Open access?

Wed Apr 11 15:22:23 EDT 2012

OK. Thanks for the exchange.

Best,
Loet

On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 9:00 PM, Stephen J Bensman <notsjb at lsu.edu> wrote:

> Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe):
> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
>
> Loet,
> I am working with Nobelists in chemistry, and I have not found such
> problems.  However, I have not finished the section of my research on how
> Google forms and ranks sets through the word spacing, the PageIndex, etc.
> My experience with the Nobelists is that the document sets become fairly
> random and incoherent below the h-index where the asymptotes begins.
>  Personally I would not use Google Scholar without validation by WoS
> because of the randomness of the sets.  And there is no authority control
> whatsoever on journals.  However, Google Scholar does give some interesting
> insights due to the way it retrieves data.  For example, Negishi totally
> dominates his field in terms of review articles, where the paradigms of
> science are set.  His highest rank by GS was not anything he wrote but a
> two-volume collection of review articles he EDITED.  Nobody can do anything
> in his field unless they consult those volumes, which he put together
> probably from  his students.  That book had 797 reverse links but only 7
> WoS cites.   WoS totally missed the importance of that work.  Google found
> the importance of that book by scanning down the authorship structure to
> where the editors are and giving the snippet.  I would not make any
> judgments on anything until I determined where the asymptote begins and the
> crap ends.
>
> Yours,
> SB
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:
> SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Loet Leydesdorff
> Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 1:20 PM
> To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU
> Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] Open access?
>
> Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe):
> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
>
> Dear Stephen,
>
> Try "E Garfield" in PoP and you will see what I mean. If you would run "H
> Simon" the 1000th record would still receive 27 citations.
>
> It depends on your research question whether you wish to truncate this.
> In Scopus, one can run institutional searches (e.g., top-10% of Chinese
> papers) and then 2,000 may be an unpleasant limit.
>
> For my purposes, WoS is often optimal because we don't have these limits
> set by the system.
>
> Best,
> Loet
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics
> [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Stephen J Bensman
> Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 8:07 PM
> To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU
> Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] Open access?
>
> Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe):
> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
>
> Loet,
> I think that I may have answered some of your questions in my response to
> Filippo.  With Anne-Wil's data I am doing an article with two
> mathematicians, where I describe the probability structure of the Web and
> locate the positions of chemistry and mathematics in this structure.  When
> you see what this structure is, you will have a better idea on how to
> handle
> WWW data.  For now I can only give you one piece of advice--it only works
> at
> the upper levels of the asymptote.  Below that the sets rapidly descend
> into
> nonsense and should be truncated.  It really is that simple.
>
> Yours,
>
> Stephen J Bensman, Ph.D.
> LSU Libraries
> Lousiana State University
> Baton Rouge, LA 70803
> USA
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics
> [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Loet Leydesdorff
> Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 12:34 PM
> To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU
> Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] Open access?
>
> Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe):
> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
>
> Dear Stephen,
>
> Important limitations for bibliometric research are the limits for the
> download:
> 1. Google Scholar: 1000
> 2. Scopus: 2000
> 3. WoS 100,000
>
> In version 5 of WoS one can see retrievals larger than 100,000, but not
> download them.
> PoP gives an error message when the retrieval is larger than 1,000.
>
> WoS does qualifies as the best system for evaluations which in addition to
> a
> publication also normalize against a reference set. Otherwise, the other
> databases are more recent in their organization. (For example, cited
> references in Scopus are identified and one can move to the institutional
> addresses.)
>
> Best,
> Loet
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics
> [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Stephen J. Bensman
> Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 5:00 PM
> To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU
> Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] Open access?
>
> Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe):
> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
>
> Quentin,
> Thank you for the Guardian articles on Elsevier.  I would like to add some
> observations of my own on this matter.  Elsevier runs a good operation and
> publishes important materials.  I work with their support people and find
> them informative and helpful.  But Elsevier has always been
> non-cooperative,
> tries to force people to operate within its system, and monopolizes its
> materials to maximize its profit.  This is the nature of the beast.
>
> This tendency has recently had extremely negative consequences.
> Since November, 2004, the field of scientometric evaluative data has been
> been in a state of revolution.  In that month Elsevier launched Scopus, and
> Google launched Google Scholar, breaking the monopolistic hold Thompson
> Reuters ISI had on evaluative scientometric data.  Since then there has
> been
> a Hobbesian battle among these three titans, because--if I am
> correct--production and control of such data is very profitable.  Such data
> is particularly needed in Europe and other places, where science and
> universities are funded by the central governments, which need such data
> for
> allocation decisions.  Thompson Reuters ISI (The Empire) has struck back by
> abandoning its long-standing policy of relying on mainly journals and
> launching its Book Citation Index.
>
> Google Scholar was really too difficult to use for evaluative purposes, but
> this has changed with the launching of the Publish or Perish program by
> Anne-Wil Harzing.  This program can be retrieved for free from her Web site
> at http://www.harzing.com/.  It is revolutionary in that it establishes
> effective statistical and bibliographic control over Google Scholar, making
> it feasible to use it for evaluative purposes.  I am doing research with
> others to test the vaiidity of using Google Scholar for evaluative
> purposes,
> using data which Anne-Wil has graciously given me with her program.  It is
> the most stupendous and interesting data set I have ever worked with.
> However, in doing this research, I came across this statement on Elsevier's
> SciVerse Web site at the following URL:
>
> http://www.info.sciverse.com/sciencedirect/buying/policies/crawling
>
> If one knows anything how Web seach engines operate, it is quite obvious
> that this is a knife aimed by Elsevier at Google's jugular, blocking it
> from
> indexing the publications of one of the leading publishers of scientific
> materials.  Since I working with chemistry, I am going to have to check
> what
> effect this has on Google Scholar.
> Fortunately Anne-Wil's data allows me to determine from where Google
> Scholar
> is retrieving its data.  The only question I have is whether this is an
> advantageous or self-destructive move on the part of Elsevier, whose
> publications and authors will be rated lower by Google Scholar, which can
> be
> utilized without cost by cash-strapped institutions.
>
> Respectfully,
> Stephen J. Bensman, Ph.D.
> LSU Libraries
> Louisiana State University
> Baton Rouge, LA 70803
> USA
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 20:29:03 +0100, Quentin Burrell
> <quentinburrell at MANX.NET> wrote:
>
> >Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe):
> >http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
> >
> >Members might be interested in these two related articles in today's
> Guardian newspaper.
> >
> >
> >http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/apr/09/wellcome-trust-
> academic-spring
> >
> >http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/apr/09/frustrated-blogpost-
> boycott-scientific-journals
> >
> >
> >Quentin Burrell
>
>

-- 
Professor Loet Leydesdorff
Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR)
Kloveniersburgwal 48, 1012 CX Amsterdam
Tel.: +31-20- 525 6598; fax: +31-20- 525 3681
loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.asis.org/pipermail/sigmetrics/attachments/20120411/cf4f6183/attachment.html>