRINGER, DORDRECHT SEARCH TERM(S): SCIENTOMETRIC* item_title KEYWORDS: Nanotechnology; Nanoscience; Collaborative coefficient h- index; g-index; p-index KEYWORDS+: RESEARCH COLLABORATION; SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE; PATENT CITATIONS; G-INDEX; TECHNOLOGY; SCIENCE; FIELD; INTERDISCIPLINARITY; PUBLICATIONS; EXPLORATION ABSTRACT: This paper analyses the growth pattern of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology literature in India during 1990-2009 (20 years). The Scopus international multidisciplinary bibliographical database has been used to identify the Indian contributions on the field of nanoscience and nanotechnology. The study measures the performance based on several parameters, country annual growth rate, authorship pattern, collaborative index, collaborative coefficient, modified collaborative coefficient, subject profile, etc. Further the study examines national publication output and impact in terms of average citations per paper, international collaboration output and share, contribution and impact of Indian Institutions and impact of Indian journals. AUTHOR ADDRESS: R Karpagam, Anna Univ, Univ Lib, Madras 25, Tamil Nadu, India -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Using Bayesian networks to discover relationships between bibliometric indices. A case study of computer science and artificial intelligence journals (Article, English) AUTHOR: Ibanez, A; Larranaga, P; Bielza, C SOURCE: SCIENTOMETRICS 89 (2). NOV 2011. p.523-551 SPRINGER, DORDRECHT SEARCH TERM(S): GARFIELD E rauth; HIRSCH JE P NATL ACAD SCI USA 102:16569 2005; JOURNALS item_title; BIBLIOMETR* item_title; GARFIELD E SCIENCE 178:471 1972 KEYWORDS: Bibliometric indices; Bayesian networks; Conditional dependencies and conditional independencies; Computer science and artificial intelligence KEYWORDS+: H-INDEX; PROBABILISTIC NETWORKS; CITATION ANALYSIS; R- INDEX; IMPACT ABSTRACT: As they are used to evaluate the importance of research at different levels by funding agencies and promotion committees, bibliometric indices have received a lot of attention from the scientific community over the last few years. Many bibliometric indices have been developed in order to take into account aspects not previously covered. The result is that, nowadays, the scientific community faces the challenge of selecting which of this pool of indices meets the required quality standards. In view of the vast number of bibliometric indices, it is necessary to analyze how they relate to each other (irrelevant, dependent and so on). Our main purpose is to learn a Bayesian network model from data to analyze the relationships among bibliometric indices. The induced Bayesian network is then used to discover probabilistic conditional (in) dependencies among the indices and, also for probabilistic reasoning. We also run a case study of 14 well-known bibliometric indices on computer science and artificial intelligence journals. AUTHOR ADDRESS: A Ibanez, Univ Politecn Madrid, Computat Intelligence Grp, Dept Inteligencia Artificial, E-28660 Madrid, Spain -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Multi-modal social networks for modeling scientific fields (Article, English) AUTHOR: Groh, G; Fuchs, C SOURCE: SCIENTOMETRICS 89 (2). NOV 2011. p.569-590 SPRINGER, DORDRECHT SEARCH TERM(S): SMALL H INFORMATION PROCESSI 17:39 1981; SMALL H J AM SOC INFORM SCI 24:265 1973; SMALL H SCIENTOMETRICS 8:321 1985; SMALL H SCIENTOMETRICS 7:391 1985; WHITE HD J AM SOC INFORM SCI 32:163 1981 KEYWORDS: Social networks; Mobile Social Networking; Modeling of a scientific domain; Co-authorship networks; Person- organization networks; Author co-citation networks; Journal-person networks; Conference-person networks KEYWORDS+: AUTHOR COCITATION ANALYSIS; INFORMATION-SCIENCE; INTELLECTUAL STRUCTURE; SUBGRAPH ISOMORPHISM; MAPPING AUTHORS; DOMAIN-ANALYSIS; SALTONS COSINE; PEARSONS R; ALGORITHM; INDEX ABSTRACT: This paper analyzes whether methods from social network analysis can be adopted for the modeling of scientific fields in order to obtain a better understanding of the respective scientific area. The approach proposed is based on articles published within the respective scientific field and certain types of nodes deduced from these papers, such as authors, journals, conferences and organizations. As a proof of concept, the techniques discussed here are applied to the field of 'Mobile Social Networking'. For this purpose, a tool was developed to create a large data collection representing the aforementioned field. The paper analyzes various views on the complete network and discusses these on the basis of the data collected on Mobile Social Networking. The authors demonstrate that the analysis of particular subgraphs derived from the data collection allows the identification of important authors as well as separate sub-disciplines such as classic network analysis and sensor networks and also contributes to the classification of the field of 'Mobile Social Networking' within the greater context of computer science, applied mathematics and social sciences. Based on these results, the authors propose a set of concrete services which could be offered by such a network and which could help the user to deal with the scientific information process. The paper concludes with an outlook upon further possible research topics. AUTHOR ADDRESS: G Groh, Tech Univ Munich, Dept Informat, Boltzmannstr 3, D-85478 Garching, Germany -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: A bibliometric analysis and comparison on three information science journals: JASIST, IPM, JOD, 1998-2008 (Article, English) AUTHOR: Tsay, MY SOURCE: SCIENTOMETRICS 89 (2). NOV 2011. p.591-606 SPRINGER, DORDRECHT SEARCH TERM(S): LIPETZ BA rauth; JOURNALS item_title; BIBLIOMETR* item_title KEYWORDS: Bibliometric study; Cited books; Cited journals; Subject analysis; Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (JASIST); Information Processing and Management (IPM); Journal of Documentation (JOD) KEYWORDS+: REFERENCES; LIBRARY ABSTRACT: Employing a citation analysis, this study explored and compared the bibliometric characteristics and the subject relationship with other disciplines of and among the three leading information science journals, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (JASIST), Information Processing and Management and Journal of Documentation. The citation data were drawn from references of each article of the three journals during 1998 and 2008. The Ulrich's Periodical Directory, Library of Congress Subject Heading, retrieved from the WorldCat, and LISA database were used to identify the main class, subclass and subject of cited journals and books. Quantitative results on the number of JASIST, IPM and JOD literature references, average number of references cited per paper, document type of cited literature and the journal self-citation rate are reported. Moreover, the highly cited journals and books, the main classes and subclasses of cited journals and books in papers of the three journals, the highly cited subjects in journals and books of library and information science were identified and analyzed. Comparison on the characteristics of cited journals and books confirmed that all the three journals under study are information science oriented, except JOD which is library science orientation. JASIST and IPM are very much in common and diffuse to other disciplines more deeply than JOD. AUTHOR ADDRESS: MY Tsay, Natl Chengchi Univ, Grad Inst Lib Informat & Archival Studies, Taipei 116, Taiwan -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: The journal relative impact: an indicator for journal assessment (Article, English) AUTHOR: Vieira, ES; Gomes, JANF SOURCE: SCIENTOMETRICS 89 (2). NOV 2011. p.631-651 SPRINGER, DORDRECHT SEARCH TERM(S): GARFIELD E rauth; SMALL H SCIENTOMETRICS 7:391 1985; JOURNAL item_title; GARFIELD E AM DOC 14:195 1963 KEYWORDS: Normalization; Journal impact; Assessment; Variable window KEYWORDS+: WEB-OF-SCIENCE; SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE; RESEARCH PERFORMANCE; SCOPUS; SYSTEM; INDEX ABSTRACT: This paper presents the journal relative impact (JRI), an indicator for scientific evaluation of journals. The JRI considers in its calculation the different culture of citations presented by the Web of Science subject categories. The JRI is calculated considering a variable citation window. This citation window is defined taking into account the time required by each subject category for the maturation of citations. The type of document considered in each subject category depends on its outputs in relation to the citations. The scientific performance of each journal in relation to each subject category that it belongs to is considered allowing the comparison of the scientific performance of journals from different fields. The results obtained show that the JRI can be used for the assessment of the scientific performance of a given journal and that the SJR and SNIP should be used to complement the information provided by the JRI. The JRI presents good features as stability over time and predictability. AUTHOR ADDRESS: JANF Gomes, Univ Porto, Fac Ciencias, REQUIMTE Dept Quim & Bioquim, Rua Campo Alegre 687, P-4169007 Oporto, Portugal -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: The growth of international collaboration in East European scholarly communities: a bibliometric analysis of journal articles published between 1989 and 2009 (Article, English) AUTHOR: Teodorescu, D; Andrei, T SOURCE: SCIENTOMETRICS 89 (2). NOV 2011. p.711-722 SPRINGER, DORDRECHT SEARCH TERM(S): BIBLIOMETR* item_title; JOURNAL item_title KEYWORDS: Eastern Europe; Co-authorship; Citations ABSTRACT: In the last two decades international collaboration in the Eastern European academic communities has strongly intensified. Scientists from developed countries within the European Union play a key role in stimulating the international collaboration of academics in this region. In addition, many of the research projects that engage East- European scholars are only possible in the framework of the large European programmes. The present study focuses on the role of EU and other developed nations as a partner of these countries and the analysis of the performance of collaborative research as reflected by the citation impact of internationally co-authored publications. AUTHOR ADDRESS: D Teodorescu, Emory Univ, 201 Dowman Dr,Suite 313, Atlanta, GA 30032 USA - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Industry Funding of University Research and Scientific Productivity (Article, English) AUTHOR: Hottenrott, H; Thorwarth, S SOURCE: KYKLOS 64 (4). NOV 2011. p.534-555 WILEY-BLACKWELL, MALDEN KEYWORDS+: RESEARCH-AND-DEVELOPMENT; COUNT DATA MODELS; ACADEMIC RESEARCH; TECHNOLOGY-TRANSFER; NATIONAL-SURVEY; PUBLIC RESEARCH; LIFE SCIENCES; IVORY TOWER; INNOVATION; IMPACT ABSTRACT: Research conducted by university researchers for industry constitutes one of the main channels through which knowledge and technology are transferred from science to the private sector. Since the value of such inputs for the innovation performance of firms has been found to be considerable, it is not surprising that firms increasingly seek direct access to university knowledge. In particular, industry funding for university research has been increasing in most OECD countries. This development, however, spurred concerns regarding possible long-run effects on scientific output. While some policy makers argue that the potential of universities to foster and accelerate industrial innovations is not yet fully exploited, others are concerned with the distraction of academics from their actual research mission. Our results show for a sample of professors in science and engineering in Germany that a higher budget share from industry reduces publication output of professors both in terms of quantity and quality in subsequent years. This finding supports the "skewing problem" hypothesis for science and engineering faculty in Germany. If information sharing among scientists via publications is the basis for cumulative knowledge production and thus for scientific progress, industry funding that reduces publications may have detrimental effects on the development of science. On the other hand, we find that industry funding has a positive impact on the quality of applied research if measured by patent citations. Industry funding may thus have beneficial effects by improving impact and quality of more applied research. If industry funded research results in successfully patentable and industrially relevant technologies it may create economic as well as social value. AUTHOR ADDRESS: H Hottenrott, Dept Managerial Econ Strategy & Innovat, Naamsestr 69, B-3000 Louvain, Belgium TITLE: Empirical study of the growth dynamics in real career h- index sequences (Article, English) AUTHOR: Wu, J; Lozano, S; Helbing, D SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (4). OCT 2011. p.489-497 ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM SEARCH TERM(S): HIRSCH JE P NATL ACAD SCI USA 102:16569 2005 KEYWORDS: h-Index sequence; Real career path; h-Index core KEYWORDS+: HIRSCH INDEX; MODEL ABSTRACT: Based on historical citation data from the ISI Web of Science, this paper introduces a methodology to automatically calculate and classify the real career h-index sequences of scientists. Such a classification is based on the convexity-concavity features of the different temporal segments of h-index sequences. Five categories are identified, namely convex, concave, S-shaped, IS-shaped and linear. As a case study, the h-index sequences of several Nobel Prize winners in Medicine, Chemistry and Economics are investigated. Two proposed factors influencing the growth of the h-index, namely the "freshness" of the h- index core and changes in the rank positions of papers near the h-index point are studied. It is found that the h-index core's "freshness" is particularly relevant to the growth of the h-index. Moreover, although in general more publications lead to an increase of the h-index, the key role is played by those papers near the h-index point. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. AUTHOR ADDRESS: J Wu, Huazhong Univ Sci & Technol, Sch Management, Wuhan 430074, Peoples R China -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Community detection: Topological vs. topical (Article, English) AUTHOR: Ding, Y SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (4). OCT 2011. p.498-514 ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM SEARCH TERM(S): SMALL H J AM SOC INFORM SCI 24:265 1973; WHITE HD J AM SOC INFORM SCI 32:163 1981 KEYWORDS: Community detection; Topics; Communities; Coauthor network KEYWORDS+: COCITATION ANALYSIS; INFORMATION-RETRIEVAL; BIBLIOMETRIC INFORMATION; AUTHOR COCITATION; NETWORKS; SCIENCE; CITATION; TEXT ABSTRACT: The evolution of the Web has promoted a growing interest in social network analysis, such as community detection. Among many different community detection approaches, there are two kinds that we want to address: one considers the graph structure of the network (topology-based community detection approach); the other one takes the textual information of the network nodes into consideration (topic-based community detection approach). This paper conducted systematic analysis of applying a topology-based community detection approach and a topic- based community detection approach to the coauthorship networks of the information retrieval area and found that: (1) communities detected by the topology-based community detection approach tend to contain different topics within each community; and (2) communities detected by the topic- based community detection approach tend to contain topologically-diverse sub-communities within each community. The future community detection approaches should not only emphasize the relationship between communities and topics, but also consider the dynamic changes of communities and topics. Published by Elsevier Ltd. AUTHOR ADDRESS: Y Ding, Indiana Univ, Sch Lib & Informat Sci, 1320 E 10th, Bloomington, IN 47405 USA -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Positioning research and innovation performance using shape centroids of h-core and h-tail (Article, English) AUTHOR: Kuan, CH; Huang, MH; Chen, DZ SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (4). OCT 2011. p.515-528 ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM SEARCH TERM(S): HIRSCH JE P NATL ACAD SCI USA 102:16569 2005 KEYWORDS: Rank-citation curve; h-Core; h-Tail; Shape centroid; Patentometrics; Bibliometrics KEYWORDS+: INDEX; IMPACT; OUTPUT ABSTRACT: We propose a novel yet practical method capturing an individual's research or innovation performance by the shape centroids of the h-core and h-tail areas of its publications or patents. A large number of individuals' relative performance with respect to their h-cores and h-tails can be simultaneously positioned and conveniently observed in two-dimensional coordinate systems. Two approaches are further proposed to the utilization of the two-dimensional distribution of shape centroids. The first approach specifically determines, within a group of individuals, those outperforming or being outperformed by a target individual. The second approach provides a quick qualitative categorization of the individuals so that the nature of their performance is revealed. Using patent assignees as an illustrative case, the approaches are tested with empirical patent assignee data. Crown Copyright (C) 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. AUTHOR ADDRESS: DZ Chen, Natl Taiwan Univ, Dept Mech Engn, 1,Sec 4,Roosevelt Rd, Taipei 10617, Taiwan -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Progressive nucleation mechanism and its application to the growth of journals, articles and authors in scientific fields (Article, English) AUTHOR: Sangwal, K SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (4). OCT 2011. p.529-536 ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM SEARCH TERM(S): PRICE DJD rauth; JOURNALS item_title KEYWORDS: Growth behavior of items; Power-law relation; Progressive nucleation mechanism; Saturation of item/field ABSTRACT: The basic concepts of progressive nucleation mechanism are described and the final equations of the mechanism are used to analyze the growth of articles in three randomly selected databases from 20 different databases in humanities (philosopher's index, set 1), social sciences (exceptional child education, set 5) and science and technology (food science and technology, set 10), respectively, covering the period 1968-1987, previously analyzed by Egghe and Ravichandra Rao (1992, Scientometrics 25 (1), 5-46), and the growth of journals, articles and authors in malaria research for the period 1955-2005, reported recently by Ravichandra Rao and Srivastava (2010, Journal of Informetrics 4 (1), 249-256) and compared with the predictions of the power-law equation. Analysis of the former data revealed that: (1) the progressive nucleation mechanism describes the data better than the power-law relation, (2) the field of social sciences is saturated much earlier than science and technology but publication activity in humanities is saturated much later, and (3) that social sciences have the maximum growth, followed by lower growth in humanities and the lowest growth in science and technology. The data on journals J(t), papers N(t) and authors W(t) against publication year Y in malaria research can be described equally well by equations of the power-law and progressive nucleation mechanism, and the growth of journals J(t) and articles N(t) is intimately connected with the growth of authors W(t). (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. AUTHOR ADDRESS: K Sangwal, Lublin Univ Technol, Dept Appl Phys, Ul Nadbystrzycka 38, PL-20618 Lublin, Poland -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: On the growth of citations of publication output of individual authors (Article, English) AUTHOR: Sangwal, K SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (4). OCT 2011. p.554-564 ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM SEARCH TERM(S): PRICE DJD rauth; HIRSCH JE P NATL ACAD SCI USA 102:16569 2005; CITATION* item_title KEYWORDS: Citations; Citation rate; Power law; Exponential growth law; Progressive nucleation mechanism KEYWORDS+: INDEX ABSTRACT: Dependence of citations L(t) at time t on the publication duration t of 10 arbitrarily selected Polish professors is analyzed using equations based on power law and exponential growth and on progressive nucleation mechanism for overall crystallization in fixed volume. The former two approaches are well known in the bibliometric literature, but the last approach is new for the analysis of growth of citations and other related phenomena. It was found that: (1) power-law relation and exponential growth are relatively inadequate to analyze the data of all authors due to large scatter in the L(t) data of various authors, (2) in view of poor fit at low or high values of t, the exponential growth relation is worse than the power-law relation, and (3) the progressive nucleation mechanism describes the data reasonably well and gives information on the processes of sources of citations and the growth of theses citation sources. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. AUTHOR ADDRESS: K Sangwal, Lublin Univ Technol, Dept Appl Phys, Ul Nadbystrzycka 38, PL-20618 Lublin, Poland -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: The diffusion of H-related literature (Article, English) AUTHOR: Zhang, L; Thijs, B; Glanzel, W SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (4). OCT 2011. p.583-593 ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM SEARCH TERM(S): HIRSCH JE P NATL ACAD SCI USA 102:16569 2005 KEYWORDS: H-index; Knowledge diffusion; Clustering analysis; Core- documents KEYWORDS+: DEPENDENT LOTKAIAN INFORMETRICS; SELF-CITATION CORRECTIONS; WEB-OF-SCIENCE; EGGHES G-INDEX; HIRSCH-INDEX; GOOGLE SCHOLAR; BIBLIOMETRIC INDICATORS; RESEARCH PRODUCTIVITY; RESEARCH PERFORMANCE; ACADEMIC JOURNALS ABSTRACT: In the present study we attempt to trace the diffusion of h-related literature over a five-year period beginning with the introduction of the h-index. The study is based on a reliable and representative publication set of 755 papers retrieved from the Web of Science database using keywords and citation links. In the course of the study we analyse several aspects of the emergence of this topic, the differentiation of methodological research, its application within and outside the field and the dissemination process of information among different disciplines in the sciences and social sciences. Finally, a cluster analysis of h-related literature is conducted. The hybrid clustering algorithm results in four clusters, which depict two different aspects each of basic and applied research related to the h-index and its derivatives. Crown Copyright (C) 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. AUTHOR ADDRESS: L Zhang, Katholieke Univ Leuven, Ctr R&D Monitoring ECOOM, Waaistr 6,Room 01-82, B-3000 Louvain, Belgium -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Identifying the effects of co-authorship networks on the performance of scholars: A correlation and regression analysis of performance measures and social network analysis measures (Article, English) AUTHOR: Abbasi, A; Altmann, J; Hossain, L SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (4). OCT 2011. p.594-607 ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM SEARCH TERM(S): HIRSCH JE P NATL ACAD SCI USA 102:16569 2005 KEYWORDS: Collaboration; Citation-based research performance; g- index; Co-authorship networks; Social network analysis measures; Regression; Correlation KEYWORDS+: INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC COLLABORATION; SUCCESSIVE H- INDEXES; WEAK TIES; SELF-ORGANIZATION; CENTRALITY; PRODUCTIVITY; KNOWLEDGE; RESEARCHERS; ECONOMICS; PATTERNS ABSTRACT: In this study, we develop a theoretical model based on social network theories and analytical methods for exploring collaboration (co-authorship) networks of scholars. We use measures from social network analysis (SNA) (i.e., normalized degree centrality, normalized closeness centrality, normalized betweenness centrality, normalized eigenvector centrality, average ties strength, and efficiency) for examining the effect of social networks on the (citation-based) performance of scholars in a given discipline (i.e., information systems). Results from our statistical analysis using a Poisson regression model suggest that research performance of scholars (g-index) is positively correlated with four SNA measures except for the normalized betweenness centrality and the normalized closeness centrality measures. Furthermore, it reveals that only normalized degree centrality, efficiency, and average ties strength have a positive significant influence on the g-index (as a performance measure). The normalized eigenvector centrality has a negative significant influence on the g- index. Based on these results, we can imply that scholars, who are connected to many distinct scholars, have a better citation-based performance (g-index) than scholars with fewer connections. Additionally, scholars with large average ties strengths (i.e., repeated co- authorships) show a better research performance than those with low tie strengths (e.g., single co-authorships with many different scholars). The results related to efficiency show that scholars, who maintain a strong co-authorship relationship to only one co-author of a group of linked co- authors, perform better than those researchers with many relationships to the same group of linked co-authors. The negative effect of the normalized eigenvector suggests that scholars should work with many students instead of other well-performing scholars. Consequently, we can state that the professional social network of researchers can be used to predict the future performance of researchers. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. AUTHOR ADDRESS: J Altmann, Seoul Natl Univ, Technol Management Econ & Policy Program, Seoul 151744, South Korea -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Non-alphanumeric characters in titles of scientific publications: An analysis of their occurrence and correlation with citation impact (Article, English) AUTHOR: Buter, RK; van Raan, AFJ SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (4). OCT 2011. p.608-617 ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM SEARCH TERM(S): CITATION item_title; CITATION* item_title KEYWORDS: Impact; Occurrence; Special characters; Scientific publications; Titles; Bootstrap; Heatmaps KEYWORDS+: CONFIDENCE-INTERVALS; BOOTSTRAP; ARTICLES; ASTERISK; COLONS ABSTRACT: We investigated the occurrence of non-alphanumeric characters in a randomized subset of over almost 650,000 titles of scientific publications from the Web of Science database. Additionally, for almost 500,000 of these publications we correlated occurrence with impact, using the field-normalised citation metric CPP/FCSm. We compared occurrence and correlation with impact both at in general and for specific disciplines and took into account the variation within sets by (non-parametrically) bootstrapping the calculation of impact values. We also compared use and impact of individual characters in the 30 fields in which non-alphanumeric characters occur most frequently, by using heatmaps that clustered and reordered fields and characters. We conclude that the use of some non-alphanumeric characters, such as the hyphen and colon, is common in most titles and that not including such characters generally correlates negatively with impact. Specific disciplines on the other hand, may show either a negative, absent, or positive correlation. We also found that thematically related science fields use non- alphanumeric characters in comparable numbers, but that impact associated with such characters shows a less strong thematic relation. Overall, it appears that authors cannot influence success of publications by including non-alphanumeric characters in fields where this is not already commonplace. (C) 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. AUTHOR ADDRESS: RK Buter, Wassenaarseweg 62A,POB 905, NL-2300 AX Leiden, Netherlands -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Comparing the expert survey and citation impact journal ranking methods: Example from the field of Artificial Intelligence (Article, English) AUTHOR: Serenko, A; Dohan, M SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (4). OCT 2011. p.629-648 ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM SEARCH TERM(S): HIRSCH JE P NATL ACAD SCI USA 102:16569 2005; SEGLEN PO J AM SOC INFORM SCI 43:628 1992; CITATION item_title; CITATION* item_title; JOURNAL item_title KEYWORDS: Artificial Intelligence; Journal ranking; Academic journal; Google Scholar; Survey; Citation impact; H-index; G-index; Hc-index KEYWORDS+: SCIENTIFIC JOURNALS; MANAGEMENT JOURNALS; EVALUATING RESEARCH; GLOBAL PERCEPTIONS; ACADEMIC JOURNALS; H-INDEX; QUALITY; BUSINESS; PEER; SCIENCE ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study is to: (1) develop a ranking of peer-reviewed AI journals; (2) compare the consistency of journal rankings developed with two dominant ranking techniques, expert surveys and journal impact measures; and (3) investigate the consistency of journal ranking scores assigned by different categories of expert judges. The ranking was constructed based on the survey of 873 active AI researchers who ranked the overall quality of 182 peer-reviewed AI journals. It is concluded that expert surveys and citation impact journal ranking methods cannot be used as substitutes. Instead, they should be used as complementary approaches. The key problem of the expert survey ranking technique is that in their ranking decisions, respondents are strongly influenced by their current research interests. As a result, their scores merely reflect their present research preferences rather than an objective assessment of each journal's quality. In addition, the application of the expert survey method favors journals that publish more articles per year. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. AUTHOR ADDRESS: A Serenko, Lakehead Univ, Fac Business Adm, 955 Oliver Rd, Thunder Bay, ON P7B 5E1, Canada -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Assessing the varying level of impact measurement accuracy as a function of the citation window length (Article, English) AUTHOR: Abramo, G; Cicero, T; D'Angelo, CA SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (4). OCT 2011. p.659-667 ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM SEARCH TERM(S): MACROBERTS MH rauth; CITATION item_title; CITATION* item_title; GARFIELD E SCIENCE 178:471 1972; GARFIELD E rauth KEYWORDS: Research evaluation; Scientific impact; Citation window; Peer review; Bibliometrics; Italy KEYWORDS+: BIBLIOMETRIC INDICATORS; SCIENCE; COUNTS; TOOL ABSTRACT: With the passage of more time from the original date of publication, the measure of the impact of scientific works using subsequent citation counts becomes more accurate. However the measurement of individual and organizational research productivity should ideally refer to a period with closing date just prior to the evaluation exercise. Therefore it is necessary to compromise between accuracy and timeliness. This work attempts to provide an order of magnitude for the error in measurement that occurs with decreasing the time lapse between date of publication and citation count. The analysis is conducted by scientific discipline on the basis of publications indexed in the Thomson Reuters Italian National Citation Report. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. AUTHOR ADDRESS: G Abramo, Univ Roma Tor Vergata, Dipartimento Ingn Impresa, Via Politecn 1, I-00133 Rome, Italy -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: h-Degree as a basic measure in weighted networks (Article, English) AUTHOR: Zhao, SX; Rousseau, R; Ye, FY SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (4). OCT 2011. p.668-677 ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM SEARCH TERM(S): HIRSCH JE P NATL ACAD SCI USA 102:16569 2005 KEYWORDS: h-Degree; Node strength; Network analysis; Weighted networks; Informetric networks KEYWORDS+: HIRSCH-TYPE INDEXES; CENTRALITY; SCIENCE; COCITATION; MODELS ABSTRACT: We introduce the h-degree of a node as a basic indicator for weighted networks. The h-degree (d(h)) of a node is the number d(h) if this node has at least d(h) links with other nodes and the strength of each of these links is greater than or equal to d(h). Based on the notion of h-degree other notions are developed such as h-centrality and h- centralization, leading to a new set of indicators characterizing nodes in a network. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. AUTHOR ADDRESS: FY Ye, Zhejiang Univ, Dept Informat Resource Management, 38 Zheda Rd, Hangzhou 310027, Zhejiang, Peoples R China -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Bibliometric impact assessment with R and the CITAN package (Article, English) AUTHOR: Gagolewski, M SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (4). OCT 2011. p.678-692 ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM SEARCH TERM(S): HIRSCH JE P NATL ACAD SCI USA 102:16569 2005; BIBLIOMETR* item_title KEYWORDS: Data analysis software; Quality control in science; Citation analysis; Bibliometrics; Hirsch's h index; Egghe's g index; SciVerse Scopus KEYWORDS+: H-INDEX; SCIENTIFIC IMPACT; OUTPUT; DATABASES; SCIENCE; SCOPUS; WEB ABSTRACT: In this paper CITAN, the CITation ANalysis package for R statistical computing environment, is introduced. The main aim of the software is to support bibliometricians with a tool for preprocessing and cleaning bibliographic data retrieved from SciVerse Scopus and for calculating the most popular indices of scientific impact. To show the practical usability of the package, an exemplary assessment of authors publishing in the fields of scientometrics and webometrics is performed. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. AUTHOR ADDRESS: M Gagolewski, Polish Acad Sci, Syst Res Inst, Ul Newelska 6, PL-01447 Warsaw, Poland ----------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Is it necessary to consider suburbs (or small cities in the close proximity) and name variants in a citation impact analysis for bigger cities? An investigation using Munich as an example (Letter, English) AUTHOR: Bornmann, L; Plume, A SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (4). OCT 2011. p.695-697 ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM SEARCH TERM(S): CITATION item_title; CITATION* item_title; LETTER* doctype AUTHOR ADDRESS: L Bornmann, Max Planck Soc, Hofgartenstr 8, D-80539 Munich, Germany -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Comparing impact factors from two different citation databases: The case of Computer Science (Article, English) AUTHOR: Sicilia, MA; Sanchez-Alonso, S; Garcia-Barriocanal, E SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (4). OCT 2011. p.698-704 ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM SEARCH TERM(S): GARFIELD E rauth; CITATION item_title; CITATION* item_title; IMPACT FACTOR* item_title; GARFIELD E JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC 295:90 2006; GARFIELD E SCIENCE 122:108 1955 KEYWORDS: Impact factor; Citation database; Journal Citation Reports (JCR); Scimago Journal Rank (SJR); Research outcome evaluation KEYWORDS+: WEB-OF-SCIENCE; JOURNAL IMPACT; SCOPUS ABSTRACT: Journal impact factors continue to play an important role in research output assessment, in spite of the criticisms and debates around them. The impact factor rankings provided in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR (TM)) database by Thompson Reuters have enjoyed a position of monopoly for many years. But this has recently changed with the availability of the Scopus (TM) database and its associated journal ranking published in the Scimago Journal Rank (SJR) Web page, as the former provides a citation database with similar inclusion criteria to those used in the JCR and the latter and openly accessible impact factor- based ranking. The availability of alternatives to the JCR impact factor listings using a different citation database raises the question of the extent to which the two rankings can be considered equally valid for research evaluation purposes. This paper reports the results of a contrast of both listings in Computer Science-related topics. It attempts to answer the validity question by comparing the impact factors of journals ranked in both listings and their relative position. The results show that impact factors for journals included in both rankings are strongly correlated, with SJR impact factors in general slightly higher, confirming previous studies related to other disciplines. Nonetheless, the consideration of tercile and quartile position of journal yields some divergences for journals appearing in both rankings that need to be accounted for in research evaluation procedures. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. AUTHOR ADDRESS: MA Sicilia, Univ Alcala De Henares, Dept Comp Sci, Polytech Bldg,Ctra Barcelona Km 33-6, Alcala De Henares 28871, Madrid, Spain -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: The Virtues of Correct Citation Careful Referencing Is Important but Is Often Neglected Even in Peer Reviewed Articles (Editorial Material, English) AUTHOR: Mertens, S; Baethge, C SOURCE: DEUTSCHES ARZTEBLATT INTERNATIONAL 108 (33). AUG 19 2011. p.550-552 DEUTSCHER AERZTE-VERLAG GMBH, COLOGNE SEARCH TERM(S): CITATION item_title; CITATION* item_title; EDITORIAL doctype KEYWORDS+: REFERENCE ACCURACY; JOURNALS AUTHOR ADDRESS: S Mertens, Ottostr 12, D-50859 Cologne, Germany -------------------------------------------------------------------------- [ ]<-- Enter an X to order article (IDS: BUF08 00001) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Open Access: Key Strategic, Technical and Economic Aspects Foreword (Editorial Material, English) AUTHOR: Gibson, I SOURCE: OPEN ACCESS: KEY STRATEGIC, TECHNICAL AND ECONOMIC ASPECTS. 2006. p.XI-XII,217-234 CHANDOS PUBL, SAWSTON SEARCH TERM(S): GARFIELD E rauth; GARFIELD E SCIENCE 122:108 1955; EDITORIAL doctype KEYWORDS+: IMPACT; CITATIONS; DOCUMENTATION; SCIENTISTS; EVOLUTION; SERIALS; PUBLISH; SYSTEM - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Topic-Dependent Document Ranking: Citation Network Analysis by Analogy to Memory Retrieval in the Brain (Article, English) AUTHOR: Okamoto, H SOURCE: ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORKS AND MACHINE LEARNING - ICANN 2011, PT I 6791. 2011. p.371-378 SPRINGER-VERLAG BERLIN, BERLIN SEARCH TERM(S): GARFIELD E SCIENCE 122:108 1955 KEYWORDS: Bibliometrics; Scientometrics; Citation network; PageRank; Memory retrieval; Continuous attractor; Graded persistent activity KEYWORDS+: PERSISTENT ACTIVITY; NEURAL INTEGRATOR; ACTIVATION; ALGORITHM; PAGERANK; NEURONS; CORTEX; MODEL ABSTRACT: We propose a method of citation analysis for evaluating the topic-dependent importance of individual scientific papers. This method assumes spreading activation in citation networks with a multi- hysteretic input/output relationship for each node (paper). The multi- hysteretic property renders the steady state of spreading activation continuously dependent on the initial state. Given a topic represented by the initial state, the importance of individual papers can be defined by the activities they have in the steady state. We have devised this method inspired by memory retrieval in the brain, where the multi-hysteretic property of single cells or neuronal networks is considered to play an essential role for cue-dependent retrieval of memory. Quantitative evaluation using a restoration problem has revealed that the performance of the proposed method is considerably higher than that of the benchmark method. We demonstrate the practical usefulness of the proposed method by applying it to a citation network of neuroscience papers. AUTHOR ADDRESS: H Okamoto, Fuji Xerox Co Ltd, Res & Dev Grp, Nishi Ku, 6-1 Minatomirai, Yokohama, Kanagawa 2208668, Japan -------------------------------------------------------------------------- From lietz at FORSCHUNGSINFO.DE Thu Nov 17 09:53:12 2011 From: lietz at FORSCHUNGSINFO.DE (Lietz, Haiko) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 15:53:12 +0100 Subject: Job offer in bibliometrics (Berlin 2012) Message-ID: Dear all, We are hiring two people in the field of bibliometrics/scientometrics. City is Berlin, time is 2012 (1yr). Call in German: http://forschungsinfo.de/Ausschreibungen/iFQ_Bibliometrie_11-2011.pdf Competence Centre: http://www.bibliometrie.info/en/home.html Feel free to contact me for details. Best wishes Haiko Lietz ____________________ iFQ Institut f?r Forschungsinformation und Qualit?tssicherung Institute for Research Information and Quality Assurance www.forschungsinfo.de Kompetenzzentrum Bibliometrie Competence Centre for Bibliometrics www.bibliometrie.info Sch?tzenstra?e 6a 10117 Berlin, Germany Tel.: +49 - 30 2064177 21 Fax: +49 - 30 2064177 99 lietz at forschungsinfo.de -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From willieezi at YAHOO.COM Fri Nov 18 05:30:29 2011 From: willieezi at YAHOO.COM (Williams Nwagwu) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 02:30:29 -0800 Subject: Job offer in bibliometrics (Berlin 2012) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear Haiko, I wish I could have further details. I am interested in the opportunity. My name is Williams from university of ibadan, nigeria --- On Thu, 11/17/11, Lietz, Haiko wrote: From: Lietz, Haiko Subject: [SIGMETRICS] Job offer in bibliometrics (Berlin 2012) To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Date: Thursday, November 17, 2011, 6:53 AM Dear all, ? We are hiring two people in the field of bibliometrics/scientometrics. City is Berlin , time is 2012 (1yr). ? Call in German: http://forschungsinfo.de/Ausschreibungen/iFQ_Bibliometrie_11-2011.pdf ? Competence Centre: http://www.bibliometrie.info/en/home.html ? Feel free to contact me for details. ? Best wishes ? Haiko Lietz ____________________ iFQ Institut f?r Forschungsinformation und Qualit?tssicherung Institute for Research Information and Quality Assurance www.forschungsinfo.de ? Kompetenzzentrum Bibliometrie Competence Centre for Bibliometrics www.bibliometrie.info ? Sch?tzenstra?e 6a 10117 Berlin , Germany Tel.: +49 - 30 2064177 21 Fax: +49 - 30 2064177 99 lietz at forschungsinfo.de ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Fri Nov 18 17:17:21 2011 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 22:17:21 +0000 Subject: two papers of interest to SIG Metrics readers Message-ID: ========================== Start of Data ========================= TITLE: Subjective judgements in scientific practice and art (Article, English) AUTHOR: Regidor, E SOURCE: JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY AND COMMUNITY HEALTH 65 (12). DEC 2011. p.1065-1069 B M J PUBLISHING GROUP, LONDON SEARCH TERM(S): GARFIELD E rauth; MERTON RK rauth; MERTON RK SCIENCE 159:56 1968; GARFIELD E CURR CONTENTS :3 1984 KEYWORDS+: SCIENCE; POPULATION; MORTALITY; ARTICLES; MCKEOWN; TRUTH ABSTRACT: Since art and science went their separate ways in the 18th century, the purpose of science has been to generate true knowledge based on reason and objectivity. However, during the second half of the 20th century, opinions emerged within science that showed the impossibility of eliminating subjectivity in scientific practice. This paper describes the similarity of the subjective judgements that form part of the peer-review system-the method devised by the scientific community to guarantee truth and objectivity-and the subjective judgements involved in artistic evaluation. AUTHOR ADDRESS: E Regidor, Univ Complutense Madrid, Dept Prevent Med & Publ Hlth, Ciudad Univ S-N, E-28040 Madrid, Spain -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: RANKING DISCIPLINARY JOURNALS WITH THE GOOGLE SCHOLAR H- INDEX: A NEW TOOL FOR CONSTRUCTING CASES FOR TENURE, PROMOTION, AND OTHER PROFESSIONAL DECISIONS (Article, English) AUTHOR: Hodge, DR; Lacasse, JR SOURCE: JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION 47 (3). FAL 2011. p.579-596 COUNCIL SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION, ALEXANDRIA SEARCH TERM(S): MACROBERTS MH rauth; HIRSCH JE P NATL ACAD SCI USA 102:16569 2005; JOURNALS item_title KEYWORDS+: SOCIAL-WORK JOURNALS; FACULTY PUBLICATION PROJECT; IMPACT FACTOR; BIBLIOMETRIC DATA; CITATION; SCIENCE; QUALITY; WEB; PERCEPTIONS; RELIABILITY ABSTRACT: Given the importance of journal rankings to tenure, promotion, and other professional decisions, this study examines a new method for ranking social work journals. The Google Scholar h-index correlated highly with the current gold standard for measuring journal quality, Thomson Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) impact factors, but provided data for more than 4 times as many disciplinary journals. Eighty disciplinary periodicals are identified and ranked using the Google Scholar h-index. The vast majority of these were ranked higher than the lowest ranked social work journal indexed by Thomson ISI. Although the results hold salience for many professional stakeholders, they may be of particular interest to faculty who publish in disciplinary journals not indexed by Thomson ISI. The Google Scholar h-index provides faculty with an additional tool to document the quality of the venues in which they publish. AUTHOR ADDRESS: DR Hodge, Arizona State Univ, Sch Social Work, Mail Code 3920,411 N Cent,Suite 800, Phoenix, AZ 85007 USA - - From noyons at CWTS.LEIDENUNIV.NL Tue Nov 22 06:02:24 2011 From: noyons at CWTS.LEIDENUNIV.NL (Noijons, E.) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 12:02:24 +0100 Subject: CWTS Postdoc position Message-ID: Dear Colleagues, The Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS, Leiden University) has a vacancy for the following position: POSTDOCTORAL RESEARCHER (full time) in the area of science innovation studies. Please find attached the details or visit www.cwts.nl Ed Noyons <> Dr ECM Noyons (Ed) Leiden University, NL Centre for Science & Technology Studies (CWTS) Willem Einthoven-gebouw, Wassenaarseweg 62A Postbus 905, 2300 AX Leiden tel +31 71 5273909/6650 noyons at cwts.nl http://www.cwts.leidenuniv.nl ********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. ********************************************************************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Vacature Post-doc CWTS_nov 2011.pdf Type: application/octet-stream Size: 11615 bytes Desc: Vacature Post-doc CWTS_nov 2011.pdf URL: From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Thu Nov 24 16:14:00 2011 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 21:14:00 +0000 Subject: papersof interst to SIG Metrics Message-ID: -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Citation Advantage of Open Access Legal Scholarship (Article, English) AUTHOR: Donovan, JM; Watson, CA SOURCE: LAW LIBRARY JOURNAL 103 (4). FAL 2011. p.553-573 AMER ASSOC LAW LIBRARIES, CHICAGO SEARCH TERM(S): GARFIELD E rauth; SEGLEN PO J AM SOC INFORM SCI 43:628 1992; KEYWORDS+: LAW-LIBRARIES; PUBLICATION; RANKING; SCIENCE; SCHOOLS; IMPACT ABSTRACT: In this study focusing on the impact of open access on legal scholarship, the authors examine open access articles from three journals at the University of Georgia School of Law and confirm that legal scholarship freely available via open access improves an article's research impact. Open access legal scholarship which today appears to account for almost half of the output of law faculties can expect to receive fifty-eight percent more citations than non open access writings of similar age from the same venue. AUTHOR ADDRESS: JM Donovan, Univ Kentucky, Alvin E Evans Law Lib, Lexington, KY 40536 USA -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Publishing Management Research (Article, English) AUTHOR: van Dick, R SOURCE: CHALLENGES AND CONTROVERSIES IN MANAGEMENT RESEARCH. 2011. p.138-151 ROUTLEDGE, LONDON SEARCH TERM(S): HIRSCH JE P NATL ACAD SCI USA 102:16569 2005 KEYWORDS+: EDITORS; INDEX AUTHOR ADDRESS: R van Dick, Aston Business Sch Birmingham, Kathmandu, Nepal -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: A Bibliometric Study of Citations to Sport Management and Marketing Journals (Article, English) AUTHOR: Shilbury, D SOURCE: JOURNAL OF SPORT MANAGEMENT 25 (5). SEP 2011. p.423-444 HUMAN KINETICS PUBL INC, CHAMPAIGN SEARCH TERM(S): MERTON RK rauth; GROSS PLK SCIENCE 66:385 1927; JOURNALS item_title; BIBLIOMETR* item_title; CITATION* item_title KEYWORDS+: ORGANIZATIONAL-EFFECTIVENESS; COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE; OLYMPIC SPONSORSHIP; PROFESSIONAL SPORT; COLLEGE ATHLETICS; HUMAN-RESOURCES; BRAND EQUITY; SUPER BOWL; TEAM SPORT; EVENT ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to examine the influence of seven sport management and marketing journals on sport-related research published in 20 top tier generic management and marketing journals. Ten top tier management and 10 top tier marketing journals were inventoried to ascertain the number of sport-related management and marketing manuscripts published in those journals from 1987 to 2007. Twenty-five sport management and 51 sport marketing-related manuscripts were identified in the generic journals. From these manuscripts, twelve citations to the seven sport journals were identified in the management publications and 98 citations to the seven sport journals were found in the marketing publications. Sport Marketing Quarterly (62) was the most cited sport management and marketing journal followed by the Journal of Sport Management (28). Results also identify citation frequency by year, first citations and time taken for the seven sport journals to record first citations, author citation frequency and field of author affiliation and its impact on citation patterns. Implications for sport journal focus and editorial policies are discussed as well as the impact of citations in the generic marketing journals compared with the generic management journals. AUTHOR ADDRESS: D Shilbury, Deakin Univ, Sport Management Program, Sch Management & Mkt, Melbourne, Vic, Australia -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Analysis of performance metrics reporting in papers comparing treatments or materials/devices in four important orthopaedic journals for the year 2009 (Article, English) AUTHOR: Bowles, RJ; Mauffrey, C; Seligson, D SOURCE: INJURY-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THE CARE OF THE INJURED 42 (12). DEC 2011. p.1480-1483 ELSEVIER SCI LTD, OXFORD KEYWORDS: Orthopaedics; Performance metrics; Evidence-based medicine; Radiographic measurements ABSTRACT: Purpose: We propose to look at the quality of performance metrics reporting in papers comparing two or more treatments. Our goal is to provide additional context in the focus on evidence-based medicine. Methods: We reviewed papers (1082 papers with 98 papers meeting the inclusion criteria) from four important orthopaedic journals published in 2009 to quantify and analyse the quality of papers reporting performance metrics, defined as (1) radiographic evidence; (2) training/experience of surgeon(s); and (3) intra-operative measurements. Results: Our research revealed that only 32 papers (33%) reported performance metrics. There were no significant differences in the rate of performance metrics reporting amongst the journals included or amongst the different orthopaedic subspecialties topics; however, papers from South Korea and China reported both performance metrics in general and radiographic measurements specifically at a higher rate than papers from the western world. Conclusions: The low rate of performance metric reporting could have an impact on the reader's ability to determine the reproducibility of the results published. We propose a new section on performance metrics reporting for editors to include in their instructions to authors. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. AUTHOR ADDRESS: C Mauffrey, Univ Hosp Louisville, 530 S Jackson St, Louisville, KY 40202 USA -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Citation Advantage of Open Access Legal Scholarship (Article, English) AUTHOR: Donovan, JM; Watson, CA SOURCE: LAW LIBRARY JOURNAL 103 (4). FAL 2011. p.553-573 AMER ASSOC LAW LIBRARIES, CHICAGO SEARCH TERM(S): GARFIELD E rauth; SEGLEN PO J AM SOC INFORM SCI 43:628 1992; CITATION item_title; CITATION* item_title KEYWORDS+: LAW-LIBRARIES; PUBLICATION; RANKING; SCIENCE; SCHOOLS; IMPACT ABSTRACT: In this study focusing on the impact of open access on legal scholarship, the authors examine open access articles from three journals at the University of Georgia School of Law and confirm that legal scholarship freely available via open access improves an article's research impact. Open access legal scholarship which today appears to account for almost half of the output of law faculties can expect to receive fifty-eight percent more citations than non open access writings of similar age from the same venue. AUTHOR ADDRESS: JM Donovan, Univ Kentucky, Alvin E Evans Law Lib, Lexington, KY 40536 USA ------------------------------------------------ TITLE: Publishing Management Research (Article, English) AUTHOR: van Dick, R SOURCE: CHALLENGES AND CONTROVERSIES IN MANAGEMENT RESEARCH. 2011. p.138-151 ROUTLEDGE, LONDON SEARCH TERM(S): HIRSCH JE P NATL ACAD SCI USA 102:16569 2005 KEYWORDS+: EDITORS; INDEX AUTHOR ADDRESS: R van Dick, Aston Business Sch Birmingham, Kathmandu, Nepal From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Thu Nov 24 16:18:56 2011 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 21:18:56 +0000 Subject: Misc items of interest to Sig Metrics Message-ID: TITLE: An index to evaluate fund and fund manager performance (Article, English) AUTHOR: Bystrom, H SOURCE: APPLIED ECONOMICS LETTERS 18 (13-15). SEP-OCT 2011. p.1311-1314 ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD, ABINGDON SEARCH TERM(S): HIRSCH JE P NATL ACAD SCI USA 102:16569 2005 ABSTRACT: I propose a new index, the b-index, to measure the performance of funds and fund managers. A fund or fund manager has a b- index equal to b if b is the highest number for which it holds that the fund/fund manager has returned more than b% at least b years throughout the history of the fund/fund manager. AUTHOR ADDRESS: H Bystrom, Lund Univ, Dept Econ, Box 7082, S-22007 Lund, Sweden ----------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Parochialism or Self-Consciousness? Internationality in Medical History Journals 1997-2006 (Article, English) AUTHOR: Steinke, H; Lang, Y SOURCE: MEDICAL HISTORY 55 (4). OCT 2011. p.523-538 PROF SCI PUBL, LONDON SEARCH TERM(S): JOURNALS item_title KEYWORDS: Journals; Research Quality; Internationality; Languages; Historiography; Citations ABSTRACT: Research councils, universities and funding agencies are increasingly asking for tools to measure the quality of research in the humanities. One of their preferred methods is a ranking of journals according to their supposed level of internationality. Our quantitative survey of seventeen major journals of medical history reveals the futility of such an approach. Most journals have a strong national character with a dominance of native language, authors and topics. The most common case is a paper written by a local author in his own language on a national subject regarding the nineteenth or twentieth century. American and British journals are taken notice of internationally but they only rarely mention articles from other history of medicine journals. Continental European journals show a more international review of literature, but are in their turn not noticed globally. Increasing specialization and fragmentation has changed the role of general medical history journals. They run the risk of losing their function as international platforms of discourse on general and theoretical issues and major trends in historiography, to international collections of papers. Journal editors should therefore force their authors to write a more international report, and authors should be encouraged to submit papers of international interest and from a more general, transnational and methodological point of view. AUTHOR ADDRESS: H Steinke, Univ Bern, Inst Hist Med, Buehlstr 26, CH-3012 Bern, Switzerland -------------------------------------------------------------------------- From katy at INDIANA.EDU Sun Nov 27 21:39:06 2011 From: katy at INDIANA.EDU (Katy Borner) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2011 21:39:06 -0500 Subject: Call for Maps for the 8th Iteration of the Places & Spaces: Mapping Science Exhibit on "Science Maps for Kids" (2012) Message-ID: Call for Maps for the 8th Iteration of the Places & Spaces: Mapping Science Exhibit on "Science Maps for Kids" (2012) *http://scimaps.org/call * *Background and Goals* The Places & Spaces: Mapping Science exhibit was created to inspire cross-disciplinary discussion on how to best track and communicate human activity and scientific progress on a global scale. It has two components: (1) physical exhibits enable the close inspection of high quality reproductions of maps for display at conferences and education centers and (2) the online counterpart (http://scimaps.org) provides links to a selected series of maps and their makers along with detailed explanations of how these maps work. provides links to a selected series of maps and their makers along with detailed explanations of how these maps work. Places & Spaces is a 10-year effort. Each year, 10 new maps are added, which will result in 100 maps total in 2014. Each iteration of the exhibit attempts to learn from the best examples of visualization design. To accomplish this goal, each iteration compares and contrasts four existing maps with six new maps of science. Themes for the different iterations/years are: * 1st Iteration (2005): The Power of Maps * 2nd Iteration (2006): The Power of Reference Systems * 3rd Iteration (2007): The Power of Forecasts * 4th Iteration (2008): Science Maps for Economic Decision Makers * 5th Iteration (2009): Science Maps for Science Policy Makers * 6th Iteration (2010): Science Maps for Scholars * 7th Iteration (2011): Science Maps as Visual Interfaces to Digital Libraries * 8th Iteration (2012): Science Maps for Kids * 9th Iteration (2013): Science Maps for Daily Science Forecasts * 10th Iteration (2014): Science Mapping Standards Places & Spaces was first shown at the Annual Meeting of the Association of American Geographers in April 2005. Since then, the physical exhibit has been displayed at 190 venues in 19 countries, including twelve in Europe, as well as Japan, China, Brazil, South Africa, Australia, Canada, and the United States. A schedule of all display locations can be found at http://scimaps.org/exhibitions . * Submission Details* The 8th iteration of the Mapping Science exhibit is devoted to science maps that kids aged 5-14 can use to gain a more holistic understanding and appreciation of science and technology. Each map should be engaging and fun to peruse yet should have at least one concrete learning objective. Among others, the maps might depict: * A concept map telling a science story, * Famous adventures, encounters, or discoveries in science history, * Zooms in-out of the world of science, * Surprising, scary, wonderful, and exciting scientific activities, * Timelines of science and technology development and inventions, * Exhibit holdings at different science museums (location, subject matter, or both), * A map of school science curricula, projects, or science textbook contents, * Career trajectories in science, or * Science maps drawn by kids analogous to Children Map the World Maps are intended to give children the exciting opportunity to immerse in, explore, or navigate the landscape of science and to find their own place. We invite people of all ages to submit maps that show a visual rendering of a data set together with a legend, textual description, and acknowledgements as required to interpret the map. These maps should be aimed at the understanding level of kids rather than college students or college graduates. Maps can be abstract, geographical, or feature-based, but are typically richer than simple x, y plots. Data can be used to generate a reference system over which other data, e.g., career trajectories, are overlaid. Data can also be projected onto an existing reference system, e.g., a map of the world. Maps should present fully formed ideas and analysis; they should not be simple sketches of "what we plan to do". See http://scimaps.org/exhibit/docs/all-maps-poster1-7_2011.pdf for an overview of the 70 maps already featured in the exhibit. Each initial entry must be submitted by January 10th, 2012 and needs to include: * Low resolution version of map * Title of work * Author(s) name, email address, affiliation, mailing address * Copyright holder (if different from authors) * Description of work: Learning objectives addressed, data used, data analysis, visualization techniques applied, and main insights gained (100-300 words) * References to publications or online sites in which the map appeared * Links to related projects/works * At least three keywords Entries should be submitted via EasyChair at https://www.easychair.org/account/signin.cgi?conf=sciencemapsforkids20. Submit map as pdf file. Enter author info, a title, and three keywords. Submit all other information via the 'Abstract' field. * Review Process* All submissions will be reviewed by the exhibit advisory board and children aged 5-14. Submissions will be evaluated in terms of * /*Scientific value*/ -- quality of data collection, analysis and communication of results in support of clearly stated learning objectives. Appropriate and innovative application of existing algorithms and/or development of new approaches. * /*Value for kids*/ -- what major insight does the map provide and why does it matter? Is the map easy to understand by kids? Does it inspire them to learn more about science and technology? *Final Submission* Authors of winning entries will be contacted early February and invited to submit final entries by April 10th, 2012. Each final entry should consist of: * Title of Work * Author(s) name, email address, affiliation, mailing address * 24 x 30 inch, 300 dpi, landscape version of map using provided template at http://scimaps.org/exhibit/images/Matte_300DPI.psd (13.9 MB) * Official map description (200 words) * Biographies and photos of all authors (100 words each) * Signed copyright and reproduction agreement Map makers are welcome to use the expertise and resources of the exhibit curators and designers when designing and producing high resolution versions of final maps. The layout and production of the 8th iteration maps are expected to be ready for display by mid-June, 2012. Please feel free to send any questions you might have regarding the judging process to Katy Borner (katy at indiana.edu ), keep subject header. * Important Dates* Submit initial entries: January 10th, 2012 Notification to mapmakers: February 10th, 2012 Submit final entries: April 10th, 2012 8th Iteration ready for display: June, 2012 * Exhibit Advisory Board * * Gary Berg-Cross, SUNY Stony Brook * Bob Bishop, ICES Foundation * Kevin Boyack, SciTech Strategies, Inc. * Donna Cox, Illinois eDream Institute, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign * Bonnie DeVarco, Media X, Stanford University * Sara Irina Fabrikant, Geography Department, University of Z?rich, Switzerland * Marjorie Hlava, Access Innovations * Peter A. Hook, Law Librarian, Indiana University * Manuel Lima, Royal Society of Arts, Microsoft Bing, VisualComplexity.com * Deborah MacPherson, Accuracy&Aesthetics * Lev Manovich, Visual Arts Department, University of California at San Diego * Carlo Ratti, Professor and Director of SENSEable City Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology * Eric Rodenbeck, Stamen Design * Andr? Skupin, Associate Professor of Geography, San Diego State University * Moritz Stefaner, Freelance Designer * Stephen Uzzo, New York Hall of Science * Caroline Wagner, Batelle Center for Science and Technology Policy and John Glenn School for Public Affairs, Ohio State University * Benjamin Wiederkehr, Founder, InteractiveThings.com Follow us on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/mappingscience. -- Katy Borner Victor H. Yngve Professor of Information Science Director, CI for Network Science Center, http://cns.iu.edu Curator, Mapping Science exhibit, http://scimaps.org School of Library and Information Science, Indiana University Wells Library 021, 1320 E. Tenth Street, Bloomington, IN 47405, USA Phone: (812) 855-3256 Fax: -6166 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET Mon Nov 28 01:37:40 2011 From: loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET (Loet Leydesdorff) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 07:37:40 +0100 Subject: The Disclosure of University Research for Societal Demand: A Non-Market Perspective on the "Third Mission" (preprint version) Message-ID: The Disclosure of University Research for Societal Demand: A Non-Market Perspective on the "Third Mission" Michelina Venditti, Emanuela Reale, and Loet Leydesdorff Many nations, universities, and regional governments commit resources to promote the dissemination of scientific and technical knowledge. The emphasis has been on knowledge-based innovation and the economic function of the university in terms of technology transfer, intellectual property, university-industry-government relations, etc. Faculties other than engineering or applied sciences may not be able to recognize opportunities in this "linear model" of technology transfer. In our opinion, more options for relating demand and supply in terms of innovations can then be explored. In this study, we elaborate on an idea originally developed in the context of the Dutch science shops in the late 1980s: the two Amsterdam universities were questionnaired about keywords and expertise at the level of individual researchers. Using the internet, this experiment was redesigned for questionnairing the academic staff of the Gabriele d'Annunzio University (UdA) in Italy (728 tenured staff). The recall was highest among the humanities (keywords) and social sciences (expertises). On the basis of this data an interface was constructed that allows to build bridges across disciplinary divides and using considerable semantic precision. pdf available from here ** apologies for cross-postings _____ Loet Leydesdorff Professor, University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) Kloveniersburgwal 48, 1012 CX Amsterdam. Tel. +31-20-525 6598; fax: +31-842239111 loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Visiting Professor, ISTIC, Beijing; Honorary Fellow, SPRU, University of Sussex; http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ych9gNYAAAAJ&hl=en -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Tue Nov 29 13:18:51 2011 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 18:18:51 +0000 Subject: Web citation persistence over time by N. Riahinia of Iran Message-ID: While it is always interesting to have yet another study of the library science literature, it would be far more interesting if we could have a similar analysis of the literature of a field in the natural or physical sciences that is of interest to the users of libraries rather than those who administer libraries. EG -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Web citation persistence over time: a retrospective study (Article, English) AUTHOR: Riahinia, N; Zandian, F; Azimi, A SOURCE: ELECTRONIC LIBRARY 29 (5). 2011. p.609-620 EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LIMITED, BINGLEY SEARCH TERM(S): CITATION item_title; CITATION* item_title KEYWORDS: Web citation; Web resources persistence; Print citations; LIS journals; Citation domains; Resources file format; Referencing; Communication processes ABSTRACT: Purpose - By studying a large number of citations in the US field, this paper seeks to examine carefully the persistence status of web resources specified by their domains and type of files. Design/methodology/approach - All 2005-2008 volumes of six LIS journals ranked by ISI Thomson Reuters were selected. From 1,181 papers, 37,791 citations were recorded. Only original articles, which had a list of references, were included in the study. The persistence of web citations was checked by directly following the cited URLs. Findings - Of the 37,791 citations, 4,840 (12.8 percent) were web citations. The means per articles of web and print citations were 4.09, and 27.9, respectively. Of all web citations, 4,617 (95 percent) were readily persistent, and 5 percent returned errors and thus were not originally accessible. The relationship between the print and web citation over time (year) was significant. The most prevalent domain of citations was html and the most favorable and persistent file format was pdf. Practical implications - The web resources are used for their easy accessibility and the support they provide for a scientific content. While direct accessibility to a web citation is not provided, many strategies are adopted to recover the dead citation. The issue is to what extent the authors rely on web resources and are they finished with citing paper-based materials? Are web resources becoming replaced with their print counterparts? The study showed that scholars still rely more on print resources than on the web materials. Originality/value - Tracking current trends in scholars' communication behavior shows a shift from print to web resources. The paper examines web citations persistence in some prestigious journals to show whether the web citations are reliable enough and always accessible in the digital world. AUTHOR ADDRESS: N Riahinia, Tarbiat Moallem Univ, Fac Psychol & Educ, Tehran, Iran ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Eugene Garfield, PhD. email: garfield at codex.cis.upenn.edu home page: www.eugenegarfield.org Tel: 610-525-8729 Fax: 610-560-4749 Chairman Emeritus, ThomsonReuters Scientific (formerly ISI) 1500 Spring Garden Street, Philadelphia, PA 19130-4067 Editor Emeritus, The Scientist LLC. www.the-scientist.com 121 W 27th Street, Suite 604, New York, NY 10001 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 Tue Nov 29 13:30:06 2011 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 18:30:06 +0000 Subject: Papers of possible interst to SIG Metrics readers Message-ID: - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Scholarly impact measurements of LIS open access journals: based on citations and links (Article, English) AUTHOR: Yuan, SB; Hua, WN SOURCE: ELECTRONIC LIBRARY 29 (5). 2011. p.682-697 EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LIMITED, BINGLEY SEARCH TERM(S): JOURNALS item_title; CITATION* item_title KEYWORDS: Open access; Scholarly impact measurement; Citation analysis; Web link analysis; Library and information networks KEYWORDS+: GREATER RESEARCH IMPACT; WEB IMPACT; SCIENCE; ARTICLES; SITES; PUBLICATIONS; INDEXES ABSTRACT: Purpose - The main purpose of this paper is to measure the scholarly impact of LIS (Library and Information Science) open access journals (OA journals), most of which are not indexed by the Web of Science (WoS). In addition, the paper seeks to discuss measurement methods beyond citation analysis. Design/methodology/approach - The study selected 97 LIS OA journals as a sample and measured their scholarly impact on the basis of citations and links. The citation counts in WoS, coverage in LISA, Web links, WIFs and Page Rank of the journals are retrieved and calculated, and correlations between citation counts, links, pages, WIFs, and Page Rank are also analyzed. Findings - The results indicate that LIS OA journals have become a significant component of the scholarly communication system. The Journal of the Medical Library Association enjoys the highest citation counts in WoS. This journal, together with D-Lib Magazine, Information Research, Ariadne, Cybermetrics, and First Monday are the six most important LIS OA journals. With regard to coverage in LISA, Bulletin des Bibliotheques de France (2151) performs best. As a whole, the Page Rank is relatively high, mostly at 6, 7, or 8. The study finds that correlation between citation-based measurements and link-based measurements tends to be significant. Originality/value - This paper uses the web as a global resource to measure the impact of LIS OA journals by analyzing citation, coverage, web links and Page Rank. The focus of this study is the value of the web as a source of impact indices, rather different from the traditional research methods. It contributes to the scholarly impact measurements of OA journals. AUTHOR ADDRESS: SB Yuan, Nanjing Univ, Dept Informat Management, Nanjing 210008, Jiangsu, Peoples R China -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: A bibliometric analysis of digestive health research in Canada: "Fair is foul, and foul is fair" (Editorial Material, English) AUTHOR: Vanner, SS SOURCE: CANADIAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY 25 (11). NOV 2011. p.601-602 PULSUS GROUP INC, OAKVILLE SEARCH TERM(S): BIBLIOMETR* item_title; HIRSCH JE P NATL ACAD SCI USA 102:16569 2005; EDITORIAL doctype AUTHOR ADDRESS: SS Vanner, Queens Univ, Kingston Gen Hosp, Dept Med, 78 Stuart St, Kingston, ON K7L 2V7, Canada -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: A bibliometric analysis of digestive health research in Canada (Article, English) AUTHOR: Tuitt, D; Knight, F; Lipman, T SOURCE: CANADIAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY 25 (11). NOV 2011. p.609-614 PULSUS GROUP INC, OAKVILLE SEARCH TERM(S): HIRSCH JE P NATL ACAD SCI USA 102:16569 2005; BIBLIOMETR* item_title KEYWORDS: Canada; Digestive disease; Digestive health; Impact; Influence KEYWORDS+: INDICATORS; IMPACT; INDEX ABSTRACT: Measurement: of the impact and influence of medical/scientific journals, and of individual researchers has become more widely practiced in recent decades. Tills is driven, in part, by the increased availability of data regarding citations of research articles, and by increased competition for research funding. Digestive disease research has been identified as a particularly strong discipline in Canada. The authors collected quantitative data on the impact and influence of Canadian digestive health research. The present study involved an analysis of the research impact (Hirsch factor) and research influence (Influence factor) of 106 digestive health researchers in Canada. Rankings of the top 25 researchers on the basis of the two metrics were dominated by the larger research groups at the University of Toronto (Toronto, Ontario), McMaster University (Hamilton, Ontario), and the Universities of Calgary (Calgary, Alberta) and Alberta (Edmonton, Alberta), but with representation by other research groups at the Universities of Manitoba (Winnipeg, Manitoba), Western Ontario (London, Ontario) and McGill University (Montreal, Quebec). Female and male researchers had similar scores for the two metrics, as did basic scientists versus clinical investigators. Strategic recruitment, particularly of established investigators, can have a major impact on the ranking of research groups. Comparing these metrics over different time frames can provide insights into the vulnerabilities and strengths of research groups. AUTHOR ADDRESS: D Tuitt, Res Excellence Metr Ltd, 2000 Appleby Line,Suite 226, Burlington, ON L7L 7H7, Canada -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Influence of Database Mistakes on Journal Citation Analysis: Remarks on the Paper by Franceschini and Maisano, QREI (2010) (Article, English) AUTHOR: Franceschini, F; Maisano, D SOURCE: QUALITY AND RELIABILITY ENGINEERING INTERNATIONAL 27 (7). NOV 2011. p.969-976 WILEY-BLACKWELL, MALDEN SEARCH TERM(S): HIRSCH JE P NATL ACAD SCI USA 102:16569 2005; CITATION item_title; CITATION ANALYS* item_title; CITATION* item_title; JOURNAL item_title KEYWORDS: bibliometric indicators; citation analysis; Hirsch-index; robust indicator; database mistake; false reference KEYWORDS+: H-INDEX ABSTRACT: This short note contains some remarks on a recent bibliometric survey about some of the major scientific journals in the field of Quality Engineering/Management (Qual. Reliab. Engng. Int. 2010; 26(6): 593-604). In particular, thanks to Professor Woodall's precious indication, it has been freshly noticed that some results in the original work are biased by mistakes in the bibliometric databases (in this case Google Scholar). After a careful examination and correction of biased data, a synthetic analysis of the typical mistakes of bibliometric databases is presented, focussing the attention on the importance of using robust bibliometric indicators. Copyright (C) 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. AUTHOR ADDRESS: F Franceschini, Politecn Torino, Dipartimento Sistemi Prod & Econ Azienda DISPEA, Corso Duca Abruzzi 24, I-10129 Turin, Italy -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: HOW SHOULD RESEARCH PERFORMANCE BE MEASURED? A STUDY OF SWEDISH ECONOMISTS (Article, English) AUTHOR: Henrekson, M; Waldenstrom, D SOURCE: MANCHESTER SCHOOL 79 (6). DEC 2011. p.1139-1156 WILEY-BLACKWELL, MALDEN SEARCH TERM(S): HIRSCH JE P NATL ACAD SCI USA 102:16569 2005 KEYWORDS+: EUROPEAN ECONOMICS; RELATIVE IMPACTS; CORE JOURNALS; DRY HOLES; DEPARTMENTS; PRODUCTIVITY; PUBLICATIONS; RANKINGS ABSTRACT: Billions are allocated annually to university research. The increased specialization and international integration of research and researchers has animated the need for comparisons of performance across fields, institutions and individual researchers. However, there is still no consensus regarding how such rankings should be conducted and what output measures to use. We rank all full professors in a particular discipline (economics) in one country using seven established measures of research performance. We show both that the rank order varies greatly across measures and that the distribution of total research output is valued very differently depending on the measure used. AUTHOR ADDRESS: M Henrekson, Res Inst Ind Econ IFN, Stockholm, Sweden -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: Fifty years of the Journal of Apicultural Research (Review, English) AUTHOR: Carreck, NL SOURCE: JOURNAL OF APICULTURAL RESEARCH 50 (4). 2011. p.249-256 INT BEE RESEARCH ASSOC, CARDIFF SEARCH TERM(S): JOURNAL item_title KEYWORDS: Journal of Apicultural Research; International Bee Research Association; honey bees; stingless bees; bumble bees; solitary bees KEYWORDS+: ACUTE PARALYSIS VIRUS; BRITISH BUMBLE BEES; VARROA- JACOBSONI; HONEY-BEES; AFRICANIZED HONEYBEE; BACILLUS- LARVAE; BEHAVIOR; SPERMATOZOA; CULTURE; WORKER ABSTRACT: The Journal of Apicultural Research (JAR) was first published in 1962 under the Editorship of Dr Eva Crane, Director of the then Bee Research Association (BRA). The journal was envisaged as an international English language medium of refereed science dealing with all kinds of bee including: honey bees, stingless bees, bumble bees and solitary bees. The international nature of this journal and its parent journal Bee World were instrumental in the change of title of BRA to International Bee Research Association (IBRA). This paper, coming at the completion of the fiftieth volume of JAR, describes the origins and history of the journal, and discusses some of the most notable papers published within its pages. AUTHOR ADDRESS: NL Carreck, Int Bee Res Assoc, 16 North Rd, Cardiff CF10 3DY, S Glam, Wales ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: A study of influential authors, works and research network of consumer behavior research (Article, English) AUTHOR: Tu, PPN SOURCE: AFRICAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS MANAGEMENT 5 (23). OCT 7 2011. p.9838-9854 ACADEMIC JOURNALS, VICTORIA ISLAND SEARCH TERM(S): MARSHAKOVA IV rauth; SMALL H SCIENTOMETRICS 26:5 1993; SMALL H SCI STUD 4:17 1974; SMALL H J AM SOC INFORM SCI 24:265 1973; WHITE HD J AM SOC INFORM SCI 32:163 1981 KEYWORDS: Consumer behavior; bibliometric analysis; author co- citation analysis; social network analysis; knowledge of network KEYWORDS+: COCITATION ANALYSIS; INTELLECTUAL STRUCTURE; ELECTRONIC MARKETPLACES; OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT; MODELING APPROACH; PLANNED BEHAVIOR; CONSUMPTION; THEMES; SELF; CONSCIOUSNESS ABSTRACT: With the proliferation of consumer behavior research in recent decades, the ability to effectively identify the most influential and representative collection of research articles had become significantly important. Research in the consumer behavior area had developed rapidly, but no recent studies had examined contemporary consumer behavior research. This paper employed author co-citation analysis, a bibliometric methodology and social network analysis methodology to highlight the most influential authors, to analyze citation relationships, to exploit changes in the intellectual base and to show trends and patterns in the consumer behavior field over two consecutive time periods, 1989 to 1998 and 1999 to 2008. In order to analyze the dynamic intellectual structure of consumer behavior research, author co-citation analysis was conducted of 16,536 references from 606 articles found in the SSCI and SCI databases from 1989 to 2008. In addition, factor analysis was used to examine the breadth of the authors' research areas. The aims of this paper were twofold: to provide a valuable direction for future consumer behavior research, and to propose an objective means of establishing the relative importance of different knowledge nodes in the recent development of the consumer behavior field. AUTHOR ADDRESS: PPN Tu, Chang Jung Christian Univ, Grad Sch Business & Operat Management, Tainan, Taiwan From loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET Wed Nov 30 03:07:28 2011 From: loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET (Loet Leydesdorff) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 09:07:28 +0100 Subject: Betweenness Centrality as a Driver of Preferential Attachment in the Evolution of Research Collaboration Networks (preprint version) Message-ID: Betweenness Centrality as a Driver of Preferential Attachment in the Evolution of Research Collaboration Networks Alireza Abbasi, Liaquat Hossain, and Loet Leydesdorff We analyze whether preferential attachment in scientific coauthorship networks is different for authors with different forms of centrality. Using a complete database for the scientific specialty of research about "steel structures," we show that betweenness centrality of an existing node is a significantly better predictor of preferential attachment by new entrants than degree or closeness centrality. During the growth of a network, preferential attachment shifts from (local) degree centrality to betweenness centrality as a global measure. An interpretation is that supervisors of PhD projects and postdocs broker between new entrants and the already existing network, and thus become focal to preferential attachment. Because of this mediation, scholarly networks can be expected to develop differently from networks which are predicated on preferential attachment to nodes with high degree centrality. Alireza Abbasi, Liaquat Hossain Centre for Complex Systems Research, Faculty of Engineering and IT, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia; alireza.abbasi at sydney.edu.au Loet Leydesdorff Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) Kloveniersburgwal 48, 1012 CX Amsterdam; loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Wed Nov 30 13:33:46 2011 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 18:33:46 +0000 Subject: The h-index, h-core citation rate and the bibliometric profile of the Web of Science database in three configurations by P. Jacso Message-ID: -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE: The h-index, h-core citation rate and the bibliometric profile of the Web of Science database in three configurations (Article, English) AUTHOR: Jacso, P SOURCE: ONLINE INFORMATION REVIEW 35 (5). 2011. p.821-833 EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LIMITED, BINGLEY SEARCH TERM(S): GARFIELD E rauth; HIRSCH JE P NATL ACAD SCI USA 102:16569 2005; BIBLIOMETR* item_title; CITATION item_title; CITATION* item_title; GARFIELD E SCIENCE 122:108 1955 KEYWORDS: Databases; Research KEYWORDS+: SCIENTIFIC-RESEARCH OUTPUT; GOOGLE SCHOLAR; INFORMATION- SCIENCE; OF-SCIENCE; SCOPUS; INDICATORS; IMPACT; RESEARCHERS; RANKING; CONS ABSTRACT: Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to discuss the new version of the Web of Science (WoS) software. Design/methodology/approach - This paper discusses the new version of the Web of Science (WoS) software. Findings - The new version of the Web of Science (WoS) software released in mid-2011 eliminated the 100,000-record limit in the search results. This, in turn, makes it possible to study the bibliometric profile of the entire WoS database (which consists of 50 million unique records), and/or any subset licensed by a library. In addition the maximum record set for the automatic production of the informative citation report was doubled from 5,000 to 10,000 records. These are important developments for getting a realistic picture of WoS, and gauging the most widely used gauge. It also helps in comparing WoS with the Scopus database using traceable and reproducible quantitative measures, including the h-index and its variants, the citation rate of the documents making up the h-core (the set of records that contribute to the h-index), and computing additional bibliometric indicators that can be used as proxies in evaluating the research performance of individuals, research groups, educational and research institutions as well as serial publications for the broadest subject areas and time span although with some limitations and reservations. Originality/value - This paper, which attempts to describe some of the bibliometric traits of WoS in three different configurations (in terms of the composition and time span of the components licensed), complements the one published in a previous issue of Online Information Review profiling the Scopus database. AUTHOR ADDRESS: P Jacso, Univ Hawaii, Honolulu, HI 96822 USA --------------------------------------------------------------------------