From amsciforum at GMAIL.COM Sun Dec 1 12:23:55 2013 From: amsciforum at GMAIL.COM (Stevan Harnad) Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2013 12:23:55 -0500 Subject: Of Course Immediate OA Generates More Citations Than Delayed Access Message-ID: Laakso & Bj?rk (2013) compare the citation impact of immediate Gold OA with delayed Gold and toll-access. They find that delayed-Gold journals average twice as many citations per article as toll-access journals and three times as many as immediate-Gold journals. This is based on comparisons between different journals. But journals differ in both subject matter and quality -- and one of the ways to try to equate them to make them comparable for quality is to equate them for impact. So if journals are not equated for subject matter and quality, one is comparing apples and oranges. But if immediate Gold OA, delayed-Gold and toll-access journals are equated for impact, one can't compare impact for delayed vs. immediate Gold -- in fact one can't compare the journals for citation impact at al!! A feasible way to compare immediate-OA with delayed-access and toll-access is via Green OA based on within-journal instead of between-journal comparisons, by comparing articles published within the same journal and year. To do this one needs both the date of publication and the date the article was made Green OA. It is impossible to get the OA date for webwide deposits in general, but for repository deposits it is possible. We do have some very preliminary and partial data from the University of Minho repository, but the sample is still too small to do within-journal comparisons. Immediate Green OA articles do have more citations on average than Delayed Access articles (see Figures 2c and 3c) despite the availability of the automated "Almost-OA" Button during the delay period, but these citation counts are just absolute ones, rather than relative to within-journal matched toll-access controls. Hence these are likewise still comparisons between apples and oranges. (Note also that the large number of undeposited articles is likewise unmatched, and not based on their respective within-journal matched toll-access controls.) The sample will grow as the number of Green OA mandates and repository deposits worldwide grows. The vast unused potential for immediate Green-OA and Almost-OA has long been known and noted -- most recently by Laakso (2014) . Gargouri, Yassine, Larivi?re, Vincent & Harnad, Stevan (2013) Ten-year Analysis of University of Minho Green OA Self-Archiving Mandate (in E Rodrigues, Ed. *title to come)* Laakso, M., & Bj?rk, B. C. (2013). Delayed open access: An overlooked high-impact category of openly available scientific literature . *Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology*. Laakso, M (2014) Green open access policies of scholarly journal publishers: a study of what, when, and where self-archiving is allowed. Scientometrics (in press) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Sun Dec 1 17:19:41 2013 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2013 22:19:41 +0000 Subject: Papers of possible interest to Sigmetrics 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:000326231200025 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: The Academic Impact of The Triological Society Theses-Mosher and Fowler Awards: *Citations*, *Impact Factor*, and H-Index Authors: Badran, KW; Lahham, S; Mahboubi, H; Crumley, RL; Wong, BJF Author Full Names: Badran, Karam W.; Lahham, Sari; Mahboubi, Hossein; Crumley, Roger L.; Wong, Brian J. F. Source: LARYNGOSCOPE, 123 (11):2654-2657; 10.1002/lary.24188 NOV 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: H-index, h-index in otolaryngology, Triological Society, Triological Society Thesis, academic productivity, academic physician scientific productivity, Mosher Award, Fowler Award, The Laryngoscope KeyWords Plus: RESEARCH PRODUCTIVITY; OTOLARYNGOLOGISTS; RANK Abstract: Objectives/HypothesisThe Triological Society requires thesis submission for full membership. Accepted theses (AT) may be recognized with designations of: Mosher Awards (MA), Fowler Awards (FA), Honorable Mention for Basic Science (HMBS), and Honorable Mention for Clinical Science (HMCS). We sought to determine and compare the scholarly impact of Triological Society theses, their authors, and whether differences exist between AT and those that receive special recognition. Study DesignRetrospective analysis of awards and theses compiled by The Triological Society home office from 1998 to 2011. MethodsThomson Reuters' Integrated Search Interface (ISI) Web of Knowledge and Google Scholar and were used to determine citations and the author's h-index. Trend and statistical analysis was performed. ResultsOf the 307 Triological Society theses examined, 275 were published and had record of citation. H-indices and number of citations were found to be nonparametric; thus, median and quartile (1(st)-3(rd) quartiles) values were found to be the following: AT 11 (4-26), MA 18 (9-25), FA 6 (1-28), HMBS 11 (4-26), and HMCS 16 (1-28) for number of citations per published thesis. H-indices of authors with accepted theses were AT 15 (10-19), MA 16 (15-23), FA 18 (10-23), HMBS 16 (11-19), and HMCS 15 (11-21). When comparing all groupings of theses and award winners with bibliometric indices, no statistical significance was found (P >0.5). ConclusionsThe Triological Society cultivates a competitive pool of applicants as membership is highly regarded. Negligible difference in citations and author h-index were observed between AT, MA, and FA theses indicated that the level of excellence is uniform, and thesis submission remains influential and prestigious. Addresses: [Badran, Karam W.; Lahham, Sari; Mahboubi, Hossein; Wong, Brian J. F.] Univ Calif Irvine, Dept Otolaryngol Head & Neck Surg, Irvine, CA 92612 USA. [Wong, Brian J. F.] Univ Calif Irvine, Beckman Laser Inst, Irvine, CA 92612 USA. [Wong, Brian J. F.] Univ Calif Irvine, Med Clin, Irvine, CA 92612 USA. E-mail Addresses: bjwong at uci.edu Cited Reference Count: 16 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: WILEY-BLACKWELL, 111 RIVER ST, HOBOKEN 07030-5774, NJ USA ISSN: 0023-852X Web of Science Categories: Medicine, Research & Experimental; Otorhinolaryngology Research Areas: Research & Experimental Medicine; Otorhinolaryngology IDS Number: 242IA Unique ID: WOS:000326231200025 Cited References: Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Hirsch J. E., 2007, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V104, P19193 Svider Peter F., 2013, LARYNGOSCOPE, V123, P103 Svider Peter F., 2013, LARYNGOSCOPE, V123, P118 Ball Philip, 2007, NATURE, V448, P737 Benway Brian M., 2009, UROLOGY, V74, P30 Binderup G., 2013, Electronic mail interview, Lee Janet, 2009, JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, V111, P387 Kulasegarah Jeyanthi, 2010, EUROPEAN ARCHIVES OF OTO-RHINO-LARYNGOLOGY, V267, P455 Callaham M, 2002, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION4th International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication, SEP 14-16, 2001, BARCELONA, SPAIN, V287, P2847 van Leeuwen TN, 2001, CORTEX, V37, P607 Eloy Jean Anderson, 2012, LARYNGOSCOPE, V122, P2690 Castillo M., 2010, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF NEURORADIOLOGY, V31, P783 Bornmann Lutz, 2007, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V58, P1381 Von Bohlen Und Halbach O., 2011, Ann Anat, V193, P191 Pagel P. S., 2011, ANAESTHESIA, V66, P873 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326245200008 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: *Scientometrics* Study of Impact of *Journal* Indexing on the Growth of Scientific Productions of Iran Authors: Najari, A; Yousefvand, M Author Full Names: Najari, Abbas; Yousefvand, Masoud Source: IRANIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 42 (10):1134-1138; OCT 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Medical sciences, Scientometrics, Scientific assessment, Journal indexing, Iran KeyWords Plus: WEB Abstract: Background: This study represents scientific production of Iran in medical sciences field at recent years, and the correlation between scientific productions with the number of indexed journals. Methods: Data extracted from SCOPUS database between years 2000 and 2011, and Iran?s performance measured in terms of different Scientometrics indexes including self-citations, percent of cited articles, number of articles with international collaboration and contribution of Iran in medical sciences in Middle East and world. Moreover correlation between the number of articles, citations, self-citations, and H-index and number of indexed journals for 50 countries in all fields is included. Results: In 2011 year, Iran contributed 32.77 percent of the Middle East, and accounted for 1.57 percent of the world scientific production. The most frequent document type was original journal article published in English. Retrieved records revealed preferred subject areas, including medicine miscellaneous (14.53 percent of Iran publications in 2011 year). In 2011, according to the number of articles and citations to them, Iran was at 17th and 23th position between 226 countries, respectively. After adjustment for 19708 journals from 50 countries, Iran?s rank based on the number of journals in medical sciences was 24th. Conclusion: The number of indexed journals with number of articles, citations, self-citations, and H-index of each country showed significant correlation (P-value<0.01). In recent years, by favoring quality over quantity of researches, the new rules have proven to be more effective for discriminating Iranian scientific productions. Addresses: [Najari, Abbas] Minist Hlth & Med Educ, Ctr Collect Reflect & Implementat Ideas, Undersecretary Res & Technol, Tehran, Iran. [Yousefvand, Masoud] Minist Hlth & Med Educ, Tehran, Iran. E-mail Addresses: aaa at zzz.ir Cited Reference Count: 14 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: IRANIAN SCIENTIFIC SOCIETY MEDICAL ENTOMOLOGY, SCHOOL PUBLIC HEALTH & INST HEALTH RESEARCH, TEHRAN UNIV MEDICAL SCIENCES, P O BOX 6446-14155, TEHRAN, 00000, IRAN ISSN: 2251-6085 Web of Science Categories: Public, Environmental & Occupational Health Research Areas: Public, Environmental & Occupational Health IDS Number: 242MD Unique ID: WOS:000326245200008 Cited References: Powell Ronald R., 2006, LIBRARY TRENDS, V55, P102 Xiaojun Hua RR, 2011, J Informetr, V5, P27 Inonu E, 2003, SCIENTOMETRICS, V56, P137 Falagas Matthew E., 2008, FASEB JOURNAL, V22, P338 Falagas Matthew E., 2008, FASEB JOURNAL, V22, P2623 Aminpour Farzaneh, 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS, V80, P253 Aminpour F, 2008, JRMS, V14, P56 Fernandez-Cano A, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS, V61, P301 Morison L, 2008, Ulster Med J, V77, Yamazaki S, 1998, Joho Kanri, V41, P436 Molinari Alain, 2008, SCIENTOMETRICS, V75, P339 van Leeuwen TN, 2001, CORTEX, V37, P607 [Anonymous], 2011, Scopus database, Schubert A, 2002, SCIENTOMETRICS, V53, P3 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326254400002 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Assessment of psychology *journals*: correlation of *impact factor* and h-index vs. Latindex criteria Authors: Gamez, AM Author Full Names: Matias Gamez, A. Source: INVESTIGACION BIBLIOTECOLOGICA, 27 (61):15-27; SEP-DEC 2013 Language: Spanish Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Scientific Journals, Impact factor, h-index, Latindex, Research evaluation KeyWords Plus: SCIENTIFIC JOURNALS; SPANISH JOURNALS; QUALITY; LIMITATIONS; INDICATORS Abstract: The goal of this study is to explore the extent to which several psychology journals may be similarly classified on the basis of citation count through the impact factor proposed by Journal Citation Reports and the h-index (Hirsch, 2005), against a given journal's compliance with the Latindex Catalogue criteria for assessing editorial quality. Using these parameters, we carried out three separate journal rankings and found that the correlation between the Latindex ranking and either of the former is not statistically distinct from zero. The suitability of applying editorial- rather than citation-based criteria to evaluate the quality of psychology journals is discussed. This discussion proposes using a mix of editorial criteria such as circulation, international reach and the journal's manuscript review process and editorial policies. Addresses: Univ Jaen, Jaen, Spain. E-mail Addresses: amatiasgm at gmail.com Cited Reference Count: 24 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: UNIV NACIONAL AUTONOMA MEXICO, CIUDAD UNIV, CENTRO UNIV BIBLIOTECOLOGICAS, TORRE II HUMANIDADES, PISO 11, 12 & 13, MEXICO CITY, CP 04510, MEXICO ISSN: 0187-358X Web of Science Categories: Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: 242PL Unique ID: WOS:000326254400002 Cited References: Buela-Casal G, 2002, PSICOTHEMA, V14, P837 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Aleixandre-Benavent Rafael, 2007, PROFESIONAL DE LA INFORMACION, V16, P4 ANECA, 2008, Como se cumplimenta el apartado ''indicios de calidad'' de una publicacion cientifica en el modelo de CV?, Coslado Maria-Angeles, 2011, PROFESIONAL DE LA INFORMACION, V20, P159 Torres-Salinas Daniel, 2010, PROFESIONAL DE LA INFORMACION, V19, P201 RESH, 2012, Revistas Espanolas de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades: valoracion integrada e indice de citas, Carbonell, 2009, Anales de psicologia, V25, P209 Cami J, 1997, MEDICINA CLINICA, V109, P515 SCImago, 2007, SJR-SCImago Journal & Country Rank, Lopez A. J., 2005, Revista Espanola de Documentacion Cientifica, V28, P22 Sternberg R. J., 2001, Observer, V14, Matias Gamez A., 2011, INVESTIGACION BIBLIOTECOLOGICA, V25, P63 Garfield E., 2003, International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, V3, P363 Seglen PO, 1997, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V314, P498 Carretero-Dios H, 2005, PSICOTHEMA, V17, P669 Braun Tibor, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P169 Buela-Casal G, 2003, PSICOTHEMA, V15, P23 Alcain MD, 2005, PSICOTHEMA, V17, P179 GARFIELD E, 1955, SCIENCE, V122, P108 Gonzalez-Pereira Borja, 2010, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V4, P379 Bordons M, 2002, SCIENTOMETRICS8th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, JUL 17, 2001, SYDNEY, AUSTRALIA, V53, P195 Cangas A.J., 2006, International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, V6, P417 Buela-Casal G, 2001, Papeles del Psicologo, V79, P53 ======================================================================= ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326254400007 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: *Bibliometric* analysis of authorship gender in the field vertebrate paleontology: Case study of Argentine *journal* Ameghiniana (1957-2011) Authors: Miguel, S; Hidalgo, M; Stubbs, E; Posadas, P; Jaureguizar, EO Author Full Names: Miguel, Sandra; Hidalgo, Monica; Stubbs, Edgardo; Posadas, Paula; Ortiz Jaureguizar, Edgardo Source: INVESTIGACION BIBLIOTECOLOGICA, 27 (61):133-155; SEP-DEC 2013 Language: Spanish Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Bibliometrics, Scientific production, Gender, Vertebrate Paleontology, Ameghiniana, Argentina KeyWords Plus: PRODUCTIVITY; COLLABORATION; SCIENCE; IMPACT Abstract: The objective of this work is to assess gender distribution differences in authorship of papers in the field of vertebrate paleontology published in the Argentine journal Ameghiniana from 1957 to 2011. The bibliometric method was used to analyze gender distribution and evolution of the signing authors, their productivity, geographical origin, authorship composition (i.e., author and co-author), order of authors, taxon and citation levels. Results show predominance of men in number of signatures, mean annual productivity rates and average citation levels. No significant differences were found between gender for the taxa studied or in the order of the signatures. Significant differences were observed in the geographical origin of the authors. In view of the authorship gender distribution of papers published in Ameghiniana, we conclude that men continue to lead in the discipline of vertebrate palaeontology. The increase of women authors, the levelling of productivity over the last decade and the increase co-authorships including women, however, are clear signs of a shifting trend. Addresses: [Miguel, Sandra; Hidalgo, Monica; Stubbs, Edgardo; Posadas, Paula; Ortiz Jaureguizar, Edgardo] Univ Nacl La Plata, La Plata, Argentina. E-mail Addresses: sandra at fcnym.unlp.edu.ar; monicahidal at yahoo.com.ar; edgstubbs at yahoo.com; posadas at fcnym.unlp.edu.ar Cited Reference Count: 32 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: UNIV NACIONAL AUTONOMA MEXICO, CIUDAD UNIV, CENTRO UNIV BIBLIOTECOLOGICAS, TORRE II HUMANIDADES, PISO 11, 12 & 13, MEXICO CITY, CP 04510, MEXICO ISSN: 0187-358X Web of Science Categories: Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: 242PL Unique ID: WOS:000326254400007 Cited References: Damborenea S., 2005, Asociacion Paleontologica Argentina Publicacion Especial, V10, P21 Lee S, 2005, SOCIAL STUDIES OF SCIENCE, V35, P673 Stoller R., 1968, Sex and Gender: On the Development of Masculinity and Femininity, [Anonymous], 1957, Ameghiniana, P5 Alonso-Arroyo Adolfo, 2010, REVISTA ESPANOLA DE DOCUMENTACION CIENTIFICA, V33, P624 Stipanicic Pedro Nicolas, 2005, Asociacion Paleontologica Argentina Publicacion Especial, V10, P15 Bordons M, 2003, SCIENTOMETRICS7th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicatiors, SEP 25-28, 2002, KARLSRUHE, GERMANY, V57, P159 Kretschmer H. K., 2012, Scientometrics, V93, P17 Miguel S., 2006, Revista Espanola de Documentacion Cientifica, V29, Ortiz-Jaureguizar E., 2010, Ameghiniana, V47, P23R MINCYT, 2009, Indicadores de Ciencia y Tecnologia Argentina, Symonds Matthew R. E., 2006, PLOS ONE, V1, Abramo Giovanni, 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS, V79, P517 Torres-Salinas Daniel, 2011, REVISTA ESPANOLA DE DOCUMENTACION CIENTIFICA, V34, P11 Miguel Sandra, 2008, SCIENTOMETRICS, V74, P331 Comision Europea, 2001, Gender and Research. Conference Proceedings, 8-9 November, Brussels, Mauleon E, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS8th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators, SEP 23-25, 2004, Leiden, NETHERLANDS, V66, P199 Bonder G., 2004, Equidad de genero en ciencia y tecnologia en America Latina: bases y proyecciones en la construccion de conocimientos, agendas e institucionalidades, RICYT, 2009, Red de Indicadores de Ciencia y Tecnologia Iberoamericana e Interamericana, Vessuri V., 2006, El Estado de la Ciencia, Buenos Aires, Russell J., 2003, III Taller de Obtencion de Indicadores Bibliometricos, 3-5 marzo de, 2003, Hernandez Garcia Y., 2006, Nomadas: Revista Critica de Ciencias Sociales y Juridicas, V13, P111 Jose Leon Francisco, 2010, REVISTA INTERNACIONAL DE SOCIOLOGIA, V68, P399 Ortiz-Jaureguizar E., 2004, Ameghiniana, V41, P31R Baringoltz E., 2006, Ciencia y tecnologia en la Argentina. Diagnostico de la situacion de genero (Julio de 2006-diciembre de 2007), Mones A., 2010, X Congreso Argentino de Paleontologia y Bioestratigrafia-VII Congreso Latinoamericano de Paleontologia, 20-24 septiembre del, 2010, European Commission. Expert Working Group on Woman on Science, 2001, Science policies in the European Union: promoting excellence through mainstreaming gender equality, Kochen S., 2007, Taller de Promocion de mujeres en el area de la Ciencia, Tecnologia, Ingenieria e Innovacion en el Cono Sur, Lamas M., 1996, La Tarea: Revista de Educacion y Cultura, V8, P14 REIG OA, 1981, INTERCIENCIA, V6, P274 Andreu S., 2002, Revista Complutense de Educacion, V13, P13 Unesco, 2007, Ciencia, tecnologia y genero: informe internacional, ======================================================================= * ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326564100013 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Does size matter? Considerations on the use of the *impact factor* Authors: Ferrero, F Author Full Names: Ferrero, Fernando Source: ARCHIVOS ARGENTINOS DE PEDIATRIA, 111 (1):7-8; 10.5546/aap.2013.7 FEB 2013 Language: Spanish Document Type: Editorial Material Cited Reference Count: 8 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SOC ARGENTINA PEDIATRIA, AV COLONEL DIAZ 1971-75-C1425DQF, CAP FED BUENO AIRES, 00000, ARGENTINA ISSN: 0325-0075 Web of Science Categories: Pediatrics Research Areas: Pediatrics IDS Number: 246UG Unique ID: WOS:000326564100013 Cited References: Lozano G, The weakening relationship between the Impact Factor and papers' citations in the digital age, Falagas Matthew E., 2008, FASEB JOURNAL, V22, P2623 Saha S, 2003, JOURNAL OF THE MEDICAL LIBRARY ASSOCIATION, V91, P42 Seglen PO, 1997, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V314, P498 Campanario JM, El factor de impacto de las revistas academicas: preguntas y respuestas, Otero Paula, 2012, ARCHIVOS ARGENTINOS DE PEDIATRIA, V110, P370 Ceriani Cernadas Jose M., 2012, ARCHIVOS ARGENTINOS DE PEDIATRIA, V110, P283 Garfield E, 2006, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V295, P90 ======================================================================= ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326313800009 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Meta-analysis of *scientometric* research of knowledge management: discovering the identity of the discipline Authors: Serenko, A Author Full Names: Serenko, Alexander Source: JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT, 17 (5):773-812; 10.1108/JKM-05-2013-0166 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Knowledge management, Research, Research work, Sciences, Scientometrics, Meta-analysis, Discipline identity KeyWords Plus: INFORMATION-SYSTEMS RESEARCH; KEYWORD CLASSIFICATION SCHEME; CAPITAL ACADEMIC JOURNALS; INTELLECTUAL STRUCTURE; RESEARCH COLLABORATION; GLOBAL RANKING; STANDS TODAY; SCIENCE; TRENDS; INFORMETRICS Abstract: Purpose - The purpose of this study is to conduct a meta-analysis of prior scientometric research of the knowledge management (KM) field. Design/methodology/approach - A total of 108 scientometric studies of the KM discipline were subjected to meta-analysis techniques. Findings - The overall volume of scientometric KM works has been growing, reaching up to ten publications per year by 2012, but their key findings are somewhat inconsistent. Most scientometric KM research is published in non-KM-centric journals. The KM discipline has deep historical roots. It suffers from a high degree of over-differentiation and is represented by dissimilar research streams. The top six most productive countries for KM research are the USA, the UK, Canada, Germany, Australia, and Spain. KM exhibits attributes of a healthy academic domain with no apparent anomalies and is progressing towards academic maturity. Practical implications - Scientometric KM researchers should use advanced empirical methods, become aware of prior scientometric research, rely on multiple databases, develop a KM keyword classification scheme, publish their research in KM-centric outlets, focus on rigorous research of the forums for KM publications, improve their cooperation, conduct a comprehensive study of individual and institutional productivity and investigate interdisciplinary collaboration. KM-centric journals should encourage authors to employ under-represented empirical methods and conduct meta-analysis studies and should discourage conceptual publications, especially the development of new frameworks. To improve the impact of KM research on the state of practice, knowledge dissemination channels should be developed. Originality/value - This is the first documented attempt to conduct a meta-analysis of scientometric research of the KM discipline. Addresses: Lakehead Univ, Fac Business Adm, Thunder Bay, ON P7B 5E1, Canada. E-mail Addresses: aserenko at lakeheadu.ca Cited Reference Count: 203 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LIMITED, HOWARD HOUSE, WAGON LANE, BINGLEY BD16 1WA, W YORKSHIRE, ENGLAND ISSN: 1367-3270 Web of Science Categories: Information Science & Library Science; Management Research Areas: Information Science & Library Science; Business & Economics IDS Number: 243JX Unique ID: WOS:000326313800009 Cited References: Price D.J.d.S, 1963, Little Science, Big Science, Baskerville RL, 2002, MIS QUARTERLY, V26, P1 Scarbrough H, 2001, BRITISH JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, V12, P3 Tuzhilin A., 2011, ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems, V2, P1 1973, The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations, Frizzell V., 2003, V2, P581 Preston J.C., 1999, Knowledge Management: A Literature Review, Harman K, 2005, JOURNAL OF COMPUTER INFORMATION SYSTEMS, V46, P64 Scott SG, 2000, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT REVIEW, V25, P43 Godin Benoit, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V68, P109 Galton F., 1874, English Men of Science: Their Nature and Nature, Hennemann Stefan, 2012, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V6, P217 Scholl W., 2004, Journal of Knowledge Management, V8, Amara Nabil, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V93, P553 Harp D., 2007, Managing Worldwide Operations & Communications with Information Technology, P175 Edwards J. S., 2009, JOURNAL OF THE OPERATIONAL RESEARCH SOCIETY, V60, PS114 Schultze U., 2007, Journal of Asian Business, V23, P213 Egghe L., 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V83, P689 Senge P. M., 1990, The Fifth Discipline: The Art & Practice of the Learning Organization, Tuomi I., 2002, Lifelong Learning in Europe, VVII, P69 Alavi M, 2001, MIS QUARTERLY, V25, P107 Katz JS, 1997, SCIENTOMETRICS6th Conference of the International-Society-for-Scientometrics-and-Informetrics, JUN 16-19, 1997, JERUSALEM, ISRAEL, V40, P541 Cattell JM, 1917, SCIENCE, V45, P275 Stewart T. A., 1997, Intellectual Capital: The New Wealth of Organizations, Ferreira S. M., 2009, Knowledge Management for Development Journal, V5, P94 Griffiths D., 2011, Journal of European Industrial Training, V35, Serenko Alexander, 2013, JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT, V17, P307 Peachey T., 2005, International Journal of Knowledge Management, V1, Heisig Peter, 2009, JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT, V13, P4 BARKI H, 1993, MIS QUARTERLY, V17, P209 Bontis Nick, 2009, JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT, V13, P16 Hislop Donald, 2010, JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT, V14, P779 Paucar-Caceres Alberto, 2009, SYSTEMS RESEARCH AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE, V26, P343 Abbott A., 1988, The System of Professions: An Essay on the Division of Expert Labor, Metaxiotis K., 2005, Journal of Knowledge Management, V9, Chan I., 2008, International Journal of Knowledge Management Studies, V2, ROSEN S, 1981, AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, V71, P845 Croasdell D. T., 2003, Proceedings of the 36th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Wang Xianwen, 2012, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V6, P655 Starbuck William H., 2009, SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, V25, P108 Serenko A., 2009, Journal of Intellectual Capital, V10, Starkey K., 2001, British Journal of Management, V12, P3 Burman C., 2006, Knowledge Management for Development Journal, V2, P134 Cattell J. M., 1903, Popular Science Monthly, V62, P359 Dixon N., 2010, The three eras of knowledge management-summary, Vasconcelos A.C., 2008, Library Management, V29, Grover V, 2001, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS, V18, P5 Shariq S. Z., 1997, Journal of Knowledge Management, V1, P75 Onyancha O. B., 2009, South African Journal of Information Management, V11, P1 O'Reilly J. N., 2005, Proceedings of the International Conference on Intellectual Capital, Knowledge Management and Organizational Learning, Academic Conferences International, Dubai, United Arab Emirates, Curado Carla, 2011, AFRICAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS MANAGEMENT, V5, P9137 Scarbrough H., 2003, International Studies of Management & Organization, V32, P87 Zhong Q.-Y., 2008, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Wireless Communications, Networking and Mobile Computing, Dalian, Peng J., 2007, Journal of Technology Management in China, V2, P198 Wilson CS, 1999, ANNUAL REVIEW OF INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V34, P107 McElroy M. W, 2003, The New Knowledge Management: Complexity Learning, and Sustainable Innovation, Timonen H., 2008, Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, V6, P177 Wei Z., 2010, Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Knowledge Management in Asia Pacific, xi'an, China, Bernal J. D., 1939, The Social Function of Science, Jeong Seongkyoon, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V89, P967 Wiig KM, 1997, EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS, V13, P1 Lambe Patrick, 2011, JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT, V15, P175 Prusak L, 2001, IBM SYSTEMS JOURNAL, V40, P1002 Serenko Alexander, 2010, JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT, V14, P3 Ergazakis E., 2009, International Journal of Management and Decision Making, V10, Wallace Danny P., 2011, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFORMATION MANAGEMENT, V31, P14 Edwards J.S., 2003, Knowledge Management Research & Practice, V1, Swan J., 2005, Scandinavian Journal of Management, V21, P197 Edvinsson L., 2013, Journal of Intellectual Capital, V14, Kousha Kayvan, 2007, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V58, P1055 Kulkarni U., 2005, International Journal of Knowledge Management, V1, P12 Serenko Alexander, 2011, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V5, P333 Dwivedi Yogesh K., 2011, INFORMATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT, V28, P43 Serenko Alexander, 2009, JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT, V13, P4 Grant K., 2011, Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, V9, Desouza K. C., 2004, Journal of Information Science and Technology, V1, P1 ABRAHAMSON E, 1991, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT REVIEW, V16, P586 Kostoff Ronald N., 2012, TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING AND SOCIAL CHANGE, V79, P986 Ives W., 1998, Journal of Knowledge Management, V1, Garfield Eugene, 2009, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS11th International Conference of the International-Society-for-Scientometrics-and-Informetrics, JUN 25-27, 2007, Madrid, SPAIN, V3, P173 Nakamori Y., 2007, Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, V5, P453 Biktimirov E.N., 2006, International Journal of Knowledge and Learning, V2, P216 Palvia P, 2004, Comm AIS, V14, P526 Wiig K. M., 1997, Long Range Planning, V30, P323 Ergazakis K., 2011, VINE, V41, Holsapple Clyde W., 2008, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V59, P166 Jakubik Maria, 2011, JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT, V15, P374 Campanario JM, 1998, SCIENCE COMMUNICATION, V19, P277 Bontis N., 2011, Knowledge and Process Management, V18, P1 Teece DJ, 1998, CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW1st Annual University-of-California-Berkeley Forum on Knowledge and the Firm, SEP 29-30, 1997, BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA, V40, P289 Wolfe M., 2003, Canadian Journal of Communication, V28, P85 Liu Hsuan-I, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P145 Bontis N., 2012, Knowledge and Process Management, V19, P121 Landrum W. H., 2010, Proceedings of the Sixteenth Americas Conference on Information Systems, Lima, Peru, Mehrizi Mohammad Hosein Rezazadeh, 2009, MANAGEMENT DECISION, V47, P792 Bjornson Finn Olav, 2008, INFORMATION AND SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGY, V50, P1055 Burstein F., 2006, International Journal of Knowledge Management, V2, P1 Ferguson J., 2005, Knowledge Management for Development Journal, V1, P46 Nonaka I., 2006, Knowledge and Process Management, V13, P73 Katerattanakul P, 2006, COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM, V49, P114 Nonaka I., 1995, The Knowledge-Creating Company, MERTON RK, 1968, SCIENCE, V159, P56 Campanario JM, 1998, SCIENCE COMMUNICATION, V19, P181 Wagner CS, 2005, SCIENTOMETRICS, V62, P3 Serenko Alexander, 2012, CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCES-REVUE CANADIENNE DES SCIENCES DE L ADMINISTRATION, V29, P3 NONAKA I, 1994, ORGANIZATION SCIENCE, V5, P14 Gu Y, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS, V61, P285 Keen P., 2007, International Journal of Knowledge Management, V3, Petty R., 2000, Journal of Intellectual Capital, V1, P155 Egghe L., 2012, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V6, P422 Levine T. R., 2012, The Electronic Journal of Communication, V22, P1 Jones R., 2008, Proceedings of the 14th Americas Conference on Information Systems, Toronto, Canada, Maier R., 2008, Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Learning in Enterprise., Holsapple Clyde W., 2008, KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT RESEARCH & PRACTICE, V6, P31 Gray P.H., 2003, Information Technology & People, V16, Liao Chien Hsiang, 2012, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V6, P27 Bordons M, 1996, SCIENTOMETRICS4th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators, OCT 05-07, 1995, ANTWERP, BELGIUM, V37, P279 Nie Kun, 2009, SYSTEMS RESEARCH AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE, V26, P629 Hallin Carina Antonia, 2008, TOURISM MANAGEMENT, V29, P366 Davenport T. H., 1998, Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know, Serenko Alexander, 2011, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V5, P629 Levitt Jonathan M., 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P434 Kebede Gashaw, 2010, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFORMATION MANAGEMENT, V30, P416 Desouza K.C., 2006, VINE, V36, Prakasan E.R., 2006, INSPEC Database Analysis for Knowledge Management Records, Ponzi LJ, 2002, SCIENTOMETRICS, V55, P259 Bennis WG, 2005, HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW, V83, P96 Price D.J.d.S., 1961, Science Since Babylon, Mahapatra R., 2003, Working Paper No. 03-23, Lee Maria R., 2012, KNOWLEDGE-BASED SYSTEMS, V28, P47 Lowry P. B., 2004, Journal of the Association for Information Systems, V5, P29 Ponzi L. J., 2002, Information Research, V8, Hazlett SA, 2005, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT INQUIRY, V14, P31 Schwartz D.G., 2005, International Journal of Knowledge Management, V1, CHUNG KH, 1990, JOURNAL OF FINANCE, V45, P301 Koenig M., 2008, Journal of Information & Knowledge Management, V7, P243 Jasimuddin S. M., 2006, International Journal of Organizational Analysis, V14, P171 Lee Maria R., 2007, KNOWLEDGE SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT2nd International Conference on Knowledge Science, Engineering Management, NOV 28-30, 2007, Melbourne, AUSTRALIA, V4798, P362 Vorakulpipat C., 2008, Journal of Knowledge Management, V12, Nalimov V. V., 1969, Scientometrics. The Study of the Development of Science as an Information process, Koenig M., 2012, Journal of Information & Knowledge Management, V11, P1 Harzing Anne-Wil, 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V94, P1057 McLaren Patricia Genoe, 2008, CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCES-REVUE CANADIENNE DES SCIENCES DE L ADMINISTRATION, V25, P307 Looy B., 2007, Scientometrics, V70, P441 Godin Benoit, 2007, SOCIAL STUDIES OF SCIENCE, V37, P691 Sidorova Anna, 2008, MIS QUARTERLY, V32, P467 Edvinsson L., 2010, International Journal of Knowledge and Systems Science, V1, Laszlo K.C., 2002, Journal of Knowledge Management, V6, Snowden D., 2002, Journal of Knowledge Management, V6, Baskerville R., 2006, Knowledge Management Research & Practice, V4, Abbott A., 2001, Chaos of Disciplines, Kostoff Ronald N., 2007, SCIENTOMETRICS, V72, P513 Abrahamson Eric, 2009, SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, V25, P235 Cronin Blaise, 2008, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V59, P1861 Ma Zhenzhong, 2010, JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT, V14, P175 Lane V., 2008, Journal of Medical Informatics & Technologies, V12, P233 Schultze U, 2002, MIS QUARTERLY, V26, P213 Bradford S. C., 1934, Engineering, V137, P85 BARKI H, 1988, MIS QUARTERLY, V12, P299 Hood WW, 2001, SCIENTOMETRICS, V52, P291 Lotka A. J., 1926, Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences, V16, P317 Straub Detmar, 2006, JOURNAL OF THE ASSOCIATION FOR INFORMATION SYSTEMS, V7, P241 Serenko A., 2008, Knowledge and Process Management, V15, P235 Wilson T.D., 2002, Information Research, V8, Ortenblad A., 2007, International Journal of Management Concepts and Philosophy, V2, Nold Herbert A., 2011, KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT RESEARCH & PRACTICE, V9, P84 Kuhn Thomas S., 1977, The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change, Metaxiotis K., 2012, Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Computational Systems, Dubai, Ward V., 2009, Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, V5, P267 Cattell JM, 1910, SCIENCE, V32, P633 Kuhn Thomas, 1962, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Serenko A., 2004, Knowledge and Process Management, V11, P185 Abdullah S., 2010, Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Retrieval & Knowledge Management, Shah Alam, Gu YN, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS, V61, P171 Liao Chien Hsiang, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V86, P747 Wiig K. M., 1999, Knowledge Management, Serenko Alexander, 2013, JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT, V17, P137 Meyer Morgan, 2010, SCIENCE COMMUNICATION, V32, P118 Prusak L., 2007, Knowledge Creation and Management: New Challenges for Managers, P32 Jeong Seongkyoon, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V91, P719 Uzunboylu Huseyin, 2011, BRITISH JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY, V42, P527 Palvia Prashant, 2007, INFORMATION & MANAGEMENT, V44, P1 Guo Zining, 2008, DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS, V44, P673 Mearns M. A, 2008, South African Journal of Information Management, V10, P1 Jennex M. E., 2005, International Journal of Knowledge Management, V1, Pi Dean Douglas L., 2011, MIS QUARTERLY, V35, P1 Mekhilef Mounib, 2006, EXPLOITING THE KNOWLEDGE ECONOMY: ISSUES, APPLICATIONS AND CASE STUDIES, PTS 1 AND 2, V3, P1385 Turel O., 2009, Proceedings of the 15th Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS), San Francisco, CA, Dattero R., 2006, Knowledge and Process Management, V13, P264 Huang Mu-Hsuan, 2012, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V6, P457 Eijkman H., 2011, The Learning Organization, V18, P164 Huysman M., 2004, Knowledge and Process Management, V11, P81 Harzing A.-W.K., 2008, Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, V8, P61 Onions P. E. W., 2010, Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Knowledge Management, Famalicao, Portugal, Rebelo T.M., 2008, Learning Organization, V15, Chen Tsung Teng, 2006, Advances in Knowledge Acquisition and ManagementPacific Rim Knowledge Acquisition Workshop, AUG 07-08, 2006, Guilin, PEOPLES R CHINA, V4303, P99 Jashapara A, 2005, JOURNAL OF INFORMATION SCIENCE, V31, P136 BIGLAN A, 1973, JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, V57, P195 Spender J. -C., 2008, MANAGEMENT LEARNING, V39, P159 Serenko Alexander, 2008, CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCES-REVUE CANADIENNE DES SCIENCES DE L ADMINISTRATION, V25, P279 Schulz Peter A., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V93, P517 Kraaijenbrink J., 2009, Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Chicago, IL, USA, Ekbia Hamid R., 2008, JOURNAL OF INFORMATION SCIENCE, V34, P110 ======================================================================= ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326241400056 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Making the H-index more relevant: A Step Towards Standard Classes For *Citation* Classification Authors: Abdullatif, M Author Full Names: Abdullatif, Mohammad Editor(s): Chan CY; Lu J; Norvag K; Tanin E Source: 2013 IEEE 29TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON DATA ENGINEERING WORKSHOPS (ICDEW), 330-333; 2013 Book Series: IEEE International Conference on Data Engineering Workshop Language: English Document Type: Proceedings Paper Conference Title: 29th IEEE International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE) Conference Date: APR 08-12, 2013 Conference Location: Brisbane, AUSTRALIA Conference Sponsors: IEEE, IEEE Comp Soc, IEEE Tech Comm Data Engn, SAP, Microsoft, Tourism & Events Queensland, HP, Univ Queensland, CSIRO, RMIT Univ, Oracle Labs, Renmin Univ, SA Ctr Big Data Res, Univ Melbourne, NICTA, Google, NEC, Facebook, Univ New S Wales KeyWords Plus: QUALITY; SCIENCE Abstract: The H-index is gaining popularity as a way of measuring the research impact of an academic paper. However, it has been criticized because it gives all citations equal weight. Citation classification can solve this criticism by categorising citations based on the purpose or function of the citation. An important element for performing citation classification is the presence of a standard set of classes (known as a classification scheme) to enable the comparison between the accuracy of the different techniques currently used to perform citation classification. Such a standard scheme is not available and therefore we aim to fill this gap by generating a citation classification scheme automatically. The scheme is generated by clustering four large datasets of sentences containing citations using X-means. The main contribution of this research is adapting the similarity distance between verbs extracted from the citation sentences using WordNet. Addresses: Univ Auckland, Dept Comp Sci, Auckland 1, New Zealand. Cited Reference Count: 12 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: IEEE, 345 E 47TH ST, NEW YORK, NY 10017 USA ISSN: 1943-2895 ISBN: 978-1-4673-5304-5 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Theory & Methods; Engineering, Electrical & Electronic Research Areas: Computer Science; Engineering IDS Number: BHP47 Unique ID: WOS:000326241400056 Cited References: Lawrence Peter A., 2007, CURRENT BIOLOGY, V17, PR583 MORAVCSIK MJ, 1975, SOCIAL STUDIES OF SCIENCE, V5, P86 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 GARFIELD E, 1965, STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION METHODS FOR MECHANIZED DOCUMENTATION SYMPOSIUM PROCEEDINGS, V1964, P189 Dong C., 2011, Proceedings of 5th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing, November, 2011, P623 LINDSEY D, 1989, SCIENTOMETRICS, V15, P189 Fellbaum C., 1998, WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database, Radoulov R., 2008, Exploring automatic citation classification, Leacock C., 1998, Combining local context and WordNet similarity for word sense identification, P305 Jain AK, 1999, ACM COMPUTING SURVEYS, V31, P264 Pelleg D., 2000, Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Machine Learning, San Francisco, P727 Jain A., 1988, Algorithms for clustering data, ======================================================================= From gciampag at INDIANA.EDU Tue Dec 3 11:32:21 2013 From: gciampag at INDIANA.EDU (Giovanni Luca Ciampaglia) Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 11:32:21 -0500 Subject: Websci'14 Call for Data Visualization Challenge Message-ID: ** Apologies for multiple postings; please circulate widely ** Websci'14 Call for Data Visualization Challenge =============================================== We are delighted to announce the Web Science 2014 Visualization Challenge! The Web has generated huge amounts of data at massive scale, but making sense of these datasets and representing them in a compact and easily-interpretable way remains very difficult. The goal of this challenge is to encourage innovative visualizations of Web data. We particularly encourage entries that reflect the interdisciplinary spirit of the Web Science conference. To enable this visualization, we have prepared several large-scale, easy-to-use, publicly-available datasets: 1. Web traffic data, including more than 200 million HTTP requests from browsers to servers; 2. Twitter data, including a sample of more than 22 million tweets; 3. Social bookmarking data, consisting of about 430,000 bookmarked pages; 4. Co-authorship of academic papers, consisting of about 21.5 million papers and 10.8 million authors Complete details on these datasets are available here: http://cnets.indiana.edu/groups/nan/webtraffic/websci14-data. All of the datasets are stored in simple file formats, so that they can be easily used without much technical expertise. We are pleased to offer a cash prize of at least $1000 to be split among the winning entries. Winners will be announced and displayed at the Web Science conference in June 2014, presented on the Web Science website (http://websci14.org), and the winners will be encouraged to present a poster at the conference describing their work. The entries will be judged based on four criteria: (1) innovative use of data, (2) clarity of visualization, (3) quality of design, and (4) potential impact. Rules 1. For fairness, the visualization must be primarily based on the data that we provide. Other datasets may be used to augment ours, but these datasets must be publicly-available and described in detail in the documentation (see #4 below). 2. The visualization must be a static image, and must be submitted as a PDF. In addition to the main PDF, please submit a PNG version at a resolution of about 640x480, for display on Web pages, social media sites, mobile devices, etc. This PNG version need not contain the full visualization, but should be an appropriate representation (e.g. a subset of the full PDF). 3. Please include a separate PDF file containing a description of the visualization, including: (1) name(s), affiliation(s), and contact information of the creator(s), (2) the purpose of the visualization, (3) which dataset(s) were used, (4) a brief description of how the visualizations was created, and (5) any other information you would like to share with the judges. 4. By submitting your visualization, you agree to allow us to display your visualization at the conference and on the Web Science website and social media channels. (We will give proper attribution, of course.) You also certify that you are the copyright holder of the visualization and are authorized to give us this permission. 5. Entries are due by 11:59PM Hawaii time on April 15, 2014. Please e-mail your entry to David Crandall . (If you do not receive a confirmation email within 24 hours, your entry has not been received and should be re-sent.) Panel of judges * Yong-Yeol Ahn, Indiana University * Katy Borner, Indiana * University Mark Meiss, * Google Dimitar Nikolov, Indiana University * Maximilian Schich, University of Texas For questions, please contact David Crandall . For more information about the 2014 Web Science Conference, please see http://websci14.org. -- Giovanni Luca Ciampaglia Postdoctoral fellow Center for Complex Networks and Systems Research Indiana University ? 910 E 10th St ? Bloomington ? IN 47408 ? http://cnets.indiana.edu/ ? gciampag at indiana.edu ? 1-812-855-7261 From wainer at IC.UNICAMP.BR Tue Dec 3 12:11:40 2013 From: wainer at IC.UNICAMP.BR (Jacques Wainer) Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 18:11:40 +0100 Subject: Journal classification metrics and clustering algorithms? Message-ID: I am interested in the issue of Journal Classification used by Scopus, Thomson Reuters, Google Scholar and so on. I do not know if this is strategic information for the companies, but I would appreciate if anyone could point me out to references on: a) which metric the companies use to measure the similarity between journals? b) which clustering/community detection algorithm they use? Regrading the metric (a) I assume that it is bibliographic coupling, but there are two subquestions: a1) bibliographic coupling is, in principle, an asymmetric measure - that is, the similarity from A to B may not be the same as the similarity from B to A. If journal A cites 20 documents in common to B but A cites in total 200 documents while B cites 2000 documents, the two similarities are one order of magnitude different! Do they use any symetrization procedure? a2) Is there a fixed interval for collecting the citations made by a journal (say citations in the last two years?) or should one use the whole history of the journal? Thank you jacques wainer From dwojick at CRAIGELLACHIE.US Tue Dec 3 12:34:40 2013 From: dwojick at CRAIGELLACHIE.US (David Wojick) Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 13:34:40 -0400 Subject: Journal classification metrics and clustering algorithms? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: To my knowledge Google Scholar does not do journal classification. All such classification schemes are relatively arbitrary because science is seamless and multi-dimensional, as it were. Nor does GS measure similarity of journals, not that I know of. Happy to learn otherwise, of course. GS does measure the similarity between articles with their "related articles" feature, which is quite good. This feature appears to use term vector similarity measures, but I have yet to find this explained anywhere. I myself have built a community detection algorithm using the GS related articles feature. It measures the conceptual distance, from a given central concept, for each related article. In this case the community being identified is that using the central concept. It probably could do journals as well, but I have never tried that. David At 01:11 PM 12/3/2013, you wrote: >Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): >http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > >I am interested in the issue of Journal Classification used by Scopus, >Thomson Reuters, Google Scholar and so on. I do not know if this is >strategic information for the companies, but I would appreciate if >anyone could point me out to references on: > >a) which metric the companies use to measure the similarity between journals? > >b) which clustering/community detection algorithm they use? > >Regrading the metric (a) I assume that it is bibliographic coupling, >but there are two subquestions: > >a1) bibliographic coupling is, in principle, an asymmetric measure - >that is, the similarity from A to B may not be the same as the >similarity from B to A. If journal A cites 20 documents in common to B >but A cites in total 200 documents while B cites 2000 documents, the >two similarities are one order of magnitude different! Do they use any >symetrization procedure? > >a2) Is there a fixed interval for collecting the citations made by a >journal (say citations in the last two years?) or should one use the >whole history of the journal? > > >Thank you > >jacques wainer From saeedh at IIST.UNU.EDU Wed Dec 4 00:43:15 2013 From: saeedh at IIST.UNU.EDU (Saeed UL Hassan) Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 10:43:15 +0500 Subject: List of Journals and Conferences in the field of Scientometrics/Bibliometrics Message-ID: Dear SIGMETRICS Community, Could you please provide us the list of Journals and Conferences in the field of Scientometrics? Thanks in advance. Regards, Saeed -- Dr. Saeed Ul Hassan Post-doctoral Fellow | UNU-IIST | Macau, China tel +853 8504-0455 (direct) tel +853 2871-2930 | fax +853 2871-2940 www.iist.unu.edu saeedh at iist.unu.edu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Colin_Paul_Gloster at ACM.ORG Thu Dec 5 14:49:38 2013 From: Colin_Paul_Gloster at ACM.ORG (=?UTF-8?Q?Paul_Colin_de_Glouce=C5=BFter?=) Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 20:49:38 +0100 Subject: The Science "Sting" and Pre-Green Fee-Based Fool's Gold vs. Post-Green No-Fault Fair-Gold In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On October 4th, 2013, Stevan Harnad sent: |----------------------------------------------------------| |"[. . .] | | | |For some peer-review stings of non-OA journals, see below:| | | |[. . .]" | |----------------------------------------------------------| Also see J. Scott Armstrong, "Peer Review for Journals: Evidence on Quality Control, Fairness, and Innovation", "Science and Engineering Ethics" (1997) 3, 63-84. From davidlevifaur at GMAIL.COM Fri Dec 6 05:07:01 2013 From: davidlevifaur at GMAIL.COM (David Levi-Faur) Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2013 12:07:01 +0200 Subject: advice requested Message-ID: Dear Colleagues, I am looking for advice and model/ example to follow in analyzing the emerging body of knowledge in a new field and a journal I am editing (Regulation & Governance). My aim is to capture and rank the most influential papers that were cited by the journal's authors. To do so I'll need to prepare a list of all papers published in the journal and thereafter to follow the sources that they cite. Does this seem reasonable way to go ? if so how would you technically collect and connect the data collected ? And are you aware of similar analysis ? Thank you so much i advice David -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET Fri Dec 6 05:30:53 2013 From: loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET (Loet Leydesdorff) Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2013 11:30:53 +0100 Subject: advice requested In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear colleague, You may find the program bibcoupl.exe at http://www.leydesdorff.net/software/bibcoupl/ useful. It provides you with the matrix of cited references (rows) versus cited authors (columns) in a format that can be read by SPSS. (There is a limitation of 1024 authors). Best, Loet _____ Loet Leydesdorff Professor, University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of Sussex; Visiting Professor, ISTIC, Beijing; Visiting Professor, Birkbeck , University of London. http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ych9gNYAAAAJ &hl=en From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of David Levi-Faur Sent: Friday, December 06, 2013 11:07 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: [SIGMETRICS] advice requested Dear Colleagues, I am looking for advice and model/ example to follow in analyzing the emerging body of knowledge in a new field and a journal I am editing (Regulation & Governance). My aim is to capture and rank the most influential papers that were cited by the journal's authors. To do so I'll need to prepare a list of all papers published in the journal and thereafter to follow the sources that they cite. Does this seem reasonable way to go ? if so how would you technically collect and connect the data collected ? And are you aware of similar analysis ? Thank you so much i advice David -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From olle.persson at SOC.UMU.SE Fri Dec 6 05:43:47 2013 From: olle.persson at SOC.UMU.SE (Olle Persson) Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2013 11:43:47 +0100 Subject: SV: [SIGMETRICS] advice requested In-Reply-To: <001801cef26e$3e860d20$bb922760$@leydesdorff.net> Message-ID: BibExcel made it! Best Olle Fr?n: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] F?r Loet Leydesdorff Skickat: den 6 december 2013 11:31 Till: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU ?mne: Re: [SIGMETRICS] advice requested Dear colleague, You may find the program bibcoupl.exe at http://www.leydesdorff.net/software/bibcoupl/ useful. It provides you with the matrix of cited references (rows) versus cited authors (columns) in a format that can be read by SPSS. (There is a limitation of 1024 authors). Best, Loet ________________________________ Loet Leydesdorff Professor, University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of Sussex; Visiting Professor, ISTIC, Beijing; Visiting Professor, Birkbeck, University of London. http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ych9gNYAAAAJ&hl=en From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of David Levi-Faur Sent: Friday, December 06, 2013 11:07 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: [SIGMETRICS] advice requested Dear Colleagues, I am looking for advice and model/ example to follow in analyzing the emerging body of knowledge in a new field and a journal I am editing (Regulation & Governance). My aim is to capture and rank the most influential papers that were cited by the journal's authors. To do so I'll need to prepare a list of all papers published in the journal and thereafter to follow the sources that they cite. Does this seem reasonable way to go ? if so how would you technically collect and connect the data collected ? And are you aware of similar analysis ? Thank you so much i advice David -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: WoS 191 R&G.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 967221 bytes Desc: WoS 191 R&G.xlsx URL: From loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET Fri Dec 6 08:15:55 2013 From: loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET (Loet Leydesdorff) Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2013 14:15:55 +0100 Subject: SV: [SIGMETRICS] advice requested In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear Olle, Yes, you are right. BibExcel is the right program in this case. BibCoupl studies bibliographic coupling by citing authors. Best, Loet From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Olle Persson Sent: Friday, December 06, 2013 11:44 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: [SIGMETRICS] SV: [SIGMETRICS] advice requested BibExcel made it! Best Olle Fr?n: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] F?r Loet Leydesdorff Skickat: den 6 december 2013 11:31 Till: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU ?mne: Re: [SIGMETRICS] advice requested http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html Dear colleague, You may find the program bibcoupl.exe at http://www.leydesdorff.net/software/bibcoupl/ useful. It provides you with the matrix of cited references (rows) versus cited authors (columns) in a format that can be read by SPSS. (There is a limitation of 1024 authors). Best, Loet _____ Loet Leydesdorff Professor, University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of Sussex; Visiting Professor, ISTIC, Beijing; Visiting Professor, Birkbeck , University of London. http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ych9gNYAAAAJ &hl=en From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of David Levi-Faur Sent: Friday, December 06, 2013 11:07 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: [SIGMETRICS] advice requested Dear Colleagues, I am looking for advice and model/ example to follow in analyzing the emerging body of knowledge in a new field and a journal I am editing (Regulation & Governance). My aim is to capture and rank the most influential papers that were cited by the journal's authors. To do so I'll need to prepare a list of all papers published in the journal and thereafter to follow the sources that they cite. Does this seem reasonable way to go ? if so how would you technically collect and connect the data collected ? And are you aware of similar analysis ? Thank you so much i advice David -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From vladimir.batagelj at FMF.UNI-LJ.SI Fri Dec 6 10:23:19 2013 From: vladimir.batagelj at FMF.UNI-LJ.SI (Vladimir Batagelj) Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2013 16:23:19 +0100 Subject: advice requested In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <<<-------- David Levi-Faur-------->>> > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > Dear Colleagues, > I am looking for advice and model/ example to follow in analyzing the > emerging body of knowledge in a new field and a journal I am editing > (Regulation > & > Governance). > My aim is to capture and rank the most influential papers that were cited > by the journal's authors. > To do so I'll need to prepare a list of all papers published in the > journal and thereafter to follow the sources that they cite. Does this > seem reasonable way to go ? if so how would you technically collect and > connect the data collected ? And are you aware of similar analysis ? > > Thank you so much i advice See for example http://pajek.imfm.si/lib/exe/fetch.php?media=event:pdf:cite33.pdf and the attached PDF. The flow algorithm is not implemented in Pajek yet http://pajek.imfm.si/ (there exists a prototype program in Python). Vlado -- Vladimir Batagelj, University of Ljubljana, FMF, Department of Mathematics Jadranska 19, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia http://vlado.fmf.uni-lj.si -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: flow.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 151139 bytes Desc: flow.pdf URL: From amsciforum at GMAIL.COM Fri Dec 6 10:31:48 2013 From: amsciforum at GMAIL.COM (Stevan Harnad) Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2013 10:31:48 -0500 Subject: Elsevier Study Commissioned by UK BIS Message-ID: Elsevier has just conducted and published a study commissioned by UK BIS: "International Comparative Performance of the UK Research Base ? 2013 " This study finds twice as much Green OA (11.6%) as Gold OA (5.9%) in the UK (where bothGreen OA repositories and Green OA mandates began) and about equal levels of Green (5.0%) and Gold (5.5%) in the rest of the world. There are methodological weaknesses in the Elsevier study, which was based on SCOPUS data (Gold data are direct and based on the whole data set, Green data are partial and based on hand-sampling; timing is not taken into account; categories of OA are often arbitrary and not mutually exclusive, etc). But the overall pattern may have some validity. What does it mean? It means the effects of Green OA mandates in the UK -- where there are relatively more of them, and they have been there for a half decade or more -- are detectable, compared to the rest of the world, where mandates are relatively fewer. But 11.6% Green is just a pale, partial indicator of how much OA Green OA mandates generate: If instead of looking at the world (where about 1% of institutions and funders have OA mandates) or the UK (where the percentage is somewhat higher, but many of the mandates are still weak and ineffective ones), one looks specifically at the OA percentages for effectively mandated institutions , the Green figure jumps to over 80% (about half of it immediate-OA and half embargoed OA: deposited, and accessible during the embargo via the repository's automated copy-request Button, with a click from the requestor and a click from the author). So if the planet's current level of Green OA is 11.6%, its level will jump to at least 80% as effective Green OA mandates are adopted. Meanwhile, Gold OA will continue to be unnecessary, over-priced, double-paid (which journal subscriptions still need to be paid) and potentially even double-dipped (if paid to the same hybrid subscription/Gold publisher) out of scarce research funds contributed by UK tax-payers ("Fool's Gold "). But once Green OA prevails worldwide, Fair Gold (and all the Libre OA re-use rights that users need and authors want to provide) will not be far behind. We are currently gathering data to test whether the immediate-deposit (HEFCE /Liege) Green OA mandate model is indeed the most effective mandate (compared, for example, with the Harvard copyright-retention model with opt-out, or the NIH model with a 12 month embargo). *Stevan Harnad* P.S. Needless to say, the fact that the UK's Green OA rate is twice as high as its Gold OA rate is true *despite* the new Finch/FCUK policy which subsidizes and prefers Gold and tries to downgrade Green -- certainly not because of it! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amsciforum at GMAIL.COM Fri Dec 6 19:01:38 2013 From: amsciforum at GMAIL.COM (Stevan Harnad) Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2013 19:01:38 -0500 Subject: Elsevier Study Commissioned by UK BIS Message-ID: On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Bo-Christer Bj?rk < bo-christer.bjork at hanken.fi> wrote: > > The Elsevier study on OA prevalence study was part of broader report. The > methods are just shortly mentioned so its a bit problematic to comment in > detail. > The global gold OA share found is 9,7 % of scopus articles, consisting of > 5,5 % APC paid and 4,2 others (not just 5.5 % as Stevan noted below). The > global hybrid share is 0.5. The green global share could be assumed to more > or less be the sum of preprint versions of 6.4 % and accepted versions 5.0 > %, adding directly to around 11 %. In particular if their method only took > the first found full text copy and then classified it > > The big flaw of the study seems to be in the sample used, since it > consisted of equal numbers of Scopus articles that had been published 2 > months, 6 months, 12 months and 24 months before the Googling. If the hits > are simple added up for all the sampled articles this means that a major > share of selfarchivied manuscripts are ignored, due to embargoes or author > behavior in for instance selfarchiving once a year. For instance half of > the copies in PMC would not be found in this way. Equally the very low > figure for "Open Archives", 1.0 %, could be a result of this method. Our > own results for delayed OA are around 5 %. > > So all in all the figures are much lower than if one includes articles > made OA with at least a one year delay, which we find is the method we > would recommend for studies claiming to give overall OA uptake figures. > Whether this methodological choice was a conscious one from the study team > or just an oversight is difficult to know. But if they would have adhered > to a strict interpretation that only immediate OA is OA, the sampling > should have been different. Now it's somewhere in between. > Bo-Christer is quite right. Elsevier's arbitrary (and somewhat self-serving) 6-category classification system (each of whose categories is curiously labelled a "publishing system") leaves much to be desired: 1. Gold Open Access 2. Hybrid 3. Subsidised 4. Open Archives 5. Green Open Access: Pre-print versions 6. Green Open Access: Accepted Author Manuscript versions It is not just what Elsevier called "Gold Open Access" that was Gold Open Access, but also what they called "Subsidised." The difference is merely that what they called Gold was publishing-fee-based Gold and what they called subsidized was subsidy-based Gold. Elsevier also neglected to mention that "Subsidised" did not necessarily mean subsidized either: There are also subscription-based journals that make their online versions free immediately upon publication; hence they are likewise Gold OA journals. What Elsevier called "Open Archives" is also not what it sounds like: It seems to be *Delayed Access* articles, accessible only after a publisher embargo, either on the publisher's website or in another central website, such as PubMed Central, where publishers also deposit, sometimes immediately, sometimes after an embargo. The two Green Open Access categories are also ambiguous.The pre-print versions are (correctly) described as pre-refereeing drafts (but it would take a lot closer analysis to determine whether the pre-prints differ from the refereed version. It is easy to determine whether they were posted before the official publication date but far from easy to determine whether they were posted before refereeing. (The date of the letter of acceptance of the refereed draft is often one that only the author and the editor know -- though it is in some cases printed in the journal: did Elsevier look at that too?) The post-refereeing author's drafts are presumably what they are described as being, but it is not clear by what criteria Elsevier distinguished them from pre-refeeeing drafts (except when they were in an institutional repository and specifically tagged as unrefereed). So, as Bo-Christer points out, there are many methodological questions about the data without whose answers their meaningfulness and interpretability is limited. I would say that the timing issue is perhaps the most important one. And to sort things out I would like to propose a different system of classification: *Open Access (OA):* The term OA should be reserved for immediate OA, regardless whether it is provided by the publisher (Gold) or the author (Green). A reasonable error-margin for OA should be* within 3 months or less from publication date*. Anything longer begins to overlap with publisher embargoes (of 6, 12, 24 months or longer). *Delayed Access (DA): *The term DA should be used for delays of more than 6 months. And besides the usefulness of separately counting 6, 12, and 24 month DA, DA should also be analyzed as a continuous variable, reckoned in months starting from the date of publication (including negative delays, when authors post the refereed draft during the interval from acceptance date to publication date. The unrefereed preprint, however, should not be mixed into this; it should be treated as a separate point of comparison. So there is *Gold OA* (immediate), *Green OA* (immediate), *Gold DA* and *Green DA* (measured by 6-month intervals as well as continuously in months. If a separate distinction is sought within Gold, then fee-based Gold, subsidy-based Gold and subscription-based Gold can be compared, for both OA and DA. The locus of deposit of the Gold is not relevant, but the fact that it was done by the publisher rather than the author (or the author's assigns) is extremely relevant. For Green OA and DA it is also important to compare locus of deposit (institutional vs. institution-external). See mandates below. In all cases independence and redundancy should uniformly be controlled: Whenever a positive "hit" is made in any category, it has to be checked whether there are any instances of the same paper in other categories. Otherwise the data are not mutually exclusive. If desired, all the above can be further subdivided in terms of *Gratis*(free online access) and *Libre* (free online access plus re-use rights) OA and DA. Tracking Gold has the advantage of having clear unambiguous timing (except if the publication date differs from the date the journal actually appears) and of being exhaustively searchable without having to sample or check (if one has an index of the Gold OA and DA journals). Tracking Green is much harder, but it must be done, because the fight for OA is rapidly becoming the fight against embargoes. That's why Green OA should be reserved for immediate access. It is almost certain that within the next few years most journals will become Gold DA (with an embargo of 12 months). Hence 12 months is the figure to beat, and Green DA after 18 months will not be of much use at all. And the best way to push for immediate Green OA, is to upgrade all Green mandates to require *immediate institutional deposit*, irrespective of how long an embargo the mandate allows on DA. Requiring immediate deposit does not guarantee immediate OA, but it guarantees immediate Almost-OA, mediated by the repository's automated copy-request Button, requiring only one click from the requestor and one click from the author. The immediate-deposit requirement plus the Button not only fits all OA mandates (no matter how they handle embargoes of copyright), making it possible for all institutions and funders to adopt it universally, but it also delivers the greatest amount of immediate access for 100% of deposits: immediate Green OA for X% plus (100-X)% Button-mediated Almost OA. And this, in turn will increase the universal demand for immediacy to the point where publisher embargoes will no longer be able to plug the flood-gates and the research community will have the 100% immediate Green OA it should have had ever since the creation of the web made it possible by making it possible to free the genie from the bottle, *Stevan Harnad* > On 12/6/13 5:31 PM, Stevan Harnad wrote: > > Elsevier has just conducted and published a study commissioned by UK BIS: "International > Comparative Performance of the UK Research Base ? 2013 > " > > This study finds twice as much Green OA (11.6%) as Gold OA (5.9%) in the > UK (where bothGreen OA repositories > and Green OA mandates began) > and about equal levels of Green (5.0%) and Gold (5.5%) in the rest of the > world. > > There are methodological weaknesses in the Elsevier study, which was based > on SCOPUS data (Gold data are direct and based on the whole data set, Green > data are partial and based on hand-sampling; timing is not taken into > account; categories of OA are often arbitrary and not mutually exclusive, > etc). But the overall pattern may have some validity. > > What does it mean? > > It means the effects of Green OA mandates in the UK -- > where there are relatively more of them, and they have been there for a > half decade or more -- are detectable, compared to the rest of the world, > where mandates are relatively fewer. > > But 11.6% Green is just a pale, partial indicator of how much OA Green OA > mandates generate: If instead of looking at the world (where about 1% of > institutions and funders have OA mandates) or the UK (where the percentage > is somewhat higher, but many of the mandates are still weak and ineffective > ones), one looks specifically at the OA percentages for effectively > mandated institutions , the Green > figure jumps to over 80% (about half of it immediate-OA and half embargoed > OA: deposited, and accessible during the embargo via the repository's > automated copy-request Button, with a click from the requestor and a click > from the author). > > So if the planet's current level of Green OA is 11.6%, its level will jump > to at least 80% as effective Green OA mandates are adopted. > > Meanwhile, Gold OA will continue to be unnecessary, over-priced, > double-paid (which journal subscriptions still need to be paid) and > potentially even double-dipped (if paid to the same hybrid > subscription/Gold publisher) out of scarce research funds contributed by UK > tax-payers ("Fool's Gold > "). > > But once Green OA prevails worldwide, Fair Gold (and > all the Libre OA re-use rights that users need and authors want to provide) > will not be far behind. > > We are currently gathering data to test whether the immediate-deposit > (HEFCE > /Liege) > Green OA mandate model is indeed the most effective mandate (compared, for > example, with the Harvard copyright-retention > model with opt-out, or the NIH model > with a 12 month embargo). > > *Stevan Harnad* > > P.S. Needless to say, the fact that the UK's Green OA rate is twice as > high as its Gold OA rate is true *despite* the new Finch/FCUK policy which > subsidizes and prefers Gold and tries to downgrade Green -- certainly not > because of it! > > > _______________________________________________ > GOAL mailing listGOAL at eprints.orghttp://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal > > > > _______________________________________________ > GOAL mailing list > GOAL at eprints.org > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From j.bosman at UU.NL Sat Dec 7 06:31:58 2013 From: j.bosman at UU.NL (Bosman, J.M.) Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2013 11:31:58 +0000 Subject: Elsevier Study Commissioned by UK BIS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Stevan, Could you elaborate on your expectation that "It is almost certain that within the next few years most journals will become Gold DA (with an embargo of 12 months)". Do you already see publishers move in that direction or are there other reasons for your forecast? Grtz, Jeroen Bosman Op 7 dec. 2013 om 01:01 heeft "Stevan Harnad" > het volgende geschreven: On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Bo-Christer Bj?rk > wrote: The Elsevier study on OA prevalence study was part of broader report. The methods are just shortly mentioned so its a bit problematic to comment in detail. The global gold OA share found is 9,7 % of scopus articles, consisting of 5,5 % APC paid and 4,2 others (not just 5.5 % as Stevan noted below). The global hybrid share is 0.5. The green global share could be assumed to more or less be the sum of preprint versions of 6.4 % and accepted versions 5.0 %, adding directly to around 11 %. In particular if their method only took the first found full text copy and then classified it The big flaw of the study seems to be in the sample used, since it consisted of equal numbers of Scopus articles that had been published 2 months, 6 months, 12 months and 24 months before the Googling. If the hits are simple added up for all the sampled articles this means that a major share of selfarchivied manuscripts are ignored, due to embargoes or author behavior in for instance selfarchiving once a year. For instance half of the copies in PMC would not be found in this way. Equally the very low figure for "Open Archives", 1.0 %, could be a result of this method. Our own results for delayed OA are around 5 %. So all in all the figures are much lower than if one includes articles made OA with at least a one year delay, which we find is the method we would recommend for studies claiming to give overall OA uptake figures. Whether this methodological choice was a conscious one from the study team or just an oversight is difficult to know. But if they would have adhered to a strict interpretation that only immediate OA is OA, the sampling should have been different. Now it's somewhere in between. Bo-Christer is quite right. Elsevier's arbitrary (and somewhat self-serving) 6-category classification system (each of whose categories is curiously labelled a "publishing system") leaves much to be desired: 1. Gold Open Access 2. Hybrid 3. Subsidised 4. Open Archives 5. Green Open Access: Pre-print versions 6. Green Open Access: Accepted Author Manuscript versions It is not just what Elsevier called "Gold Open Access" that was Gold Open Access, but also what they called "Subsidised." The difference is merely that what they called Gold was publishing-fee-based Gold and what they called subsidized was subsidy-based Gold. Elsevier also neglected to mention that "Subsidised" did not necessarily mean subsidized either: There are also subscription-based journals that make their online versions free immediately upon publication; hence they are likewise Gold OA journals. What Elsevier called "Open Archives" is also not what it sounds like: It seems to be Delayed Access articles, accessible only after a publisher embargo, either on the publisher's website or in another central website, such as PubMed Central, where publishers also deposit, sometimes immediately, sometimes after an embargo. The two Green Open Access categories are also ambiguous.The pre-print versions are (correctly) described as pre-refereeing drafts (but it would take a lot closer analysis to determine whether the pre-prints differ from the refereed version. It is easy to determine whether they were posted before the official publication date but far from easy to determine whether they were posted before refereeing. (The date of the letter of acceptance of the refereed draft is often one that only the author and the editor know -- though it is in some cases printed in the journal: did Elsevier look at that too?) The post-refereeing author's drafts are presumably what they are described as being, but it is not clear by what criteria Elsevier distinguished them from pre-refeeeing drafts (except when they were in an institutional repository and specifically tagged as unrefereed). So, as Bo-Christer points out, there are many methodological questions about the data without whose answers their meaningfulness and interpretability is limited. I would say that the timing issue is perhaps the most important one. And to sort things out I would like to propose a different system of classification: Open Access (OA): The term OA should be reserved for immediate OA, regardless whether it is provided by the publisher (Gold) or the author (Green). A reasonable error-margin for OA should be within 3 months or less from publication date. Anything longer begins to overlap with publisher embargoes (of 6, 12, 24 months or longer). Delayed Access (DA): The term DA should be used for delays of more than 6 months. And besides the usefulness of separately counting 6, 12, and 24 month DA, DA should also be analyzed as a continuous variable, reckoned in months starting from the date of publication (including negative delays, when authors post the refereed draft during the interval from acceptance date to publication date. The unrefereed preprint, however, should not be mixed into this; it should be treated as a separate point of comparison. So there is Gold OA (immediate), Green OA (immediate), Gold DA and Green DA (measured by 6-month intervals as well as continuously in months. If a separate distinction is sought within Gold, then fee-based Gold, subsidy-based Gold and subscription-based Gold can be compared, for both OA and DA. The locus of deposit of the Gold is not relevant, but the fact that it was done by the publisher rather than the author (or the author's assigns) is extremely relevant. For Green OA and DA it is also important to compare locus of deposit (institutional vs. institution-external). See mandates below. In all cases independence and redundancy should uniformly be controlled: Whenever a positive "hit" is made in any category, it has to be checked whether there are any instances of the same paper in other categories. Otherwise the data are not mutually exclusive. If desired, all the above can be further subdivided in terms of Gratis (free online access) and Libre (free online access plus re-use rights) OA and DA. Tracking Gold has the advantage of having clear unambiguous timing (except if the publication date differs from the date the journal actually appears) and of being exhaustively searchable without having to sample or check (if one has an index of the Gold OA and DA journals). Tracking Green is much harder, but it must be done, because the fight for OA is rapidly becoming the fight against embargoes. That's why Green OA should be reserved for immediate access. It is almost certain that within the next few years most journals will become Gold DA (with an embargo of 12 months). Hence 12 months is the figure to beat, and Green DA after 18 months will not be of much use at all. And the best way to push for immediate Green OA, is to upgrade all Green mandates to require immediate institutional deposit, irrespective of how long an embargo the mandate allows on DA. Requiring immediate deposit does not guarantee immediate OA, but it guarantees immediate Almost-OA, mediated by the repository's automated copy-request Button, requiring only one click from the requestor and one click from the author. The immediate-deposit requirement plus the Button not only fits all OA mandates (no matter how they handle embargoes of copyright), making it possible for all institutions and funders to adopt it universally, but it also delivers the greatest amount of immediate access for 100% of deposits: immediate Green OA for X% plus (100-X)% Button-mediated Almost OA. And this, in turn will increase the universal demand for immediacy to the point where publisher embargoes will no longer be able to plug the flood-gates and the research community will have the 100% immediate Green OA it should have had ever since the creation of the web made it possible by making it possible to free the genie from the bottle, Stevan Harnad On 12/6/13 5:31 PM, Stevan Harnad wrote: Elsevier has just conducted and published a study commissioned by UK BIS: "International Comparative Performance of the UK Research Base ? 2013" This study finds twice as much Green OA (11.6%) as Gold OA (5.9%) in the UK (where bothGreen OA repositories and Green OA mandates began) and about equal levels of Green (5.0%) and Gold (5.5%) in the rest of the world. There are methodological weaknesses in the Elsevier study, which was based on SCOPUS data (Gold data are direct and based on the whole data set, Green data are partial and based on hand-sampling; timing is not taken into account; categories of OA are often arbitrary and not mutually exclusive, etc). But the overall pattern may have some validity. What does it mean? It means the effects of Green OA mandates in the UK -- where there are relatively more of them, and they have been there for a half decade or more -- are detectable, compared to the rest of the world, where mandates are relatively fewer. But 11.6% Green is just a pale, partial indicator of how much OA Green OA mandates generate: If instead of looking at the world (where about 1% of institutions and funders have OA mandates) or the UK (where the percentage is somewhat higher, but many of the mandates are still weak and ineffective ones), one looks specifically at the OA percentages for effectively mandated institutions, the Green figure jumps to over 80% (about half of it immediate-OA and half embargoed OA: deposited, and accessible during the embargo via the repository's automated copy-request Button, with a click from the requestor and a click from the author). So if the planet's current level of Green OA is 11.6%, its level will jump to at least 80% as effective Green OA mandates are adopted. Meanwhile, Gold OA will continue to be unnecessary, over-priced, double-paid (which journal subscriptions still need to be paid) and potentially even double-dipped (if paid to the same hybrid subscription/Gold publisher) out of scarce research funds contributed by UK tax-payers ("Fool's Gold"). But once Green OA prevails worldwide, Fair Gold (and all the Libre OA re-use rights that users need and authors want to provide) will not be far behind. We are currently gathering data to test whether the immediate-deposit (HEFCE/Liege) Green OA mandate model is indeed the most effective mandate (compared, for example, with the Harvard copyright-retention model with opt-out, or the NIH model with a 12 month embargo). Stevan Harnad P.S. Needless to say, the fact that the UK's Green OA rate is twice as high as its Gold OA rate is true despite the new Finch/FCUK policy which subsidizes and prefers Gold and tries to downgrade Green -- certainly not because of it! _______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL at eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal _______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL at eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amsciforum at GMAIL.COM Sat Dec 7 07:56:08 2013 From: amsciforum at GMAIL.COM (Stevan Harnad) Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2013 07:56:08 -0500 Subject: Elsevier Study Commissioned by UK BIS Message-ID: On 2013-12-07, at 6:31 AM, "Bosman, J.M." wrote: Stevan, > Could you elaborate on your expectation that "It is almost certain that > within the next few years most journals will become Gold DA (with an > embargo of 12 months)". Do you already see publishers move in that > direction or are there other reasons for your forecast? It is an extrapolation and inference from the manifest pattern across the last half-decade: 1. Publishers know (better than anyone) that OA is inevitable and unstoppable, only delayable (via embargoes). 2. Publishers also know that it is the first year of sales that sustains their subscriptions. (The talk about later sales is just hyperbole.) 3. Publishers have been fighting tooth and nail against Green OA mandates, both via lobbying and via embargoes. 4. The majority of publishers with Green OA embargoes have an embargo of one year (though 60%, including Elsevier and Springer, have no embargo at all). 5. This 1-year Green OA embargo is publishers' realistic compromise: with minimal loss, it wards off immediate Green OA, making Green mandates *Delayed Green Mandates* instead of Green OA Mandates. 6. Then as an added protection against losing control of their content, more and more publishers are releasing it after a year on their own proprietary websites after a year: *Delayed Gold* The reasoning is that since free access after a year is a foregone conclusion, because of Green mandates, it's better if that free access is provided by publishers as Gold, so it all remains in their hands (navigation, search, reference linking, re-use, re-publication, etc.). 1-year Gold also protects the version of record from being replaced by the Green author's version. (Publishers even have a faint hope that 1-year Gold might take the wind out of the sails of Green mandates and the clamor for OA altogether: Everyone gets Gold access after a year, and that's the end of it. Back to business as before -- unless the market prefers to pay the same price that it pays for subscriptions, in exchange for immediate, un-embargoed Gold OA (as in SCOAP3 or hybrid Gold). But I think most publishers know that that is a pipe-dream, and that all they are really doing is holding back the inevitable for as long as they possibly can: And* the inevitable is immediate Green OA*, with authors posting their refereed, accepted final drafts immediately upon acceptance for publication. That version will become the version of record, because *subscriptions to the publisher's print and online version will become unsustainable once the Green OA version is free for all*. Under cancellation pressure induced by immediate Green, publishers will have to cut inessential costs by dropping the print and online version of record, offloading all access-provision and archiving onto the global network of Green OA institutional repositories, downsizing to the provision of the peer review service alone, paid for, per paper, per round of peer review, as Fair Gold (instead of today's over-priced, double-paid and double-dipped Fool's Gold) out of a fraction of the institutional annual windfall savings from their cancelled annual subscriptions. So both the 1-year embargo on Green and the 1-year release of Gold are attempts to fend off the above: *OA has become a fight for that first year of access: researchers need and want it immediately; publishers want to hold onto it unless they continue to be paid as much as they are being paid now.* But there is an antidote for publisher embargoes on immediate Green, and that is the immediate-institutional-deposit mandate plus the copy-Request Button (the HEFCE/Liege model mandate), designating the deposit of the final refereed draft immediately upon acceptance for publication as the sole mechanism for submitting publications for institutional performance review and for compliance with funding conditions. Once those mandates are universally adopted, universal OA will only be one keystroke away: The keystroke that makes an embargoed deposit OA. And embargoes will very quickly die their inevitable and well-deserved deaths under the mounting global pressure for immediate OA (which will merely be enhanced by Button-based Almost-OA). There you have it: Speculation, but grounded in the pragmatics, logic and evidence of what it actually going on today. Grtz, Jeroen Bosman Op 7 dec. 2013 om 01:01 heeft "Stevan Harnad" het volgende geschreven: On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Bo-Christer Bj?rk < bo-christer.bjork at hanken.fi> wrote: > > The Elsevier study on OA prevalence study was part of broader report. The > methods are just shortly mentioned so its a bit problematic to comment in > detail. > The global gold OA share found is 9,7 % of scopus articles, consisting of > 5,5 % APC paid and 4,2 others (not just 5.5 % as Stevan noted below). The > global hybrid share is 0.5. The green global share could be assumed to more > or less be the sum of preprint versions of 6.4 % and accepted versions 5.0 > %, adding directly to around 11 %. In particular if their method only took > the first found full text copy and then classified it > > The big flaw of the study seems to be in the sample used, since it > consisted of equal numbers of Scopus articles that had been published 2 > months, 6 months, 12 months and 24 months before the Googling. If the hits > are simple added up for all the sampled articles this means that a major > share of selfarchivied manuscripts are ignored, due to embargoes or author > behavior in for instance selfarchiving once a year. For instance half of > the copies in PMC would not be found in this way. Equally the very low > figure for "Open Archives", 1.0 %, could be a result of this method. Our > own results for delayed OA are around 5 %. > > So all in all the figures are much lower than if one includes articles > made OA with at least a one year delay, which we find is the method we > would recommend for studies claiming to give overall OA uptake figures. > Whether this methodological choice was a conscious one from the study team > or just an oversight is difficult to know. But if they would have adhered > to a strict interpretation that only immediate OA is OA, the sampling > should have been different. Now it's somewhere in between. > Bo-Christer is quite right. Elsevier's arbitrary (and somewhat self-serving) 6-category classification system (each of whose categories is curiously labelled a "publishing system") leaves much to be desired: 1. Gold Open Access 2. Hybrid 3. Subsidised 4. Open Archives 5. Green Open Access: Pre-print versions 6. Green Open Access: Accepted Author Manuscript versions It is not just what Elsevier called "Gold Open Access" that was Gold Open Access, but also what they called "Subsidised." The difference is merely that what they called Gold was publishing-fee-based Gold and what they called subsidized was subsidy-based Gold. Elsevier also neglected to mention that "Subsidised" did not necessarily mean subsidized either: There are also subscription-based journals that make their online versions free immediately upon publication; hence they are likewise Gold OA journals. What Elsevier called "Open Archives" is also not what it sounds like: It seems to be *Delayed Access* articles, accessible only after a publisher embargo, either on the publisher's website or in another central website, such as PubMed Central, where publishers also deposit, sometimes immediately, sometimes after an embargo. The two Green Open Access categories are also ambiguous.The pre-print versions are (correctly) described as pre-refereeing drafts (but it would take a lot closer analysis to determine whether the pre-prints differ from the refereed version. It is easy to determine whether they were posted before the official publication date but far from easy to determine whether they were posted before refereeing. (The date of the letter of acceptance of the refereed draft is often one that only the author and the editor know -- though it is in some cases printed in the journal: did Elsevier look at that too?) The post-refereeing author's drafts are presumably what they are described as being, but it is not clear by what criteria Elsevier distinguished them from pre-refeeeing drafts (except when they were in an institutional repository and specifically tagged as unrefereed). So, as Bo-Christer points out, there are many methodological questions about the data without whose answers their meaningfulness and interpretability is limited. I would say that the timing issue is perhaps the most important one. And to sort things out I would like to propose a different system of classification: *Open Access (OA):* The term OA should be reserved for immediate OA, regardless whether it is provided by the publisher (Gold) or the author (Green). A reasonable error-margin for OA should be* within 3 months or less from publication date*. Anything longer begins to overlap with publisher embargoes (of 6, 12, 24 months or longer). *Delayed Access (DA): *The term DA should be used for delays of more than 6 months. And besides the usefulness of separately counting 6, 12, and 24 month DA, DA should also be analyzed as a continuous variable, reckoned in months starting from the date of publication (including negative delays, when authors post the refereed draft during the interval from acceptance date to publication date. The unrefereed preprint, however, should not be mixed into this; it should be treated as a separate point of comparison. So there is *Gold OA* (immediate), *Green OA* (immediate), *Gold DA* and *Green DA* (measured by 6-month intervals as well as continuously in months. If a separate distinction is sought within Gold, then fee-based Gold, subsidy-based Gold and subscription-based Gold can be compared, for both OA and DA. The locus of deposit of the Gold is not relevant, but the fact that it was done by the publisher rather than the author (or the author's assigns) is extremely relevant. For Green OA and DA it is also important to compare locus of deposit (institutional vs. institution-external). See mandates below. In all cases independence and redundancy should uniformly be controlled: Whenever a positive "hit" is made in any category, it has to be checked whether there are any instances of the same paper in other categories. Otherwise the data are not mutually exclusive. If desired, all the above can be further subdivided in terms of *Gratis* (free online access) and *Libre* (free online access plus re-use rights) OA and DA. Tracking Gold has the advantage of having clear unambiguous timing (except if the publication date differs from the date the journal actually appears) and of being exhaustively searchable without having to sample or check (if one has an index of the Gold OA and DA journals). Tracking Green is much harder, but it must be done, because the fight for OA is rapidly becoming the fight against embargoes. That's why Green OA should be reserved for immediate access. It is almost certain that within the next few years most journals will become Gold DA (with an embargo of 12 months). Hence 12 months is the figure to beat, and Green DA after 18 months will not be of much use at all. And the best way to push for immediate Green OA, is to upgrade all Green mandates to require *immediate institutional deposit*, irrespective of how long an embargo the mandate allows on DA. Requiring immediate deposit does not guarantee immediate OA, but it guarantees immediate Almost-OA, mediated by the repository's automated copy-request Button, requiring only one click from the requestor and one click from the author. The immediate-deposit requirement plus the Button not only fits all OA mandates (no matter how they handle embargoes of copyright), making it possible for all institutions and funders to adopt it universally, but it also delivers the greatest amount of immediate access for 100% of deposits: immediate Green OA for X% plus (100-X)% Button-mediated Almost OA. And this, in turn will increase the universal demand for immediacy to the point where publisher embargoes will no longer be able to plug the flood-gates and the research community will have the 100% immediate Green OA it should have had ever since the creation of the web made it possible by making it possible to free the genie from the bottle, *Stevan Harnad* > On 12/6/13 5:31 PM, Stevan Harnad wrote: > > Elsevier has just conducted and published a study commissioned by UK BIS: "International > Comparative Performance of the UK Research Base ? 2013 > " > > This study finds twice as much Green OA (11.6%) as Gold OA (5.9%) in the > UK (where bothGreen OA repositories > and Green OA mandates began) > and about equal levels of Green (5.0%) and Gold (5.5%) in the rest of the > world. > > There are methodological weaknesses in the Elsevier study, which was based > on SCOPUS data (Gold data are direct and based on the whole data set, Green > data are partial and based on hand-sampling; timing is not taken into > account; categories of OA are often arbitrary and not mutually exclusive, > etc). But the overall pattern may have some validity. > > What does it mean? > > It means the effects of Green OA mandates in the UK -- > where there are relatively more of them, and they have been there for a > half decade or more -- are detectable, compared to the rest of the world, > where mandates are relatively fewer. > > But 11.6% Green is just a pale, partial indicator of how much OA Green OA > mandates generate: If instead of looking at the world (where about 1% of > institutions and funders have OA mandates) or the UK (where the percentage > is somewhat higher, but many of the mandates are still weak and ineffective > ones), one looks specifically at the OA percentages for effectively > mandated institutions , the Green > figure jumps to over 80% (about half of it immediate-OA and half embargoed > OA: deposited, and accessible during the embargo via the repository's > automated copy-request Button, with a click from the requestor and a click > from the author). > > So if the planet's current level of Green OA is 11.6%, its level will jump > to at least 80% as effective Green OA mandates are adopted. > > Meanwhile, Gold OA will continue to be unnecessary, over-priced, > double-paid (which journal subscriptions still need to be paid) and > potentially even double-dipped (if paid to the same hybrid > subscription/Gold publisher) out of scarce research funds contributed by UK > tax-payers ("Fool's Gold > "). > > But once Green OA prevails worldwide, Fair Gold (and > all the Libre OA re-use rights that users need and authors want to provide) > will not be far behind. > > We are currently gathering data to test whether the immediate-deposit > (HEFCE > /Liege) > Green OA mandate model is indeed the most effective mandate (compared, for > example, with the Harvard copyright-retention > model with opt-out, or the NIH model > with a 12 month embargo). > > *Stevan Harnad* > > P.S. Needless to say, the fact that the UK's Green OA rate is twice as > high as its Gold OA rate is true *despite* the new Finch/FCUK policy which > subsidizes and prefers Gold and tries to downgrade Green -- certainly not > because of it! > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amsciforum at GMAIL.COM Sat Dec 7 08:04:41 2013 From: amsciforum at GMAIL.COM (Stevan Harnad) Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2013 08:04:41 -0500 Subject: Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu Message-ID: On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 12:04 AM, Peter Murray-Rust wrote: > List members may be aware that Elsevier sent out thousands of take-down > notices for Green OA yesterday. See > http://svpow.com/2013/12/06/elsevier-is-taking-down-papers-from-academia-edu/and much twitter discussion. > > These manuscripts are Green. They are self archived by authors after > publication. > > But this is forbidden by Elsevier - the manuscripts can only be posted in > an Institutional Repository (and then, I assume, only if there is no > mandate requiring deposition). > > This is lunacy and it's to the discredit of the academics that they play > this convoluted and sterile game created by the publishers. Publishers' > reason for insisting on IRs over Academia.edu is that readers actually use > Academia. > > The purpose of the BOAI declaration was to make scholarship available to > everyone. This farce makes scholarship available to almost no-one. > Don't (just) boycott or fulminate: Deposit! Elsevier may have enough clout with take-down notices to 3rd-party service providers (and might be able to weather the backlash blizzard that will follow) -- but not with institutions self-archiving their own research output. I take this as yet another cue to push 100% for immediate institutional deposit mandates and the Button from all institutions and funders. Since 2004 Elsevier formally recognizes their authors' right to do immediate, unembargoed OA self-archiving on their institutional website. And even if they ever do try to rescind that, closed-access deposit is immune to take-down notices. (But I don't think Elsevier will dare arouse that global backlash by rescinding its 9-year policy of endorsing unembargoed Green OA -- they will instead try to hope that they can either bluff authors off with their empty-double-talk about "systematicity" and "voluntariness" or buy their institutions off by sweetening their publication deal on condition they don't mandate Green OA?) > > > > On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 12:01 AM, Stevan Harnad wrote: > >> On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Bo-Christer Bj?rk < >> bo-christer.bjork at hanken.fi> wrote: >> >>> >>> The Elsevier study on OA prevalence study was part of broader report. >>> The methods are just shortly mentioned so its a bit problematic to comment >>> in detail. >>> The global gold OA share found is 9,7 % of scopus articles, consisting >>> of 5,5 % APC paid and 4,2 others (not just 5.5 % as Stevan noted below). >>> The global hybrid share is 0.5. The green global share could be assumed to >>> more or less be the sum of preprint versions of 6.4 % and accepted versions >>> 5.0 %, adding directly to around 11 %. In particular if their method only >>> took the first found full text copy and then classified it >>> >>> The big flaw of the study seems to be in the sample used, since it >>> consisted of equal numbers of Scopus articles that had been published 2 >>> months, 6 months, 12 months and 24 months before the Googling. If the hits >>> are simple added up for all the sampled articles this means that a major >>> share of selfarchivied manuscripts are ignored, due to embargoes or author >>> behavior in for instance selfarchiving once a year. For instance half of >>> the copies in PMC would not be found in this way. Equally the very low >>> figure for "Open Archives", 1.0 %, could be a result of this method. Our >>> own results for delayed OA are around 5 %. >>> >>> So all in all the figures are much lower than if one includes articles >>> made OA with at least a one year delay, which we find is the method we >>> would recommend for studies claiming to give overall OA uptake figures. >>> Whether this methodological choice was a conscious one from the study team >>> or just an oversight is difficult to know. But if they would have adhered >>> to a strict interpretation that only immediate OA is OA, the sampling >>> should have been different. Now it's somewhere in between. >>> >> >> Bo-Christer is quite right. Elsevier's arbitrary (and somewhat >> self-serving) 6-category classification system (each of whose categories is >> curiously labelled a "publishing system") leaves much to be desired: >> >> 1. Gold Open Access >> 2. Hybrid >> 3. Subsidised >> 4. Open Archives >> 5. Green Open Access: Pre-print versions >> 6. Green Open Access: Accepted Author Manuscript versions >> >> It is not just what Elsevier called "Gold Open Access" that was Gold Open >> Access, but also what they called "Subsidised." The difference is merely >> that what they called Gold was publishing-fee-based Gold and what they >> called subsidized was subsidy-based Gold. >> >> Elsevier also neglected to mention that "Subsidised" did not necessarily >> mean subsidized either: There are also subscription-based journals that >> make their online versions free immediately upon publication; hence they >> are likewise Gold OA journals. >> >> What Elsevier called "Open Archives" is also not what it sounds like: It >> seems to be *Delayed Access* articles, accessible only after a publisher >> embargo, either on the publisher's website or in another central website, >> such as PubMed Central, where publishers also deposit, sometimes >> immediately, sometimes after an embargo. >> >> The two Green Open Access categories are also ambiguous.The pre-print >> versions are (correctly) described as pre-refereeing drafts (but it would >> take a lot closer analysis to determine whether the pre-prints differ from >> the refereed version. It is easy to determine whether they were posted >> before the official publication date but far from easy to determine whether >> they were posted before refereeing. (The date of the letter of acceptance >> of the refereed draft is often one that only the author and the editor know >> -- though it is in some cases printed in the journal: did Elsevier look at >> that too?) >> >> The post-refereeing author's drafts are presumably what they are >> described as being, but it is not clear by what criteria Elsevier >> distinguished them from pre-refeeeing drafts (except when they were in an >> institutional repository and specifically tagged as unrefereed). >> >> So, as Bo-Christer points out, there are many methodological questions >> about the data without whose answers their meaningfulness and >> interpretability is limited. I would say that the timing issue is perhaps >> the most important one. And to sort things out I would like to propose a >> different system of classification: >> >> *Open Access (OA):* The term OA should be reserved for immediate OA, >> regardless whether it is provided by the publisher (Gold) or the author >> (Green). A reasonable error-margin for OA should be* within 3 months or >> less from publication date*. Anything longer begins to overlap with >> publisher embargoes (of 6, 12, 24 months or longer). >> >> *Delayed Access (DA): *The term DA should be used for delays of more >> than 6 months. And besides the usefulness of separately counting 6, 12, and >> 24 month DA, DA should also be analyzed as a continuous variable, reckoned >> in months starting from the date of publication (including negative delays, >> when authors post the refereed draft during the interval from acceptance >> date to publication date. The unrefereed preprint, however, should not be >> mixed into this; it should be treated as a separate point of comparison. >> >> So there is *Gold OA* (immediate), *Green OA* (immediate), *Gold DA* and *Green >> DA* (measured by 6-month intervals as well as continuously in months. >> >> If a separate distinction is sought within Gold, then fee-based Gold, >> subsidy-based Gold and subscription-based Gold can be compared, for both OA >> and DA. The locus of deposit of the Gold is not relevant, but the fact that >> it was done by the publisher rather than the author (or the author's >> assigns) is extremely relevant. >> >> For Green OA and DA it is also important to compare locus of deposit >> (institutional vs. institution-external). See mandates below. >> >> In all cases independence and redundancy should uniformly be controlled: >> Whenever a positive "hit" is made in any category, it has to be checked >> whether there are any instances of the same paper in other categories. >> Otherwise the data are not mutually exclusive. >> >> If desired, all the above can be further subdivided in terms of *Gratis*(free online access) and >> *Libre* (free online access plus re-use rights) OA and DA. >> >> Tracking Gold has the advantage of having clear unambiguous timing >> (except if the publication date differs from the date the journal actually >> appears) and of being exhaustively searchable without having to sample or >> check (if one has an index of the Gold OA and DA journals). >> >> Tracking Green is much harder, but it must be done, because the fight for >> OA is rapidly becoming the fight against embargoes. That's why Green OA >> should be reserved for immediate access. It is almost certain that within >> the next few years most journals will become Gold DA (with an embargo of 12 >> months). Hence 12 months is the figure to beat, and Green DA after 18 >> months will not be of much use at all. >> >> And the best way to push for immediate Green OA, is to upgrade all Green >> mandates to require *immediate institutional deposit*, irrespective of >> how long an embargo the mandate allows on DA. Requiring immediate deposit >> does not guarantee immediate OA, but it guarantees immediate Almost-OA, >> mediated by the repository's automated copy-request Button, requiring only >> one click from the requestor and one click from the author. >> >> The immediate-deposit requirement plus the Button not only fits all OA >> mandates (no matter how they handle embargoes of copyright), making it >> possible for all institutions and funders to adopt it universally, but it >> also delivers the greatest amount of immediate access for 100% of deposits: >> immediate Green OA for X% plus (100-X)% Button-mediated Almost OA. And >> this, in turn will increase the universal demand for immediacy to the point >> where publisher embargoes will no longer be able to plug the flood-gates >> and the research community will have the 100% immediate Green OA it should >> have had ever since the creation of the web made it possible by making it >> possible to free the genie from the bottle, >> >> *Stevan Harnad* >> >> >> >>> On 12/6/13 5:31 PM, Stevan Harnad wrote: >>> >>> Elsevier has just conducted and published a study commissioned by UK >>> BIS: "International Comparative Performance of the UK Research Base ? >>> 2013 >>> " >>> >>> This study finds twice as much Green OA (11.6%) as Gold OA (5.9%) in the >>> UK (where bothGreen OA repositories >>> and Green OA mandates began) >>> and about equal levels of Green (5.0%) and Gold (5.5%) in the rest of the >>> world. >>> >>> There are methodological weaknesses in the Elsevier study, which was >>> based on SCOPUS data (Gold data are direct and based on the whole data set, >>> Green data are partial and based on hand-sampling; timing is not taken into >>> account; categories of OA are often arbitrary and not mutually exclusive, >>> etc). But the overall pattern may have some validity. >>> >>> What does it mean? >>> >>> It means the effects of Green OA mandates in the UK -- >>> where there are relatively more of them, and they have been there for a >>> half decade or more -- are detectable, compared to the rest of the world, >>> where mandates are relatively fewer. >>> >>> But 11.6% Green is just a pale, partial indicator of how much OA Green >>> OA mandates generate: If instead of looking at the world (where about 1% of >>> institutions and funders have OA mandates) or the UK (where the percentage >>> is somewhat higher, but many of the mandates are still weak and ineffective >>> ones), one looks specifically at the OA percentages for effectively >>> mandated institutions , the Green >>> figure jumps to over 80% (about half of it immediate-OA and half embargoed >>> OA: deposited, and accessible during the embargo via the repository's >>> automated copy-request Button, with a click from the requestor and a click >>> from the author). >>> >>> So if the planet's current level of Green OA is 11.6%, its level will >>> jump to at least 80% as effective Green OA mandates are adopted. >>> >>> Meanwhile, Gold OA will continue to be unnecessary, over-priced, >>> double-paid (which journal subscriptions still need to be paid) and >>> potentially even double-dipped (if paid to the same hybrid >>> subscription/Gold publisher) out of scarce research funds contributed by UK >>> tax-payers ("Fool's Gold >>> "). >>> >>> But once Green OA prevails worldwide, Fair Gold (and >>> all the Libre OA re-use rights that users need and authors want to provide) >>> will not be far behind. >>> >>> We are currently gathering data to test whether the immediate-deposit >>> (HEFCE >>> /Liege) >>> Green OA mandate model is indeed the most effective mandate (compared, for >>> example, with the Harvard copyright-retention >>> model with opt-out, or the NIH model >>> with a 12 month embargo). >>> >>> *Stevan Harnad* >>> >>> P.S. Needless to say, the fact that the UK's Green OA rate is twice as >>> high as its Gold OA rate is true *despite* the new Finch/FCUK policy which >>> subsidizes and prefers Gold and tries to downgrade Green -- certainly not >>> because of it! >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> GOAL mailing listGOAL at eprints.orghttp://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> GOAL mailing list >>> GOAL at eprints.org >>> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> GOAL mailing list >> GOAL at eprints.org >> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal >> >> > > > -- > Peter Murray-Rust > Reader in Molecular Informatics > Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry > University of Cambridge > CB2 1EW, UK > +44-1223-763069 > > _______________________________________________ > GOAL mailing list > GOAL at eprints.org > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amsciforum at GMAIL.COM Sat Dec 7 08:52:15 2013 From: amsciforum at GMAIL.COM (Stevan Harnad) Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2013 08:52:15 -0500 Subject: Definition of Open Access Message-ID: The Green/Gold distinction (which is based on who provides the access, the publisher or the author) is more important now than ever, as publishers fight to retain control of their content. The distinction resolves confusion rather than creating it; and it is simple to understand (but then needs to be adhered to). The OA movement should resolutely push for Green OA; Green OA mandates should be formulated to ensure that *compliance is by the party bound by the mandate* (the fundee, if a funder mandate, the employee, if an institutional mandate). On no account should mandates rely on compliance by a 2nd party, the publisher, who is not bound by the mandate and has every interest in maintaining control over the content. There is a 3rd way in which articles can be made OA of course, other than by the author (or the author's assigns) (Green) or by the publisher (Gold): It can be made OA by a 3rd party, either a user or a rival publisher or service provider. This is partly what the academia.edu kerfuffle is about, and it will no doubt spread to ResearchGate, Mendeley and the like. (It also concerns versions, because Green OA usually involves only the author's final draft whereas 3rd-party OA often involves the publisher's proprietary version.) My advice to those who are up in arms about Elsevier's take-down notice for 3rd-party service providers is to redirect their resentment to doing something legal and feasible, namely, mandating and depositing the final draft in their institutional repository immediately upon acceptance, and making it OA as soon as they can (or wish). The term "OA" (and the goal of the OA movement) should also continue to be reserved for *immediate (online) access*. The inverse of Open Access is Access Denial. Access is denied by Access Tolls (subscriptions, licenses, pay-to-view), but, just as surely, it is denied by Access Embargoes. Hence it is a contradiction in terms to call Embargoed Access "Delayed Open Access." It is *Delayed Access (DA),* just as Toll Access is *Toll Access (TA)*, not "Toll Open Access!" And, as I mentioned in my preceding post, a one year access embargo is now the real target to beat (as publishers already know all to well). Access delayed for a year is not a victory for the advocates of Open Access; nor is it a solution to the Access/Impact problem in the online era. A 1-year delay might be a convenient unit for doing bibliometric measurements on the growth and latency of Green and Gold Access (and a welcome compromise and marketing ploy for the publishing industry), but "Open Access" should continue to be reserved for immediate, toll-free (and permanent!) online access . (The same applies whether the Open Access is Gratis or Libre, by the way.) *Stevan Harnad* On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 3:50 AM, Bo-Christer Bj?rk < bo-christer.bjork at hanken.fi> wrote: > I fully agree with Stevan on the need to define a clear standard for > what we measure and when, by I have a different view of some details. > > Why not simply talk of "Immediate Open Access" and "Delayed Open Access", > both provide open access. I'm also getting more and more hesitant about the > use of the terms Gold and green since there is so much confusion in actual > usage. The term subsidized open access is kind of misleading. The only > subsidy a lot of OA journals, in particular in the social science and > humanities, and journals published elsewhere than in the US, UK, are > getting is the usage of a university web site, the marginal cost of which > is almost nil. Or in Latin America etc. the use of Scielo, which is very > low cost per journal and hence only a small part of their resource use. > Other than that its mainly voluntary work by academic communities. Remember > that the universities of editors, reveiewers, etc already "subsidize" > society and commercial publisher journals. > > The open archives term (for delayed open access) that Elsevier invented is > downright silly. Most people who think of this as getting e-access to > articles published many years and decades ago. > > I agree with Stevan that perhaps their could be a three month delay border > for the definition of immediate Open Access, to allow for a slight delay > for authors putting up manuscripts of non-embargoed journal articles. As > for delayed OA I would suggest going for just one minumum period in broad > studies and I would put it at slightly over a year, perhaps 15 months. This > has to do with the increasingly common 12 month embargo periods, and again > the fact that many authors following such embargoes may post a couple of > months later. Also it is very common for academics to post articles to IRs > for their full last year production in January, February the next year when > they have to report meta data to their universities for book-keeping, which > means that for some article the delay will be slightly over a year. > > If a study in particular wan't to study how green OA increases as a > function of the delay (6, 12, 24 ect) that is naturally fine, but in most > reporting in the popular press (including journal like Nature) they > simplify the message to single figures. > > In practice it is difficult in mass studies based on sampling of say > Scopus meta data to determine the exact delays for each article (which > would also entail also finding out when the copy was posted). All you can > do is run the googling at one point in time (or a relatively short period). > In order to have a big enough delay it is often convenient to use the > scopus or ISI data of articles published in the year before the last one. > > One last item which somehow would need to be sorted out (and which was > raised in connection with the recent Science-Metrix study) is that > automated searches also catch what I would label "promotional OA", for > instance the practice of many publishers to have the first issue of the > last year open using a rolling scheme (that is if you google a year later > the articles are no longer available). Dependent on the time lag of the > study, but in particular for delays between a few months and say a year and > a half, counting such articles in could raise the overall OA prevalence > with as much as five percent. Also due to the fact that in such studies > googled hits are sometimes classified as gold OA, based on the journals in > question being in DOAJ, such hits will then misleadingly be classified as > green OA. > > Bo-Christer > > On 12/7/13 2:01 AM, Stevan Harnad wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Bo-Christer Bj?rk < > bo-christer.bjork at hanken.fi> wrote: > >> >> The Elsevier study on OA prevalence study was part of broader report. The >> methods are just shortly mentioned so its a bit problematic to comment in >> detail. >> The global gold OA share found is 9,7 % of scopus articles, consisting of >> 5,5 % APC paid and 4,2 others (not just 5.5 % as Stevan noted below). The >> global hybrid share is 0.5. The green global share could be assumed to more >> or less be the sum of preprint versions of 6.4 % and accepted versions 5.0 >> %, adding directly to around 11 %. In particular if their method only took >> the first found full text copy and then classified it >> >> The big flaw of the study seems to be in the sample used, since it >> consisted of equal numbers of Scopus articles that had been published 2 >> months, 6 months, 12 months and 24 months before the Googling. If the hits >> are simple added up for all the sampled articles this means that a major >> share of selfarchivied manuscripts are ignored, due to embargoes or author >> behavior in for instance selfarchiving once a year. For instance half of >> the copies in PMC would not be found in this way. Equally the very low >> figure for "Open Archives", 1.0 %, could be a result of this method. Our >> own results for delayed OA are around 5 %. >> >> So all in all the figures are much lower than if one includes articles >> made OA with at least a one year delay, which we find is the method we >> would recommend for studies claiming to give overall OA uptake figures. >> Whether this methodological choice was a conscious one from the study team >> or just an oversight is difficult to know. But if they would have adhered >> to a strict interpretation that only immediate OA is OA, the sampling >> should have been different. Now it's somewhere in between. >> > > Bo-Christer is quite right. Elsevier's arbitrary (and somewhat > self-serving) 6-category classification system (each of whose categories is > curiously labelled a "publishing system") leaves much to be desired: > > 1. Gold Open Access > 2. Hybrid > 3. Subsidised > 4. Open Archives > 5. Green Open Access: Pre-print versions > 6. Green Open Access: Accepted Author Manuscript versions > > It is not just what Elsevier called "Gold Open Access" that was Gold > Open Access, but also what they called "Subsidised." The difference is > merely that what they called Gold was publishing-fee-based Gold and what > they called subsidized was subsidy-based Gold. > > Elsevier also neglected to mention that "Subsidised" did not necessarily > mean subsidized either: There are also subscription-based journals that > make their online versions free immediately upon publication; hence they > are likewise Gold OA journals. > > What Elsevier called "Open Archives" is also not what it sounds like: It > seems to be *Delayed Access* articles, accessible only after a publisher > embargo, either on the publisher's website or in another central website, > such as PubMed Central, where publishers also deposit, sometimes > immediately, sometimes after an embargo. > > The two Green Open Access categories are also ambiguous.The pre-print > versions are (correctly) described as pre-refereeing drafts (but it would > take a lot closer analysis to determine whether the pre-prints differ from > the refereed version. It is easy to determine whether they were posted > before the official publication date but far from easy to determine whether > they were posted before refereeing. (The date of the letter of acceptance > of the refereed draft is often one that only the author and the editor know > -- though it is in some cases printed in the journal: did Elsevier look at > that too?) > > The post-refereeing author's drafts are presumably what they are > described as being, but it is not clear by what criteria Elsevier > distinguished them from pre-refeeeing drafts (except when they were in an > institutional repository and specifically tagged as unrefereed). > > So, as Bo-Christer points out, there are many methodological questions > about the data without whose answers their meaningfulness and > interpretability is limited. I would say that the timing issue is perhaps > the most important one. And to sort things out I would like to propose a > different system of classification: > > *Open Access (OA):* The term OA should be reserved for immediate OA, > regardless whether it is provided by the publisher (Gold) or the author > (Green). A reasonable error-margin for OA should be* within 3 months or > less from publication date*. Anything longer begins to overlap with > publisher embargoes (of 6, 12, 24 months or longer). > > *Delayed Access (DA): *The term DA should be used for delays of more > than 6 months. And besides the usefulness of separately counting 6, 12, and > 24 month DA, DA should also be analyzed as a continuous variable, reckoned > in months starting from the date of publication (including negative delays, > when authors post the refereed draft during the interval from acceptance > date to publication date. The unrefereed preprint, however, should not be > mixed into this; it should be treated as a separate point of comparison. > > So there is *Gold OA* (immediate), *Green OA* (immediate), *Gold DA* and *Green > DA* (measured by 6-month intervals as well as continuously in months. > > If a separate distinction is sought within Gold, then fee-based Gold, > subsidy-based Gold and subscription-based Gold can be compared, for both OA > and DA. The locus of deposit of the Gold is not relevant, but the fact that > it was done by the publisher rather than the author (or the author's > assigns) is extremely relevant. > > For Green OA and DA it is also important to compare locus of deposit > (institutional vs. institution-external). See mandates below. > > In all cases independence and redundancy should uniformly be controlled: > Whenever a positive "hit" is made in any category, it has to be checked > whether there are any instances of the same paper in other categories. > Otherwise the data are not mutually exclusive. > > If desired, all the above can be further subdivided in terms of *Gratis*(free online access) and > *Libre* (free online access plus re-use rights) OA and DA. > > Tracking Gold has the advantage of having clear unambiguous timing > (except if the publication date differs from the date the journal actually > appears) and of being exhaustively searchable without having to sample or > check (if one has an index of the Gold OA and DA journals). > > Tracking Green is much harder, but it must be done, because the fight > for OA is rapidly becoming the fight against embargoes. That's why Green OA > should be reserved for immediate access. It is almost certain that within > the next few years most journals will become Gold DA (with an embargo of 12 > months). Hence 12 months is the figure to beat, and Green DA after 18 > months will not be of much use at all. > > And the best way to push for immediate Green OA, is to upgrade all Green > mandates to require *immediate institutional deposit*, irrespective of > how long an embargo the mandate allows on DA. Requiring immediate deposit > does not guarantee immediate OA, but it guarantees immediate Almost-OA, > mediated by the repository's automated copy-request Button, requiring only > one click from the requestor and one click from the author. > > The immediate-deposit requirement plus the Button not only fits all OA > mandates (no matter how they handle embargoes of copyright), making it > possible for all institutions and funders to adopt it universally, but it > also delivers the greatest amount of immediate access for 100% of deposits: > immediate Green OA for X% plus (100-X)% Button-mediated Almost OA. And > this, in turn will increase the universal demand for immediacy to the point > where publisher embargoes will no longer be able to plug the flood-gates > and the research community will have the 100% immediate Green OA it should > have had ever since the creation of the web made it possible by making it > possible to free the genie from the bottle, > > *Stevan Harnad* > > > >> On 12/6/13 5:31 PM, Stevan Harnad wrote: >> >> Elsevier has just conducted and published a study commissioned by UK BIS: >> "International Comparative Performance of the UK Research Base ? 2013 >> " >> >> This study finds twice as much Green OA (11.6%) as Gold OA (5.9%) in the >> UK (where bothGreen OA repositories >> and Green OA mandates began) >> and about equal levels of Green (5.0%) and Gold (5.5%) in the rest of the >> world. >> >> There are methodological weaknesses in the Elsevier study, which was >> based on SCOPUS data (Gold data are direct and based on the whole data set, >> Green data are partial and based on hand-sampling; timing is not taken into >> account; categories of OA are often arbitrary and not mutually exclusive, >> etc). But the overall pattern may have some validity. >> >> What does it mean? >> >> It means the effects of Green OA mandates in the UK -- >> where there are relatively more of them, and they have been there for a >> half decade or more -- are detectable, compared to the rest of the world, >> where mandates are relatively fewer. >> >> But 11.6% Green is just a pale, partial indicator of how much OA Green OA >> mandates generate: If instead of looking at the world (where about 1% of >> institutions and funders have OA mandates) or the UK (where the percentage >> is somewhat higher, but many of the mandates are still weak and ineffective >> ones), one looks specifically at the OA percentages for effectively >> mandated institutions , the Green >> figure jumps to over 80% (about half of it immediate-OA and half embargoed >> OA: deposited, and accessible during the embargo via the repository's >> automated copy-request Button, with a click from the requestor and a click >> from the author). >> >> So if the planet's current level of Green OA is 11.6%, its level will >> jump to at least 80% as effective Green OA mandates are adopted. >> >> Meanwhile, Gold OA will continue to be unnecessary, over-priced, >> double-paid (which journal subscriptions still need to be paid) and >> potentially even double-dipped (if paid to the same hybrid >> subscription/Gold publisher) out of scarce research funds contributed by UK >> tax-payers ("Fool's Gold >> "). >> >> But once Green OA prevails worldwide, Fair Gold (and >> all the Libre OA re-use rights that users need and authors want to provide) >> will not be far behind. >> >> We are currently gathering data to test whether the immediate-deposit >> (HEFCE >> /Liege) >> Green OA mandate model is indeed the most effective mandate (compared, for >> example, with the Harvard copyright-retention >> model with opt-out, or the NIH model >> with a 12 month embargo). >> >> *Stevan Harnad* >> >> P.S. Needless to say, the fact that the UK's Green OA rate is twice as >> high as its Gold OA rate is true *despite* the new Finch/FCUK policy which >> subsidizes and prefers Gold and tries to downgrade Green -- certainly not >> because of it! >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> GOAL mailing listGOAL at eprints.orghttp://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> GOAL mailing list >> GOAL at eprints.org >> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > GOAL mailing listGOAL at eprints.orghttp://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal > > > > _______________________________________________ > GOAL mailing list > GOAL at eprints.org > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From j.bosman at UU.NL Sat Dec 7 10:35:13 2013 From: j.bosman at UU.NL (Bosman, J.M.) Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2013 15:35:13 +0000 Subject: Elsevier Study Commissioned by UK BIS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Stevan, As you say, this is indeed specualation. I can follow the reasoning but wonder if you could mention examples of publishers releasing content after one year as you say under 6. The roadmap you put before us here is a major turn from the massive introduction of hybrid gold now offered by publishers and accepted by governments (UK, NL). I am afraid that currently many authors and universities would be content with (one eyear) delayed gold OA and retaining subscriptions. I do not think that under those circumstances there would still be massive support for depositing author versions for just one year. We do not even have that now, with almost no delayed gold at all. It may be tactically important to convince the research community of green ID/OA mandates before publishers make this switch. One final suggestion: it would be nice to have your specualative roadmap and the OA classification you suggest in this thread available on the eprints.org webpage, for easy reference. Jeroen Op 7 dec. 2013 om 13:56 heeft "Stevan Harnad" > het volgende geschreven: On 2013-12-07, at 6:31 AM, "Bosman, J.M." > wrote: Stevan, Could you elaborate on your expectation that "It is almost certain that within the next few years most journals will become Gold DA (with an embargo of 12 months)". Do you already see publishers move in that direction or are there other reasons for your forecast? It is an extrapolation and inference from the manifest pattern across the last half-decade: 1. Publishers know (better than anyone) that OA is inevitable and unstoppable, only delayable (via embargoes). 2. Publishers also know that it is the first year of sales that sustains their subscriptions. (The talk about later sales is just hyperbole.) 3. Publishers have been fighting tooth and nail against Green OA mandates, both via lobbying and via embargoes. 4. The majority of publishers with Green OA embargoes have an embargo of one year (though 60%, including Elsevier and Springer, have no embargo at all). 5. This 1-year Green OA embargo is publishers' realistic compromise: with minimal loss, it wards off immediate Green OA, making Green mandates Delayed Green Mandates instead of Green OA Mandates. 6. Then as an added protection against losing control of their content, more and more publishers are releasing it after a year on their own proprietary websites after a year: Delayed Gold The reasoning is that since free access after a year is a foregone conclusion, because of Green mandates, it's better if that free access is provided by publishers as Gold, so it all remains in their hands (navigation, search, reference linking, re-use, re-publication, etc.). 1-year Gold also protects the version of record from being replaced by the Green author's version. (Publishers even have a faint hope that 1-year Gold might take the wind out of the sails of Green mandates and the clamor for OA altogether: Everyone gets Gold access after a year, and that's the end of it. Back to business as before -- unless the market prefers to pay the same price that it pays for subscriptions, in exchange for immediate, un-embargoed Gold OA (as in SCOAP3 or hybrid Gold). But I think most publishers know that that is a pipe-dream, and that all they are really doing is holding back the inevitable for as long as they possibly can: And the inevitable is immediate Green OA, with authors posting their refereed, accepted final drafts immediately upon acceptance for publication. That version will become the version of record, because subscriptions to the publisher's print and online version will become unsustainable once the Green OA version is free for all. Under cancellation pressure induced by immediate Green, publishers will have to cut inessential costs by dropping the print and online version of record, offloading all access-provision and archiving onto the global network of Green OA institutional repositories, downsizing to the provision of the peer review service alone, paid for, per paper, per round of peer review, as Fair Gold (instead of today's over-priced, double-paid and double-dipped Fool's Gold) out of a fraction of the institutional annual windfall savings from their cancelled annual subscriptions. So both the 1-year embargo on Green and the 1-year release of Gold are attempts to fend off the above: OA has become a fight for that first year of access: researchers need and want it immediately; publishers want to hold onto it unless they continue to be paid as much as they are being paid now. But there is an antidote for publisher embargoes on immediate Green, and that is the immediate-institutional-deposit mandate plus the copy-Request Button (the HEFCE/Liege model mandate), designating the deposit of the final refereed draft immediately upon acceptance for publication as the sole mechanism for submitting publications for institutional performance review and for compliance with funding conditions. Once those mandates are universally adopted, universal OA will only be one keystroke away: The keystroke that makes an embargoed deposit OA. And embargoes will very quickly die their inevitable and well-deserved deaths under the mounting global pressure for immediate OA (which will merely be enhanced by Button-based Almost-OA). There you have it: Speculation, but grounded in the pragmatics, logic and evidence of what it actually going on today. Grtz, Jeroen Bosman Op 7 dec. 2013 om 01:01 heeft "Stevan Harnad" > het volgende geschreven: On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Bo-Christer Bj?rk > wrote: The Elsevier study on OA prevalence study was part of broader report. The methods are just shortly mentioned so its a bit problematic to comment in detail. The global gold OA share found is 9,7 % of scopus articles, consisting of 5,5 % APC paid and 4,2 others (not just 5.5 % as Stevan noted below). The global hybrid share is 0.5. The green global share could be assumed to more or less be the sum of preprint versions of 6.4 % and accepted versions 5.0 %, adding directly to around 11 %. In particular if their method only took the first found full text copy and then classified it The big flaw of the study seems to be in the sample used, since it consisted of equal numbers of Scopus articles that had been published 2 months, 6 months, 12 months and 24 months before the Googling. If the hits are simple added up for all the sampled articles this means that a major share of selfarchivied manuscripts are ignored, due to embargoes or author behavior in for instance selfarchiving once a year. For instance half of the copies in PMC would not be found in this way. Equally the very low figure for "Open Archives", 1.0 %, could be a result of this method. Our own results for delayed OA are around 5 %. So all in all the figures are much lower than if one includes articles made OA with at least a one year delay, which we find is the method we would recommend for studies claiming to give overall OA uptake figures. Whether this methodological choice was a conscious one from the study team or just an oversight is difficult to know. But if they would have adhered to a strict interpretation that only immediate OA is OA, the sampling should have been different. Now it's somewhere in between. Bo-Christer is quite right. Elsevier's arbitrary (and somewhat self-serving) 6-category classification system (each of whose categories is curiously labelled a "publishing system") leaves much to be desired: 1. Gold Open Access 2. Hybrid 3. Subsidised 4. Open Archives 5. Green Open Access: Pre-print versions 6. Green Open Access: Accepted Author Manuscript versions It is not just what Elsevier called "Gold Open Access" that was Gold Open Access, but also what they called "Subsidised." The difference is merely that what they called Gold was publishing-fee-based Gold and what they called subsidized was subsidy-based Gold. Elsevier also neglected to mention that "Subsidised" did not necessarily mean subsidized either: There are also subscription-based journals that make their online versions free immediately upon publication; hence they are likewise Gold OA journals. What Elsevier called "Open Archives" is also not what it sounds like: It seems to be Delayed Access articles, accessible only after a publisher embargo, either on the publisher's website or in another central website, such as PubMed Central, where publishers also deposit, sometimes immediately, sometimes after an embargo. The two Green Open Access categories are also ambiguous.The pre-print versions are (correctly) described as pre-refereeing drafts (but it would take a lot closer analysis to determine whether the pre-prints differ from the refereed version. It is easy to determine whether they were posted before the official publication date but far from easy to determine whether they were posted before refereeing. (The date of the letter of acceptance of the refereed draft is often one that only the author and the editor know -- though it is in some cases printed in the journal: did Elsevier look at that too?) The post-refereeing author's drafts are presumably what they are described as being, but it is not clear by what criteria Elsevier distinguished them from pre-refeeeing drafts (except when they were in an institutional repository and specifically tagged as unrefereed). So, as Bo-Christer points out, there are many methodological questions about the data without whose answers their meaningfulness and interpretability is limited. I would say that the timing issue is perhaps the most important one. And to sort things out I would like to propose a different system of classification: Open Access (OA): The term OA should be reserved for immediate OA, regardless whether it is provided by the publisher (Gold) or the author (Green). A reasonable error-margin for OA should be within 3 months or less from publication date. Anything longer begins to overlap with publisher embargoes (of 6, 12, 24 months or longer). Delayed Access (DA): The term DA should be used for delays of more than 6 months. And besides the usefulness of separately counting 6, 12, and 24 month DA, DA should also be analyzed as a continuous variable, reckoned in months starting from the date of publication (including negative delays, when authors post the refereed draft during the interval from acceptance date to publication date. The unrefereed preprint, however, should not be mixed into this; it should be treated as a separate point of comparison. So there is Gold OA (immediate), Green OA (immediate), Gold DA and Green DA (measured by 6-month intervals as well as continuously in months. If a separate distinction is sought within Gold, then fee-based Gold, subsidy-based Gold and subscription-based Gold can be compared, for both OA and DA. The locus of deposit of the Gold is not relevant, but the fact that it was done by the publisher rather than the author (or the author's assigns) is extremely relevant. For Green OA and DA it is also important to compare locus of deposit (institutional vs. institution-external). See mandates below. In all cases independence and redundancy should uniformly be controlled: Whenever a positive "hit" is made in any category, it has to be checked whether there are any instances of the same paper in other categories. Otherwise the data are not mutually exclusive. If desired, all the above can be further subdivided in terms of Gratis (free online access) and Libre (free online access plus re-use rights) OA and DA. Tracking Gold has the advantage of having clear unambiguous timing (except if the publication date differs from the date the journal actually appears) and of being exhaustively searchable without having to sample or check (if one has an index of the Gold OA and DA journals). Tracking Green is much harder, but it must be done, because the fight for OA is rapidly becoming the fight against embargoes. That's why Green OA should be reserved for immediate access. It is almost certain that within the next few years most journals will become Gold DA (with an embargo of 12 months). Hence 12 months is the figure to beat, and Green DA after 18 months will not be of much use at all. And the best way to push for immediate Green OA, is to upgrade all Green mandates to require immediate institutional deposit, irrespective of how long an embargo the mandate allows on DA. Requiring immediate deposit does not guarantee immediate OA, but it guarantees immediate Almost-OA, mediated by the repository's automated copy-request Button, requiring only one click from the requestor and one click from the author. The immediate-deposit requirement plus the Button not only fits all OA mandates (no matter how they handle embargoes of copyright), making it possible for all institutions and funders to adopt it universally, but it also delivers the greatest amount of immediate access for 100% of deposits: immediate Green OA for X% plus (100-X)% Button-mediated Almost OA. And this, in turn will increase the universal demand for immediacy to the point where publisher embargoes will no longer be able to plug the flood-gates and the research community will have the 100% immediate Green OA it should have had ever since the creation of the web made it possible by making it possible to free the genie from the bottle, Stevan Harnad On 12/6/13 5:31 PM, Stevan Harnad wrote: Elsevier has just conducted and published a study commissioned by UK BIS: "International Comparative Performance of the UK Research Base ? 2013" This study finds twice as much Green OA (11.6%) as Gold OA (5.9%) in the UK (where bothGreen OA repositories and Green OA mandates began) and about equal levels of Green (5.0%) and Gold (5.5%) in the rest of the world. There are methodological weaknesses in the Elsevier study, which was based on SCOPUS data (Gold data are direct and based on the whole data set, Green data are partial and based on hand-sampling; timing is not taken into account; categories of OA are often arbitrary and not mutually exclusive, etc). But the overall pattern may have some validity. What does it mean? It means the effects of Green OA mandates in the UK -- where there are relatively more of them, and they have been there for a half decade or more -- are detectable, compared to the rest of the world, where mandates are relatively fewer. But 11.6% Green is just a pale, partial indicator of how much OA Green OA mandates generate: If instead of looking at the world (where about 1% of institutions and funders have OA mandates) or the UK (where the percentage is somewhat higher, but many of the mandates are still weak and ineffective ones), one looks specifically at the OA percentages for effectively mandated institutions, the Green figure jumps to over 80% (about half of it immediate-OA and half embargoed OA: deposited, and accessible during the embargo via the repository's automated copy-request Button, with a click from the requestor and a click from the author). So if the planet's current level of Green OA is 11.6%, its level will jump to at least 80% as effective Green OA mandates are adopted. Meanwhile, Gold OA will continue to be unnecessary, over-priced, double-paid (which journal subscriptions still need to be paid) and potentially even double-dipped (if paid to the same hybrid subscription/Gold publisher) out of scarce research funds contributed by UK tax-payers ("Fool's Gold"). But once Green OA prevails worldwide, Fair Gold (and all the Libre OA re-use rights that users need and authors want to provide) will not be far behind. We are currently gathering data to test whether the immediate-deposit (HEFCE/Liege) Green OA mandate model is indeed the most effective mandate (compared, for example, with the Harvard copyright-retention model with opt-out, or the NIH model with a 12 month embargo). Stevan Harnad P.S. Needless to say, the fact that the UK's Green OA rate is twice as high as its Gold OA rate is true despite the new Finch/FCUK policy which subsidizes and prefers Gold and tries to downgrade Green -- certainly not because of it! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dwojick at CRAIGELLACHIE.US Sat Dec 7 12:12:01 2013 From: dwojick at CRAIGELLACHIE.US (David Wojick) Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2013 13:12:01 -0400 Subject: Elsevier Study Commissioned by UK BIS In-Reply-To: <457062DB-BDCC-4911-B29F-3B8FA6C94A89@uu.nl> Message-ID: In case some of you have not seen it, the draft FIRST bill in the US House has a major Federal OA section beginning on page 32 (section 302). http://www.fabbs.org/files/5913/8375/7907/Discussion%20Draft%20of%20House%20Science%20Committee%20Bill.pdf In particular it provides for embargo periods of up to 24 months, rather than OSTP's baseline of 12 months. Agencies can also go for 30 or 36 months for specific cases that must be justified. As a policy analyst I would say there is no way to tell where OA is going at this point. The wheel of fortune is still spinning, as it were. David http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/author/dwojick/ At 11:35 AM 12/7/2013, you wrote: >Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): >http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html >Stevan, > >As you say, this is indeed specualation. I can follow the reasoning but >wonder if you could mention examples of publishers releasing content after >one year as you say under 6. > >The roadmap you put before us here is a major turn from the massive >introduction of hybrid gold now offered by publishers and accepted by >governments (UK, NL). > >I am afraid that currently many authors and universities would be content >with (one eyear) delayed gold OA and retaining subscriptions. I do not >think that under those circumstances there would still be massive support >for depositing author versions for just one year. We do not even have that >now, with almost no delayed gold at all. > >It may be tactically important to convince the research community of green >ID/OA mandates before publishers make this switch. > >One final suggestion: it would be nice to have your specualative roadmap >and the OA classification you suggest in this thread available on the >eprints.org webpage, for easy reference. > >Jeroen > > > > >Op 7 dec. 2013 om 13:56 heeft "Stevan Harnad" ><amsciforum at GMAIL.COM> het volgende geschreven: > >>Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): >>http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html >> >>On 2013-12-07, at 6:31 AM, "Bosman, J.M." >><j.bosman at UU.NL> wrote: >>>Stevan, >>>Could you elaborate on your expectation that "It is almost certain that >>>within the next few years most journals will become Gold DA (with an >>>embargo of 12 months)". Do you already see publishers move in that >>>direction or are there other reasons for your forecast? >> >>It is an extrapolation and inference from the manifest pattern across the >>last half-decade: >> >>1. Publishers know (better than anyone) that OA is inevitable and >>unstoppable, only delayable (via embargoes). >> >>2. Publishers also know that it is the first year of sales that sustains >>their subscriptions. (The talk about later sales is just hyperbole.) >> >>3. Publishers have been fighting tooth and nail against Green OA >>mandates, both via lobbying and via embargoes. >> >>4. The majority of publishers with Green OA embargoes have an embargo of >>one year (though 60%, including Elsevier and Springer, have no embargo at all). >> >>5. This 1-year Green OA embargo is publishers' realistic compromise: with >>minimal loss, it wards off immediate Green OA, making Green mandates >>Delayed Green Mandates instead of Green OA Mandates. >> >>6. Then as an added protection against losing control of their content, >>more and more publishers are releasing it after a year on their own >>proprietary websites after a year: Delayed Gold >> >>The reasoning is that since free access after a year is a foregone >>conclusion, because of Green mandates, it's better if that free access is >>provided by publishers as Gold, so it all remains in their hands >>(navigation, search, reference linking, re-use, re-publication, etc.). >>1-year Gold also protects the version of record from being replaced by >>the Green author's version. (Publishers even have a faint hope that >>1-year Gold might take the wind out of the sails of Green mandates and >>the clamor for OA altogether: Everyone gets Gold access after a year, and >>that's the end of it. Back to business as before -- unless the market >>prefers to pay the same price that it pays for subscriptions, in exchange >>for immediate, un-embargoed Gold OA (as in SCOAP3 or hybrid Gold). >> >>But I think most publishers know that that is a pipe-dream, and that all >>they are really doing is holding back the inevitable for as long as they >>possibly can: >> >>And the inevitable is immediate Green OA, with authors posting their >>refereed, accepted final drafts immediately upon acceptance for >>publication. That version will become the version of record, because >>subscriptions to the publisher's print and online version will become >>unsustainable once the Green OA version is free for all. >> >>Under cancellation pressure induced by immediate Green, publishers will >>have to cut inessential costs by dropping the print and online version of >>record, offloading all access-provision and archiving onto the global >>network of Green OA institutional repositories, downsizing to the >>provision of the peer review service alone, paid for, per paper, per >>round of peer review, as Fair Gold (instead of today's over-priced, >>double-paid and double-dipped Fool's Gold) out of a fraction of the >>institutional annual windfall savings from their cancelled annual >>subscriptions. >> >>So both the 1-year embargo on Green and the 1-year release of Gold are >>attempts to fend off the above: OA has become a fight for that first year >>of access: researchers need and want it immediately; publishers want to >>hold onto it unless they continue to be paid as much as they are being >>paid now. >> >>But there is an antidote for publisher embargoes on immediate Green, and >>that is the immediate-institutional-deposit mandate plus the copy-Request >>Button (the HEFCE/Liege model mandate), designating the deposit of the >>final refereed draft immediately upon acceptance for publication as the >>sole mechanism for submitting publications for institutional performance >>review and for compliance with funding conditions. Once those mandates >>are universally adopted, universal OA will only be one keystroke away: >>The keystroke that makes an embargoed deposit OA. And embargoes will very >>quickly die their inevitable and well-deserved deaths under the mounting >>global pressure for immediate OA (which will merely be enhanced by >>Button-based Almost-OA). >> >>There you have it: Speculation, but grounded in the pragmatics, logic and >>evidence of what it actually going on today. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amsciforum at GMAIL.COM Sun Dec 8 13:05:42 2013 From: amsciforum at GMAIL.COM (Stevan Harnad) Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2013 13:05:42 -0500 Subject: OA's Real Battle-Ground in 2014: The One-Year Embargo Message-ID: On 12/7/2013, Jeroen Bosman wrote: > *JS:* Stevan, > > As you say, this is indeed specualation. I can follow the reasoning but > wonder if you could mention examples of publishers releasing content after > one year as you say under 6. > > See Laakso & Bjork (2013) in the text appended at the end of this posting. > *JS: *The roadmap you put before us here is a major turn from the massive > introduction of hybrid gold now offered by publishers and accepted by > governments (UK, NL). > > The publishers' road is the road to over-priced, double-paid, double-dipped Fool's Gold OA. The alternative is the road to Green OA -- which will in turn lead to single-paid, affordable, sustainable Fair Gold OA. > *JS: *I am afraid that currently many authors and universities would be > content with (one year) delayed gold OA and retaining subscriptions. I do > not think that under those circumstances there would still be massive > support for depositing author versions for just one year. We do not even > have that now, with almost no delayed gold at all. > > Until recently authors and universities were content with subscription-access alone. Then came the OA movement. Now the publishers are trying to offer 1-year Delayed Access instead of OA (and they only offer that under pressure for OA). The pressure for OA will only increase, not decrease. Publisher access-embargoes block access as surely as publisher subscription tolls do. If access is needed for research at all, it is needed immediately upon acceptance for publication, not just a year (or two, or ten) later. OA means immediate (and permanent) online access. *JS: *It may be tactically important to convince the research community of > green ID/OA mandates before publishers make this switch. > > Publishers are offering embargoed access only because of pressure for immediate OA, from researchers as well us institutional and funder OA mandated. The Li?ge/HEFCE immediate-deposit mandate model (ID/OA) is probably the most effective mandate model, and the one to which all OA mandates can be easily upgraded. > *JS: *One final suggestion: it would be nice to have your speculative > roadmap and the OA classification you suggest in this thread available on > the eprints.org webpage, for easy reference. > > I've posted a revised version of it in http://openaccess.eprints.org and appended it below. I've also added two references (Harnad 2007, 2010) for the leveraged transition from subscription access to mandated Green OA and finally to Fair Gold. I will first reply to David Wojick's (*DW*) optimistic comment about the prospect of publishers demanding and US lawmakers agreeing to Green OA embargoes longer than the ones proposed by OSTP. (DW is a policy consultant with OSTI and for some reason one cannot fathom, sounds uncannily like a publishing industry lobbyist !) On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 12:12 PM, David Wojick wrote: > > *DW:* In case some of you have not seen it, the draft FIRST bill in the > US House has a major Federal OA section beginning on page 32 (section 302). > > http://www.fabbs.org/files/5913/8375/7907/Discussion%20Draft%20of%20House%20Science%20Committee%20Bill.pdf > > *DW: I*n particular it provides for embargo periods of up to 24 months, > rather than OSTP's baseline of 12 months. Agencies can also go for 30 or 36 > months for specific cases that must be justified. As a policy analyst I > would say there is no way to tell where OA is going at this point. The > wheel of fortune is still spinning, as it were. > http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/author/dwojick/ Nowhere else on the planet is a publisher OA embargo longer than a year being seriously contemplated -- but, as I said, the Li?ge/HEFCE immediate-deposit mandate model (ID/OA) is immune to publisher embargoes? *Stevan Harnad* OA's Real Battle-Ground in 2014: The One-Year Embargo The prediction that "It is almost certain that within the next few years most journals will become [Delayed] Gold (with an embargo of 12 months)" is an extrapolation and inference from the manifest pattern across the last half-decade: 1. Journal publishers know (better than anyone) that OA is inevitable and unstoppable, only delayable (via embargoes). 2. Journal publishers also know that it is the first year of sales that sustains their subscriptions. (The talk about later sales is just hyperbole.) 3. Publishers have accordingly been fighting tooth and nail against Green OA mandates, by lobbying against Green OA Mandates, by embargoing Green OA, and by offering and promoting hybrid Gold OA . 4. Although the majority of publishers (60%, including Elsevier and Springer) do not embargo Green OA, of the 40% that do embargo Green OA, most have a 1-year embargo. 5. This 1-year embargo on Green is accordingly publishers' reluctant but realistic compromise: It is an attempt to ward off immediate Green OA with minimal risk by trying to make institutions' and funders' Green mandates *Delayed Green Mandates * instead of Green OA Mandates. 6. Then, as an added insurance against losing control of their content, more and more publishers are releasing online access themselves, on their own proprietary websites, a year after publication: *Delayed Gold * The publishers' calculation is that since free access after a year is a foregone conclusion, because of Green mandates, it's better (for publishers) if that free access is provided by publishers themselves, as Delayed Gold, so it all remains in their hands (archiving, access-provision, navigation, search, reference linking, re-use, re-publication, etc.). One-year delayed Gold is also being offered by publishers as insurance against the Green author's version taking over the function of the publisher's version of record. (Publishers even have a faint hope that 1-year Gold might take the wind out of the sails of Green mandates and the clamor for OA altogether: Maybe if everyone gets Gold access after a year, that will be the end of it! Back to subscription business as before -- unless the market prefers instead to keep paying the same price that it now pays for subscriptions, but in exchange for immediate, un-embargoed Gold OA, as in SCOAP3 or hybrid Gold ). But I think most publishers also know that sustaining their current subscription revenue levels is a pipe-dream, and that all their tactics are really doing as long as they succeed is holding back the optimal and inevitable outcome for refereed research journal publishing in the OA era for as long as they possibly can: *And the inevitable outcome is immediate Green OA*, with authors posting their refereed, accepted final drafts free for all online immediately upon acceptance for publication. That draft itself will in turn become the version of record, because *subscriptions to the publisher's print and online version will become unsustainable once the Green OA version is free for all*. Under mounting cancellation pressure induced by immediate Green OA, publishers will have to cut inessential costs by phasing out the print and online version of record, offloading all access-provision and archiving onto the global network of Green OA institutional repositories, and downsizing to just the provision of the peer review service alone, paid for -- per paper, per round of peer review, asFair Gold (instead of today's over-priced, double-paid and double-dipped Fool's Gold) -- out of a fraction of each institution's annual windfall savings from their cancelled annual subscriptions. So both the 1-year embargo on Green and the 1-year release of Gold are attempts to fend off the above transition: *OA has become a fight for that first year of access: researchers need and want it immediately; publishers want to hold onto it until and unless they continue to be paid as much as they are being paid now.* The purpose of embargoes is to hold OA hostage to publisher's current revenue levels, locking in content until they pay the right price. But there is an antidote for publisher embargoes on immediate Green, and that is the immediate-institutional-deposit mandate plus the "Almost-OA" Request-a-Copy Button (the HEFCE /Li?ge model mandate), designating the deposit of the final refereed draft in the author's institutional repository immediately upon acceptance for publication as the sole mechanism for submitting publications for institutional performance review and for compliance with funding conditions. Once those immediate-deposit mandates are universally adopted, universal OA will only be one keystroke away: The keystroke that sets access to an embargoed deposit as Open Access instead of Closed Access. With immediate-deposit ubiquitous, embargoes will very quickly die their inevitable and well-deserved deaths under the mounting global pressure for immediate OA (for which impatience will be all the more intensified by Button-based Almost-OA). The scenario is speculative, to be sure, but grounded in the pragmatics, logic and evidence of what is actually going on today. (Prepare for a vehement round of pseudo-legal publisher FUD about the copy-request Button as its adoption grows -- all groundless and ineffectual, but yet another attempt to delay the inevitable for as long as possible, by hook or by crook?) *Stevan Harnad* Harnad, S. (2007) The Green Road to Open Access: A Leveraged Transition. In: Anna Gacs. *The Culture of Periodicals from the Perspective of the Electronic Age*. L'Harmattan. 99-106. *______* (2010) No-Fault Peer Review Charges: The Price of Selectivity Need Not Be Access Denied or Delayed . *D-Lib Magazine* 16 (7/8). Hitchcock, S. (2013) The effect of open access and downloads ('hits') on citation impact: a bibliography of studies Houghton, J. & Swan, A. (2013) Planting the Green Seeds for a Golden Harvest: Comments and Clarifications on "Going for Gold" . *D-Lib Magazine* 19 (1/2). Laakso, M & Bj?rk, B-Ch (2013) Delayed open access . *Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology* 64(7): 1323?29 Rentier, B., & Thirion, P. (2011). The Li?ge ORBi model: Mandatory policy without rights retention but linked to assessment processes . Sale, A., Couture, M., Rodrigues, E., Carr, L. and Harnad, S. (2012) Open Access Mandates and the "Fair Dealing" Button. In: *Dynamic Fair Dealing: Creating Canadian Culture Online* (Rosemary J. Coombe & Darren Wershler, Eds.) Suber, P. (2012) Open Access. MIT Press. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bowman at BIOCHEM.MPG.DE Mon Dec 9 04:51:25 2013 From: bowman at BIOCHEM.MPG.DE (Bowman, Benjamin) Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2013 10:51:25 +0100 Subject: Evaluation of research publications at LSN Message-ID: Dear Colleagues, Does anyone know more about this "initiative"? Should it be taken seriously? Our researchers are currently receiving the following invitation to join and are seeking our advice. Your comments would be appreciated! Best regards, Ben Bowman -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Evaluation of research publications at LSN Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2013 17:36:01 +0100 From: Alen Piljic Dear colleague, You are receiving this email because in the past you published results of your research in a scientific journal. I am writing to inform you that, as part of the larger non-profit Life Science Network (LSN) initiative, which strives to organize and enable sharing and easy access to information related to life sciences, it is now possible to evaluate and comment already published research on a single web platform. I'd like to invite you to join this initiative and, by sharing your opinion about scientific publications, contribute to improving the knowledge base we all use as foundation for our research and help us in creating an alternative research quality metric. You can join this initiative at:www.lifescience.net I am looking forward to seeing you among our members. Best wishes, Alen Piljic -- Alen Piljic Life Science Network gGmbH Karlsruher Str. 18 69126 Heidelberg Germany In case you are no longer an active member of the research community and feel this email was sent to you in error, please send a replytoalen at life-science-network.eu to remove your name from this list. From dwojick at CRAIGELLACHIE.US Mon Dec 9 13:19:33 2013 From: dwojick at CRAIGELLACHIE.US (David Wojick) Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2013 14:19:33 -0400 Subject: Scientometric aspects of government OA mandates Message-ID: The Scholarly Kitchen has an interesting article on how to define "federal funding" under the emerging US OA mandate. See http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/12/09/what-does-federally-funded-actually-mean/ The scientometric issue is how valid the impact analysis of government agencies can be when "government funding" is poorly defined, such that research with very little actual government funding is included? Conversely, what role might the scientometric community play in resolving this issue? I have raised this issue in the Kitchen article comments, if anyone wants to join the discussion. David -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amsciforum at GMAIL.COM Mon Dec 9 15:56:35 2013 From: amsciforum at GMAIL.COM (Stevan Harnad) Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2013 15:56:35 -0500 Subject: Scientometric aspects of government OA mandates Message-ID: On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 1:19 PM, David Wojick wrote: > > The Scholarly Kitchen has an interesting article on how to define "federal > funding" under the emerging US OA mandate. See > http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/12/09/what-does-federally-funded-actually-mean/ > > The scientometric issue is how valid the impact analysis of government > agencies can be when "government funding" is poorly defined, such that > research with very little actual government funding is included? > Conversely, what role might the scientometric community play in resolving > this issue? I have raised this issue in the Kitchen article comments, if > anyone wants to join the discussion. > Let me see if I get this: Because it is not clear what proportion of the research that a funded researcher publishes can be directly attributed to any particular funding source, it would be better if funders did not mandate that it must be made Open Access (for "scientometric" reasons!)? I don't think so. In any case, don?t worry: Whatever is not covered by federal funder mandates will be covered by institutional mandates like Harvard?s, MIT?s etc. All refereed research output, both funded and unfunded, in all fields, is the obvious, natural target for OA. No problem for researchers to figure that out: they won?t have to think twice. And publishers ? for all their moaning and groaning, and dire warnings of doom and gloom ? will, of course, figure out a way to adapt. All the FUD they keep trying to raise at each juncture is so unmistakably just smoke and delay tactics: futile efforts to stave off the obvious, optimal and inevitable outcome for research, researchers, the vast R&D industry, and the tax-paying public in the online era: 100% Open Access to all peer-reviewed research immediately upon acceptance for publication. But why is a policy consultant for OSTI raising this "scientometric" smokescreen which sounds, for all the world, as if it were coming from a lobbyist for the publishing industry? *Stevan Harnad* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dwojick at CRAIGELLACHIE.US Mon Dec 9 18:17:38 2013 From: dwojick at CRAIGELLACHIE.US (David Wojick) Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2013 18:17:38 -0500 Subject: Scientometric aspects of government OA mandates In-Reply-To: Message-ID: The scientometric policy issue is agencies claiming impacts they did not generate, or how to determine the impacts their various programs are actually generating. This is part of what is called in the US the science of science policy, in which I am active. The central question is what are taxpayers getting for their money? Some of us are interesting in designing a federal system that works, which may not be one of your concerns. You seem to think that anyone who does not subscribe to your crusade is an industry lobbyist. My concern is that the government not do harm and I admire the scholarly publishing industry, so I am not on your side. David On Dec 9, 2013, at 3:56 PM, Stevan Harnad wrote: > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 1:19 PM, David Wojick wrote: > > The Scholarly Kitchen has an interesting article on how to define "federal funding" under the emerging US OA mandate. See http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/12/09/what-does-federally-funded-actually-mean/ > > The scientometric issue is how valid the impact analysis of government agencies can be when "government funding" is poorly defined, such that research with very little actual government funding is included? Conversely, what role might the scientometric community play in resolving this issue? I have raised this issue in the Kitchen article comments, if anyone wants to join the discussion. > > Let me see if I get this: > > Because it is not clear what proportion of the research that a funded researcher publishes can be directly attributed to any particular funding source, it would be better if funders did not mandate that it must be made Open Access (for "scientometric" reasons!)? > > I don't think so. > > In any case, don?t worry: Whatever is not covered by federal funder mandates will be covered by institutional mandates like Harvard?s, MIT?s etc. All refereed research output, both funded and unfunded, in all fields, is the obvious, natural target for OA. No problem for researchers to figure that out: they won?t have to think twice. > > And publishers ? for all their moaning and groaning, and dire warnings of doom and gloom ? will, of course, figure out a way to adapt. All the FUD they keep trying to raise at each juncture is so unmistakably just smoke and delay tactics: futile efforts to stave off the obvious, optimal and inevitable outcome for research, researchers, the vast R&D industry, and the tax-paying public in the online era: 100% Open Access to all peer-reviewed research immediately upon acceptance for publication. > But why is a policy consultant for OSTI raising this "scientometric" smokescreen which sounds, for all the world, as if it were coming from a lobbyist for the publishing industry? > > Stevan Harnad > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From weingart.scott at GMAIL.COM Mon Dec 9 17:34:55 2013 From: weingart.scott at GMAIL.COM (Scott Weingart) Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2013 17:34:55 -0500 Subject: Scientometric aspects of government OA mandates In-Reply-To: Message-ID: David, If we care about what taxpayers are getting for their money, and I imagine all of us on this list do, many of us believe that their getting access to articles they paid for should be a top priority. Our ability or inability to measure science should never get in the way of its capacity to do good. Cheers, Scott On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 6:17 PM, David Wojick wrote: > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > The scientometric policy issue is agencies claiming impacts they did not > generate, or how to determine the impacts their various programs are > actually generating. This is part of what is called in the US the science > of science policy, in which I am active. The central question is what are > taxpayers getting for their money? > > Some of us are interesting in designing a federal system that works, which > may not be one of your concerns. You seem to think that anyone who does not > subscribe to your crusade is an industry lobbyist. My concern is that the > government not do harm and I admire the scholarly publishing industry, so I > am not on your side. > > David > > On Dec 9, 2013, at 3:56 PM, Stevan Harnad wrote: > > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 1:19 PM, David Wojick < > dwojick at craigellachie.us> wrote: > >> >> The Scholarly Kitchen has an interesting article on how to define >> "federal funding" under the emerging US OA mandate. See >> http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/12/09/what-does-federally-funded-actually-mean/ >> >> The scientometric issue is how valid the impact analysis of government >> agencies can be when "government funding" is poorly defined, such that >> research with very little actual government funding is included? >> Conversely, what role might the scientometric community play in resolving >> this issue? I have raised this issue in the Kitchen article comments, if >> anyone wants to join the discussion. >> > > Let me see if I get this: > > Because it is not clear what proportion of the research that a funded > researcher publishes can be directly attributed to any particular funding > source, it would be better if funders did not mandate that it must be made > Open Access (for "scientometric" reasons!)? > > I don't think so. > > In any case, don?t worry: Whatever is not covered by federal funder > mandates will be covered by institutional mandates like Harvard?s, MIT?s > etc. All refereed research output, both funded and unfunded, in all fields, > is the obvious, natural target for OA. No problem for researchers to figure > that out: they won?t have to think twice. > > And publishers ? for all their moaning and groaning, and dire warnings of > doom and gloom ? will, of course, figure out a way to adapt. All the FUD > they keep trying to raise at each juncture is so unmistakably just smoke > and delay tactics: futile efforts to stave off the obvious, optimal and > inevitable outcome for research, researchers, the vast R&D industry, and > the tax-paying public in the online era: 100% Open Access to all > peer-reviewed research immediately upon acceptance for publication. > > But why is a policy consultant for OSTI raising this "scientometric" > smokescreen which sounds, for all the world, as if it were coming from a > lobbyist for the publishing industry? > > *Stevan Harnad* > > > -- -scottbot.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From osllocor at INGENIO.UPV.ES Tue Dec 10 04:53:06 2013 From: osllocor at INGENIO.UPV.ES (OSCAR LLOPIS CORCOLES) Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 09:53:06 +0000 Subject: Eu-SPRI Forum ECC (2014 INGENIO PhD Days) In-Reply-To: <47BCCB10CFA92342ADC8737FF1DF8E660651FA31@AGENDA4.upvnet.upv.es> Message-ID: ********************* Apologies for cross-posting ********************* Dear all, Please find attached the call for applications for the Eu-SPRI Forum Early Career Researcher Conference (ECC): "Interdisciplinarity in the Study of the Dynamics of Science, Technology and Innovation" (2014 INGENIO PhD Days) that will be held in Valencia (Spain), 7-8 April 2014. We would like to invite you to circulate it to doctoral students and young scholars that might be interested. The 2014 EU-SPRI Forum ECC is a two-day event aimed to provide an enriching experience to doctoral students working on: ? Geography and Innovation ? Creation, Transfer and Use of Knowledge ? Science and Society. New challenges ? Social networks, Social Capital and Innovation ? Science and Technology Policies. Evaluation and Governance ? Management of Innovation in Organizations Confirmed speakers ? Philippe Lar?do - Universit? Paris-Est and University of Manchester ? Orietta Marsili - Rotterdam School of Management (Erasmus University) ? Ismael Rafols - INGENIO (CSIC-UPV); SPRU (University of Sussex) ? Ammon Salter - School of Management (University of Bath) Submissions and important deadlines The 2014 EU-SPRI Forum ECC will offer a platform for international networking for around 30 young academic researchers. Participation from PhD students, who develop their research in the areas of Science, Technology and Innovation, is particularly encouraged. Potential participants are invited to submit a short CV (max 1 page) and an extended abstract (1,000 words approx.), no later than 13 January 2014. Abstracts must be in English and include: (i) a brief description of the main objectives of research; (ii) research questions in relation to the relevant literature; (iii) methods of analysis and data (where it applies); (iv) main findings or expected results. The selected participants will be required a full paper (around 5,000 words) no later than 24 March 2014. Information on the programme and the submission procedure are provided in the call for applications and on the website of the event: http://www.ingenio.upv.es/2014-phd-days-euspri-ecrc Should you have any further question, please contact us at: info at ingenio.upv.es Kind regards, Organizing committee -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: ECC_INGENIO_Conference.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 275979 bytes Desc: ECC_INGENIO_Conference.pdf URL: From dwojick at CRAIGELLACHIE.US Tue Dec 10 08:13:04 2013 From: dwojick at CRAIGELLACHIE.US (David Wojick) Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 08:13:04 -0500 Subject: Scientometric aspects of government OA mandates In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Scott, the question is which articles did they "pay for"? I put pay for in quotes because the Feds do not normally pay for the writing, just the research. If the Feds are going to regulate certain articles then we need to know which articles these are. This is always a basic regulatory issue, namely what is covered? David On Dec 9, 2013, at 5:34 PM, Scott Weingart wrote: > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > David, > > If we care about what taxpayers are getting for their money, and I imagine all of us on this list do, many of us believe that their getting access to articles they paid for should be a top priority. Our ability or inability to measure science should never get in the way of its capacity to do good. > > Cheers, > Scott > > > On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 6:17 PM, David Wojick wrote: > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > The scientometric policy issue is agencies claiming impacts they did not generate, or how to determine the impacts their various programs are actually generating. This is part of what is called in the US the science of science policy, in which I am active. The central question is what are taxpayers getting for their money? > > Some of us are interesting in designing a federal system that works, which may not be one of your concerns. You seem to think that anyone who does not subscribe to your crusade is an industry lobbyist. My concern is that the government not do harm and I admire the scholarly publishing industry, so I am not on your side. > > David > > On Dec 9, 2013, at 3:56 PM, Stevan Harnad wrote: > >> Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html >> On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 1:19 PM, David Wojick wrote: >> >> The Scholarly Kitchen has an interesting article on how to define "federal funding" under the emerging US OA mandate. See http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/12/09/what-does-federally-funded-actually-mean/ >> >> The scientometric issue is how valid the impact analysis of government agencies can be when "government funding" is poorly defined, such that research with very little actual government funding is included? Conversely, what role might the scientometric community play in resolving this issue? I have raised this issue in the Kitchen article comments, if anyone wants to join the discussion. >> >> Let me see if I get this: >> >> Because it is not clear what proportion of the research that a funded researcher publishes can be directly attributed to any particular funding source, it would be better if funders did not mandate that it must be made Open Access (for "scientometric" reasons!)? >> >> I don't think so. >> >> In any case, don?t worry: Whatever is not covered by federal funder mandates will be covered by institutional mandates like Harvard?s, MIT?s etc. All refereed research output, both funded and unfunded, in all fields, is the obvious, natural target for OA. No problem for researchers to figure that out: they won?t have to think twice. >> >> And publishers ? for all their moaning and groaning, and dire warnings of doom and gloom ? will, of course, figure out a way to adapt. All the FUD they keep trying to raise at each juncture is so unmistakably just smoke and delay tactics: futile efforts to stave off the obvious, optimal and inevitable outcome for research, researchers, the vast R&D industry, and the tax-paying public in the online era: 100% Open Access to all peer-reviewed research immediately upon acceptance for publication. >> But why is a policy consultant for OSTI raising this "scientometric" smokescreen which sounds, for all the world, as if it were coming from a lobbyist for the publishing industry? >> >> Stevan Harnad >> >> >> > > > > -- > -scottbot.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From harnad at ECS.SOTON.AC.UK Tue Dec 10 10:26:36 2013 From: harnad at ECS.SOTON.AC.UK (Stevan Harnad) Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 10:26:36 -0500 Subject: No further replies to Graham Triggs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Anyone who has followed the tedious exchanges with Graham Triggs can find the replies to the few substantive points below by just re-reading the exchanges. The many ideological, hypothetical and irrelevant points too, but they are even less worth the effort. If Graham says something new, substantive and short, I am prepared to listen? Stevan Harnad On 2013-12-10, at 8:55 AM, Graham Triggs wrote: > On 7 December 2013 12:56, Stevan Harnad wrote: > 4. The majority of publishers with Green OA embargoes have an embargo of one year (though 60%, including Elsevier and Springer, have no embargo at all). > > That's not true - Springer have adopted a 12 month embargo, and Elsevier require an embargo for non-voluntary deposits. (You can argue as much as you like about whether you can call a spade a fork, it doesn't change what the policy is). > > Further, your claim of 60% seems to be entirely based on Sherpa/RoMEO data - which you usually provide links to. Except the classifications of RoMEO alone does not lead to saying that 60% of journals / publishers have no embargo, as when you read through the restrictions, what you CAN do may be listed as being subject to an embagro (as in the case of Elsevier and Springer). > > The reasoning is that since free access after a year is a foregone conclusion, because of Green mandates, it's better if that free access is provided by publishers as Gold, so it all remains in their hands (navigation, search, reference linking, re-use, re-publication, etc.). > > Actually, providing that a CTA has been signed as part of publishing the article, then the re-use and re-publication is only possible in accordance with the licence(s) that the publisher allows the content to be distributed under. So, regardless of whether the content is on another site or not, the [publisher granted rights via CTA] still retain that control. > > Everyone gets Gold access after a year, and that's the end of it. Back to business as before -- unless the market prefers to pay the same price that it pays for subscriptions, in exchange for immediate, un-embargoed Gold OA (as in SCOAP3 or hybrid Gold). > > Where do you get same price from? Estimates put subscription revenue per article at around $4,000-$5,000, whereas even high-price hybrid Gold is only $3,000 an article (with an industry average closer to $1,000 per article). > > Your claim regarding SCOAP3 might have more substance if it wasn't a library and funding agency led initiative to reduce the cost of publishing in physics - something that 20 years of "100% OA" in arXiv has failed to do. > > And the inevitable is immediate Green OA, with authors posting their refereed, accepted final drafts immediately upon acceptance for publication. That version will become the version of record, because subscriptions to the publisher's print and online version will become unsustainable once the Green OA version is free for all. > > If it was immediate Green OA of the refereed, accepted final draft (and it could be trusted that was the case), then there might be a chance of that happening. Might. > > Not that print is necessarily under threat from that - if people want print [enough], then they would continue to pay for it, regardless of where else it may exist, or at what cost. > > But that isn't what's happening, is it? Springer and Elsevier have introduced and/or lengthened embargoes in response to Green mandates (in Elsevier's case, the clause is specifically invoked by the presence of a mandate). > > These embargoes are going to exist as long as publishers believe that they are necessary. And so, if you expect to continue to publish -at no author cost - in the journals you choose to now, you are only going to see embargoes disappear if people will continue to pay the subscriptions. > > as Fair Gold (instead of today's over-priced, double-paid and double-dipped Fool's Gold) out of a fraction of the institutional annual windfall savings from their cancelled annual subscriptions. > > And the evidence of double-dipping is? > > On the other hand, not only has Wellcome stated there are indications of subscription price rises being constrained appropriately by limited uptake of hybrid Gold options, we have actual statements of subscription prices REDUCED because of Gold uptake in others: > > http://www.nature.com/press_releases/emboopen.html > http://static.springer.com/sgw/documents/1345327/application/pdf/Springer+Open+Choice_Journal+Price+Adjustments+2013.pdf > > So both the 1-year embargo on Green and the 1-year release of Gold are attempts to fend off the above: OA has become a fight for that first year of access: researchers need and want it immediately; publishers want to hold onto it unless they continue to be paid as much as they are being paid now. > > No, publishers are going to hold onto it unless they continue to be paid what they see as a fair return on their costs. > > I can't ever see there not being a tension between academics and [commercial] publishers over profits. But changing the business model so that you pay upfront for publishing services can and will reduce the overall cost to the scholarly community. > > However, it would be a mistake to just talk about first year of access. Ownership of materials is also important. Aside from the other opportunity costs, not retaining ownership is what allows these embargoes to exist. > > Changing the predominant business model to upfront payment will deliver immediate access, ownership and lower costs. Failing to do so isn't going to deliver ownership or lower costs, and it's not going to deliver immediate access to anything other than pre-print material. > > That's not just the evidenced in the last 20 years of open access provision, but in what is being attempted by SCOAP3 to deliver what Green OA alone can't. > > G > _______________________________________________ > GOAL mailing list > GOAL at eprints.org > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From katy at INDIANA.EDU Tue Dec 10 13:33:23 2013 From: katy at INDIANA.EDU (Katy Borner) Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 13:33:23 -0500 Subject: Call for Maps for the 10th Iteration of the Places & Spaces: Mapping Science Exhibit on =?windows-1252?Q?=93The_Future_of_Science_Mapping=94_?= (2014) In-Reply-To: <50CF792D.7020603@indiana.edu> Message-ID: *Call for Maps for the 10th Iteration of the /Places & Spaces: Mapping Science/ Exhibit on ?The Future of Science Mapping? (2014)* **http://www.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 large-scale maps for display at public places such as science museums and libraries as well as at conferences and (2) the online counterpart (http://scimaps.org) provides easy access to zoomable maps, their descriptions and references as well as information on their makers. /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 highlight outstanding 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 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 Showing Trends and Dynamics * 10th Iteration (2014): The Future of Science Mapping / 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 over 250 venues in 23 countries, including 15 in Europe, as well as Japan, China, Brazil, Chile, 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 10th and final iteration of the exhibit is devoted to maps of science that point to the future of the practice itself. Micro to macro studies using quantitative and/or qualitative data are welcome, and mixed methods approaches are encouraged. Maps should be understandable by a general audience and might answer questions such as: * How does the structure and dynamics of science evolve? * How does science interact with technology? * How can developments in science and technology be communicated to a general audience? * How can maps of science achieve more extensive and more accurate coverage? * How can maps of science be updated in near-real time? * How does science overlap with other areas of human endeavor and interest? * How do predictions of scientific developments impact the course of history?i.e., can self-fulfilling prophecies be prevented? To fit the theme of the 10^th iteration, submissions should innovate on one or more topics such as: * New data sources?social media, stock market, philanthropy, and other data that captures S&T activities. * New hardware and software setups?multi-modal man-machine symbioses that combine analog human wet-ware and digital computer hard+software to achieve superior capabilities. * Proof of concept?science maps that are widely used. * Validation?results of user evaluation and algorithm cross-validation studies. * Standards?well defined, widely shared data formats, analysis and visualization workflows, but also visual languages. Given the topic of this iteration, two types of submissions are welcome: (1) Photographs or conceptual sketches of future innovative science map usage?see Otlet?s Mondoth?que for inspiration. Ideally, the proposed interface or novel usage are paradigm-shifting?disruptive ideas are most welcome. (2) A visual rendering of a dataset together with a legend, textual description, and acknowledgements as required to interpret the map. Maps can be abstract, geographical, or feature-based (e.g., network layout), 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 this PDF map collection for an overview of the 90 maps already featured in the exhibit. Given the theme of this iteration, links to interactive web sites, hands-on displays, or interactive tools are strongly encouraged. Each initial entry must be submitted by January 31st, 2014, 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 by clicking here . 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. 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. This criteria includes the notion of relevance?submissions should showcase the ?future". * */Value for decision making/*?what major insight does the map provide and why does it matter? Is the map easy to understand by a general audience? Does it inspire viewers to learn more about science and technology? *Final Submission* Authors of winning entries will be contacted in late February and invited to submit final entries by April 30th, 2014. 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 for all authors (about 100 words each) * High resolution portraits of all authors that are no smaller than 360 x 450 pixels, or 1.2" x 1.5" at 300 dpi. Larger is always better since we can always crop them down to our specific needs for both print and web. * 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 10th iteration maps are expected to be ready for display by mid-June, 2014. Winning mapmakers will be invited to submit a ~1500 word paper for inclusion in a special /Places & Spaces/ edition (October 2014) of the ASIST Bulletin, which is widely read, referenced, and used in classrooms. These papers should include the information from the official map description along with additional detail on data, methods, and how the maps and visuals can be interpreted. Submissions will be due by June 30, 2014. Boyack and B?rner, the editors of the special issue, will work closely with the authors to create copy-ready papers. *Important Dates* Submit initial entries: January 31st, 2014 Notification to mapmakers: February 28th, 2014 Submit final entries: April 30th, 2014 ASIST Bulletin paper (~1500 words): June 30, 2014 10th iteration ready for display: June 30th, 2014 *Exhibit Advisory Board * * Gary Berg-Cross, Spatial Ontology Community of Practice (SOCoP) * Bob Bishop, ICES Foundation * Kevin W. 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, Doctoral Candidate, Indiana University * Manuel Lima, Royal Society of Arts, Microsoft Bing, VisualComplexity.com * Deborah MacPherson, Accuracy&Aesthetics * Lev Manovich, Computer Science, The Graduate Center, City University of New York * Carlo Ratti, Professor and Director of SENSEable City Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology * Eric Rodenbeck, Stamen Design * Andr? Skupin, Professor of Geography, San Diego State University * Moritz Stefaner, Freelance Designer * Stephen Uzzo, New York Hall of Science * Caroline Wagner, Battelle Center for Science and Technology Policy and John Glenn School for Public Affairs, Ohio State University * Benjamin Wiederkehr, Founder, InteractiveThings.com Please feel free to send any questions you might have regarding the judging process to Todd Theriault (ttheriau at indiana.edu ) and use the subject heading ?10^th Iteration Inquiry.? Constructing a Theories of Learning -- 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 ILS, School of Informatics and Computing, 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 jrussell at UNAM.MX Wed Dec 11 15:34:01 2013 From: jrussell at UNAM.MX (jrussell) Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 20:34:01 +0000 Subject: Call for Papers Message-ID: Dear Colleagues, Please find attached the Call for Papers for the VII INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR ON THE QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE STUDY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ?Prof. GILBERTO SOTOLONGO AGUILAR? to be held in Havana, Cuba, 16-17 April, 2014. Apologies for cross postings. Dr. Jane M. Russell Instituto de Investigaciones Bibliotecol?gicas y de la Informaci?n Universidad Nacional Aut?noma de M?xico (UNAM) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Call for Papers_2014.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 112897 bytes Desc: Call for Papers_2014.pdf URL: From isidro.aguillo at CCHS.CSIC.ES Thu Dec 12 07:53:04 2013 From: isidro.aguillo at CCHS.CSIC.ES (Isidro F. Aguillo) Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 13:53:04 +0100 Subject: CALL FOR PAPERS:,VII INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR ON THE QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE STUDY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY =?windows-1252?Q?=93Prof._GILBERTO_SOTOLONGO_AGUILAR=94?= Message-ID: CALL FOR PAPERS VII INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR ON THE QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE STUDY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ?Prof. GILBERTO SOTOLONGO AGUILAR? 16-17 April, 2014 Havana, Cuba This is the seventh edition of the international seminar held under the auspices of the biennial INFO congress. The first seminar took place on April 25, 2002 and has been held every two years since then to provide a forum for the identification of institutions and research interests in the field as well as a space for discussion between the different researchers and actors that participate in this important area of work. Additional information on the seminar and the papers presented in previous editions can be found at http://www.dynamics.unam.edu/alci/ Due to the success achieved by the seminar and as petitioned by the participants the organizing committee of INFO considers the seminar as a permanent part of their congress. The seventh seminar will take place on the 16th and 17th of April within INFO 2014 International Congress of Information, at the Palacio de las Convenciones, Havana, Cuba, from April 14th-18th. The scientific committee invites interested researchers and colleagues to send research studies, review papers and case studies completed or in progress, related to the quantitative and/or qualitative studies of science and technology. Bibliometric, Scientometric, Informetric, Patentometric, and Webometric studies are of particular relevance, without discounting the importance of qualitative analytical methods and approaches. Relevant topics for the VII seminar are: ? Scientific communication models (systems approaches, mathematical models, etc.) ? Patterns of communication, collaboration, information flows in S & T, migration (citation analysis, journal impact factors, national and international flows, etc.) ? Scientific production (disciplines, gender studies, research departments, institutes, countries, etc.) ? Literature dynamics (history, growth, obsolescence, scattering, S & T relations, etc.) ? Indicators to support decision making in science policy (economics, organization and management, information and communication technologies, resource management, foresight, impact, evaluation) ? Visualization and organization of information for bibliometrics, scientometrics and webmetrics/cybermetrics. ? Theoretical aspects of the qualitative and quantitative study of science and technology. ? Analysis, design and application of software. ? Data and text mining techniques in indicator construction. Colleagues interested in presenting their work at the Seminar should send their contributions clearly indicating the names of the authors, their institutional adscriptions and including: (1) abstract (2) background (3) objectives (4) methodology/focus (5) main results (final or expected) and conclusions (6) references. Although Spanish is the official language of the seminar papers in other languages (Portuguese or English) will be accepted at the discretion of the Organizing Committee. Important dates: Submission of full papers: by January 15th, 2014 Notification of acceptance: by February 15th, 2014 Contributions should be sent electronically to seminario at finlay.edu.cu. For more information on formatting requirements for the full papers (length, font, structure, summary, keywords, etc.) as well as general information on the INFO Congress (registration, hotel reservations, etc.) please visit the official congress website: www.congreso-info.cu Organizing Committee: Dra. Jane M. Russell Instituto de Investigaciones Bibliotecol?gicas y de la Informaci?n, UNAM, Torre II de Humanidades, Piso 11 04510, M?xico, D. F. Tel. (52)-55-5623-0363 Fax.(52)-55-55550-7461 jrussell at unam.mx Dra. Maria V. Guzm?n Instituto Finlay Ave. 27 #19805, Lisa P.O. Box 16017, Cod. 11600 La Habana, Cuba Tel. 53 7 2717452 Fax. 53 7 2720809 mvguzman at finlay.edu.cu MID. Isidro Aguillo Centro de Ciencias Humanas y Sociales - Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cient?ficas C/Albasanz, 26-28. Madrid 28037. (Espa?a). TEL: 34 91 602 23 00 FAX: 34 91 602 29 71 isidro.aguillo at csic.es Dr. Francisco Collazo Cinvestav, Departamento de F?sica. Av IPN 2508 Col. San Pedro Zacatenco M?xico, D.F. CP 07360 Tel: (55) 5747-3800 Fax: (55) 5747-3838 fcollazo at fis.cinvestav.mx Dr. Rog?rio Mugnaini Universidade de S?o Paulo Escola de Artes, Ciencias e Humanidades. Avenida Arlindo Bettio, 03828-000 - Sao Paulo, Brasil Tel: (11) 30911015 mugnaini at usp.br -- ****************************** Isidro F. Aguillo, HonDr. The Cybermetrics Lab, IPP-CSIC Grupo Scimago Madrid. SPAIN isidro.aguillo at csic.es ORCID: 0000-0001-8927-4873 ResearcherID: A-7280-2008 Scholar Citations: SaCSbeoAAAAJ Twitter: @isidroaguillo Rankings Web: webometrics.info ****************************** --- Este mensaje no contiene virus ni malware porque la protecci?n de avast! Antivirus est? activa. http://www.avast.com From notsjb at LSU.EDU Thu Dec 12 10:29:10 2013 From: notsjb at LSU.EDU (Stephen J Bensman) Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 15:29:10 +0000 Subject: Coming Attractions: Garfield, Narin, & PageRank Message-ID: I will soon be posting on arXiv an article entitled "Eugene Garfield, Francis Narin, and PageRank: the Theoretical Bases of the Google Search Engine." Below is its abstract: Abstract This paper presents a test of the validity of using Google Scholar (GS) to evaluate the publications of researchers. It does this by first comparing the theoretical premises on which the GS search engine PageRank algorithm operates to those on which Garfield based his theory of citation indexing. It finds that the basic premise is the same, i.e., that subject sets of relevant documents are defined semantically better by linkages than by words. Google incorporated this premise into PageRank, amending it with the addition of the citation influence method developed by Francis Narin and the staff of Computer Horizons, Inc. (CHI). This method weighted more heavily citations from documents which themselves were more heavily cited. Garfield himself essentially had also incorporated this method into his theory of citation indexing by restricting as far as possible the coverage of the Science Citation Index (SCI) to a small multidisciplinary core of journals most heavily cited. Stealing a page from Garfield's book, the paper presents a test of the validity of GS by tracing its citations to the h-index works of 5 Nobel laureates in chemistry-the discipline in which Garfield began his pioneering research-with Anne-Wil Harzing's revolutionary Publish-or-Perish (PoP) software that has established bibliographic and statistical control over the GS database. Most of these works were journal articles, and the rankings of the journals in which they appeared by both total cites (TC) and impact factor (IF) at the time of their publication were analyzed. The results conformed to the findings of Garfield through citation analysis, confirming his law of concentration and view of the importance of review articles. As a byproduct of this finding, it is shown that Narin had totally misunderstood and mishandled citations from review journals. The evidence of this paper is conclusive: Garfield's theory of citation indexing and PageRank validate each other, and Eugene Garfield is the grandfather of the Web search engine. I will post this article as soon as my wife finishes her proofreading and copyediting. I will inform you when it has been posted, but I wanted to get out as soon as possible the basic findings of the paper. Respectfully, Stephen J Bensman, Ph.D. LSU Libraries Lousiana State University Baton Rouge, LA 70803 USA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From j.bosman at UU.NL Thu Dec 12 14:55:36 2013 From: j.bosman at UU.NL (Bosman, J.M.) Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 19:55:36 +0000 Subject: Coming Attractions: Garfield, Narin, & PageRank In-Reply-To: <71a954c77fd84984b5f9ecae7cb65995@CO1PR06MB174.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> Message-ID: I am looking forward to you paper, but I wonder how much really is known about ranking in Scholar. Google states about it "Google Scholar aims to rank documents the way researchers do, weighing the full text of each document, where it was published, who it was written by, as well as how often and how recently it has been cited in other scholarly literature". There are so many vagueries here. First, the bulk of GS search results do not have full text, they are 'citation' parsed from reference list of primary indexed papers. Second, it says that Google weighs who wrote an article, but how is that measured in? Citations indeed play an imporant role that canot be switched off and that results in rankings that for most searches give you old stuff. The majority of GS users do not realize that and thus often miss out on the latest research findings. I also wonder whether Google uses the same kind of PageRank in GS but then with citation numbers. Or do they also take into account weblinks to the various versions of papers? If so, how are these link numbers for various versions added up or corrected for? And if Google uses pagerank based on weblinks to papers combined with pagerank type relevance based on citations, how does the resulting hybrid ranking work? Of course that is a company secret they won't share, but I wonder if there is anybody who has deduced how things really work behind the screens of GS? I will add anything I learn here to our GS guide at http://libguides.library.uu.nl/googlescholar_en Best, Jeroen --------- Jeroen Bosman Utrecht University Library Op 12 dec. 2013 om 16:29 heeft "Stephen J Bensman" > het volgende geschreven: I will soon be posting on arXiv an article entitled ?Eugene Garfield, Francis Narin, and PageRank: the Theoretical Bases of the Google Search Engine.? Below is its abstract: Abstract This paper presents a test of the validity of using Google Scholar (GS) to evaluate the publications of researchers. It does this by first comparing the theoretical premises on which the GS search engine PageRank algorithm operates to those on which Garfield based his theory of citation indexing. It finds that the basic premise is the same, i.e., that subject sets of relevant documents are defined semantically better by linkages than by words. Google incorporated this premise into PageRank, amending it with the addition of the citation influence method developed by Francis Narin and the staff of Computer Horizons, Inc. (CHI). This method weighted more heavily citations from documents which themselves were more heavily cited. Garfield himself essentially had also incorporated this method into his theory of citation indexing by restricting as far as possible the coverage of the Science Citation Index (SCI) to a small multidisciplinary core of journals most heavily cited. Stealing a page from Garfield?s book, the paper presents a test of the validity of GS by tracing its citations to the h-index works of 5 Nobel laureates in chemistry?the discipline in which Garfield began his pioneering research?with Anne-Wil Harzing?s revolutionary Publish-or-Perish (PoP) software that has established bibliographic and statistical control over the GS database. Most of these works were journal articles, and the rankings of the journals in which they appeared by both total cites (TC) and impact factor (IF) at the time of their publication were analyzed. The results conformed to the findings of Garfield through citation analysis, confirming his law of concentration and view of the importance of review articles. As a byproduct of this finding, it is shown that Narin had totally misunderstood and mishandled citations from review journals. The evidence of this paper is conclusive: Garfield?s theory of citation indexing and PageRank validate each other, and Eugene Garfield is the grandfather of the Web search engine. I will post this article as soon as my wife finishes her proofreading and copyediting. I will inform you when it has been posted, but I wanted to get out as soon as possible the basic findings of the paper. Respectfully, Stephen J Bensman, Ph.D. LSU Libraries Lousiana State University Baton Rouge, LA 70803 USA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From notsjb at LSU.EDU Thu Dec 12 15:46:21 2013 From: notsjb at LSU.EDU (Stephen J Bensman) Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 20:46:21 +0000 Subject: Coming Attractions: Garfield, Narin, & PageRank In-Reply-To: <538D96CE-BEFC-43DE-B036-EC6336E821D0@uu.nl> Message-ID: Jeroen, Thank you for the comment. With any luck I should have it posted tomorrow. I have a doctorate in history from one of the top universities in the US in this field-the University of Wisconsin at Madison (Go Badgers!). I have gone through historical documentation, and the evidence is overwhelming. Moreover, the damn thing works, I got the results that would be predicted by Garfield's law of concentration and his view of the importance of review journals. I have also done a Google Cites on myself, and it captures me quite well, pretty much replicating what ISI cites say about me. I was amazed that Google did it in about 45 seconds. The option is that I can make it public, or I can keep it private, but Harzing's program yields the same results. You cannot investigate GS without her program. Page and Brin are astute businessmen, and you really do not think that they will waste the time and money developing a different algorithm just for GS. If you think that, then I have a bridge that I can sell you. They run their operation with cheap computers that you can buy off the shelf at Wal-Mart. GS has an advantage in that it retrieves from institutional repositories, and it seems that institutional repositories are replacing journals as the main source of developing science information. Physics has been that way for a long time. Journals are really just archival. All universities, including LSU, are developing institutional repositories for this reason. GS threatens many vested interests, and I have catching a lot of flak. It is amazing how little understood GS is-almost deliberately so. This is my way of throwing down the gauntlet. Respectfully, SB From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Bosman, J.M. Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2013 1:56 PM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] Coming Attractions: Garfield, Narin, & PageRank I am looking forward to you paper, but I wonder how much really is known about ranking in Scholar. Google states about it "Google Scholar aims to rank documents the way researchers do, weighing the full text of each document, where it was published, who it was written by, as well as how often and how recently it has been cited in other scholarly literature". There are so many vagueries here. First, the bulk of GS search results do not have full text, they are 'citation' parsed from reference list of primary indexed papers. Second, it says that Google weighs who wrote an article, but how is that measured in? Citations indeed play an imporant role that canot be switched off and that results in rankings that for most searches give you old stuff. The majority of GS users do not realize that and thus often miss out on the latest research findings. I also wonder whether Google uses the same kind of PageRank in GS but then with citation numbers. Or do they also take into account weblinks to the various versions of papers? If so, how are these link numbers for various versions added up or corrected for? And if Google uses pagerank based on weblinks to papers combined with pagerank type relevance based on citations, how does the resulting hybrid ranking work? Of course that is a company secret they won't share, but I wonder if there is anybody who has deduced how things really work behind the screens of GS? I will add anything I learn here to our GS guide at http://libguides.library.uu.nl/googlescholar_en Best, Jeroen --------- Jeroen Bosman Utrecht University Library Op 12 dec. 2013 om 16:29 heeft "Stephen J Bensman" > het volgende geschreven: I will soon be posting on arXiv an article entitled "Eugene Garfield, Francis Narin, and PageRank: the Theoretical Bases of the Google Search Engine." Below is its abstract: Abstract This paper presents a test of the validity of using Google Scholar (GS) to evaluate the publications of researchers. It does this by first comparing the theoretical premises on which the GS search engine PageRank algorithm operates to those on which Garfield based his theory of citation indexing. It finds that the basic premise is the same, i.e., that subject sets of relevant documents are defined semantically better by linkages than by words. Google incorporated this premise into PageRank, amending it with the addition of the citation influence method developed by Francis Narin and the staff of Computer Horizons, Inc. (CHI). This method weighted more heavily citations from documents which themselves were more heavily cited. Garfield himself essentially had also incorporated this method into his theory of citation indexing by restricting as far as possible the coverage of the Science Citation Index (SCI) to a small multidisciplinary core of journals most heavily cited. Stealing a page from Garfield's book, the paper presents a test of the validity of GS by tracing its citations to the h-index works of 5 Nobel laureates in chemistry-the discipline in which Garfield began his pioneering research-with Anne-Wil Harzing's revolutionary Publish-or-Perish (PoP) software that has established bibliographic and statistical control over the GS database. Most of these works were journal articles, and the rankings of the journals in which they appeared by both total cites (TC) and impact factor (IF) at the time of their publication were analyzed. The results conformed to the findings of Garfield through citation analysis, confirming his law of concentration and view of the importance of review articles. As a byproduct of this finding, it is shown that Narin had totally misunderstood and mishandled citations from review journals. The evidence of this paper is conclusive: Garfield's theory of citation indexing and PageRank validate each other, and Eugene Garfield is the grandfather of the Web search engine. I will post this article as soon as my wife finishes her proofreading and copyediting. I will inform you when it has been posted, but I wanted to get out as soon as possible the basic findings of the paper. Respectfully, Stephen J Bensman, Ph.D. LSU Libraries Lousiana State University Baton Rouge, LA 70803 USA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From victorherrero at GMAIL.COM Thu Dec 12 18:08:45 2013 From: victorherrero at GMAIL.COM (Victor Herrero) Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 00:08:45 +0100 Subject: Worldwide Topology of the Scientific Subject Profile: A Macro Approach in the Country Level - final version Message-ID: Worldwide Topology of the Scientific Subject Profile: A Macro Approach in the Country Level Abstract Background Models for the production of knowledge and systems of innovation and science are key elements for characterizing a country in view of its scientific thematic profile. With regard to scientific output and publication in journals of international visibility, the countries of the world may be classified into three main groups according to their thematic bias. Methodology/Principal Findings This paper aims to classify the countries of the world in several broad groups, described in terms of behavioural models that attempt to sum up the characteristics of their systems of knowledge and innovation. We perceive three clusters in our analysis: 1) the biomedical cluster, 2) the basic science & engineering cluster, and 3) the agricultural cluster. The countries are conceptually associated with the clusters via Principal Component Analysis (PCA), and a Multidimensional Scaling (MDS) map with all the countries is presented. Conclusions/Significance As we have seen, insofar as scientific output and publication in journals of international visibility is concerned, the countries of the world may be classified into three main groups according to their thematic profile. These groups can be described in terms of behavioral models that attempt to sum up the characteristics of their systems of knowledge and innovation. F?lix Moya-Aneg?n* & V?ctor Herrero-Solana** * CSIC/CCHS/IPP, SCImago Group, Madrid, Spain ** University Granada, SCImago-UGR, Granada, Spain Published: December 09, 2013 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0083222 final version: http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0083222 ** apologies for cross-postings ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- V?ctor Herrero-Solana victorhs at ugr.es www.ugr.es/~victorhs scholar.google.com/citations?user=OKIleUEAAAAJ orcid.org/0000-0003-1142-5074 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- SCImago-UGR Universidad de Granada www.scimagojr.com www.scimagoir.com www.scimagolab.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anne-wil at HARZING.COM Thu Dec 12 18:35:46 2013 From: anne-wil at HARZING.COM (Anne-Wil Harzing) Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 10:35:46 +1100 Subject: Worldwide Topology of the Scientific Subject Profile: A Macro Approach in the Country Level - final version In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Thanks Victor, We just published a paper with a very similar theme in Journal of Informetrics. It is available for free until the end of January through this link: *http://elsarticle.com/18ATXK0 * The competitive advantage of nations: An application to academia * Anne-Wil Harzing ^a ^, * Ax?le Giroud ^b ^, ^ * ^a University of Melbourne, Department of Management and Marketing, Parkville Campus, Victoria 3010, Australia * ^b Manchester Business School, Booth Street West, Manchester M15 6PB, UK ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Abstract Within the field of bibliometrics, there is sustained interest in how nations "compete" in terms of academic disciplines, and what determinants explain why countries may have a specific advantage in one discipline over another. However, this literature has not, to date, presented a comprehensive structured model that could be used in the interpretation of a country's research profile and academic output. In this paper, we use frameworks from international business and economics to present such a model. Our study makes four major contributions. First, we include a very wide range of countries and disciplines, explicitly including the Social Sciences, which unfortunately are excluded in most bibliometrics studies. Second, we apply theories of revealed comparative advantage and the competitive advantage of nations to academic disciplines. Third, we cluster our 34 countries into five different groups that have distinct combinations of revealed comparative advantage in five major disciplines. Finally, based on our empirical work and prior literature, we present an academic diamond that details factors likely to explain a country's research profile and competitiveness in certain disciplines. Best wishes, Anne-Wil* The Publish or Perish Book: Your guide to effective and responsible citation analysis*_ __http://www.harzing.com/popbook.htm_ *Prof. Anne-Wil Harzing* Professor of International Management Faculty of Business and Economics, University of Melbourne website: www.harzing.com, email: anne at harzing.com On 13/12/2013 10:08, Victor Herrero wrote: > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > Worldwide Topology of the Scientific Subject Profile: A Macro > Approach in the Country Level > > Abstract > > Background > Models for the production of knowledge and systems of innovation and > science are key elements for characterizing a country in view of its > scientific thematic profile. With regard to scientific output and > publication in journals of international visibility, the countries of > the world may be classified into three main groups according to their > thematic bias. > > Methodology/Principal Findings > This paper aims to classify the countries of the world in several > broad groups, described in terms of behavioural models that attempt to > sum up the characteristics of their systems of knowledge and > innovation. We perceive three clusters in our analysis: 1) the > biomedical cluster, 2) the basic science & engineering cluster, and 3) > the agricultural cluster. The countries are conceptually associated > with the clusters via Principal Component Analysis (PCA), and a > Multidimensional Scaling (MDS) map with all the countries is presented. > > Conclusions/Significance > As we have seen, insofar as scientific output and publication in > journals of international visibility is concerned, the countries of > the world may be classified into three main groups according to their > thematic profile. These groups can be described in terms of behavioral > models that attempt to sum up the characteristics of their systems of > knowledge and innovation. > > F?lix Moya-Aneg?n* & V?ctor Herrero-Solana** > > * CSIC/CCHS/IPP, SCImago Group, Madrid, Spain > ** University Granada, SCImago-UGR, Granada, Spain > > Published: December 09, 2013 > DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0083222 > > final version: > http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0083222 > > > ** apologies for cross-postings > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > V?ctor Herrero-Solana > victorhs at ugr.es > www.ugr.es/~victorhs > scholar.google.com/citations?user=OKIleUEAAAAJ > > orcid.org/0000-0003-1142-5074 > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > SCImago-UGR > Universidad de Granada > www.scimagojr.com > www.scimagoir.com > www.scimagolab.com > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From j.bosman at UU.NL Fri Dec 13 00:58:34 2013 From: j.bosman at UU.NL (Bosman, J.M.) Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 05:58:34 +0000 Subject: Coming Attractions: Garfield, Narin, & PageRank In-Reply-To: <80bbbd5525404cf982c0e08bba37eead@CO1PR06MB174.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> Message-ID: Dear Stephen, Although I do not quite get what you are trying to tell me in your reaction, I await your paper with interest. Best, Jeroen Op 12 dec. 2013 om 21:46 heeft "Stephen J Bensman" > het volgende geschreven: Jeroen, Thank you for the comment. With any luck I should have it posted tomorrow. I have a doctorate in history from one of the top universities in the US in this field?the University of Wisconsin at Madison (Go Badgers!). I have gone through historical documentation, and the evidence is overwhelming. Moreover, the damn thing works, I got the results that would be predicted by Garfield?s law of concentration and his view of the importance of review journals. I have also done a Google Cites on myself, and it captures me quite well, pretty much replicating what ISI cites say about me. I was amazed that Google did it in about 45 seconds. The option is that I can make it public, or I can keep it private, but Harzing?s program yields the same results. You cannot investigate GS without her program. Page and Brin are astute businessmen, and you really do not think that they will waste the time and money developing a different algorithm just for GS. If you think that, then I have a bridge that I can sell you. They run their operation with cheap computers that you can buy off the shelf at Wal-Mart. GS has an advantage in that it retrieves from institutional repositories, and it seems that institutional repositories are replacing journals as the main source of developing science information. Physics has been that way for a long time. Journals are really just archival. All universities, including LSU, are developing institutional repositories for this reason. GS threatens many vested interests, and I have catching a lot of flak. It is amazing how little understood GS is?almost deliberately so. This is my way of throwing down the gauntlet. Respectfully, SB From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Bosman, J.M. Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2013 1:56 PM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] Coming Attractions: Garfield, Narin, & PageRank I am looking forward to you paper, but I wonder how much really is known about ranking in Scholar. Google states about it "Google Scholar aims to rank documents the way researchers do, weighing the full text of each document, where it was published, who it was written by, as well as how often and how recently it has been cited in other scholarly literature". There are so many vagueries here. First, the bulk of GS search results do not have full text, they are 'citation' parsed from reference list of primary indexed papers. Second, it says that Google weighs who wrote an article, but how is that measured in? Citations indeed play an imporant role that canot be switched off and that results in rankings that for most searches give you old stuff. The majority of GS users do not realize that and thus often miss out on the latest research findings. I also wonder whether Google uses the same kind of PageRank in GS but then with citation numbers. Or do they also take into account weblinks to the various versions of papers? If so, how are these link numbers for various versions added up or corrected for? And if Google uses pagerank based on weblinks to papers combined with pagerank type relevance based on citations, how does the resulting hybrid ranking work? Of course that is a company secret they won't share, but I wonder if there is anybody who has deduced how things really work behind the screens of GS? I will add anything I learn here to our GS guide at http://libguides.library.uu.nl/googlescholar_en Best, Jeroen --------- Jeroen Bosman Utrecht University Library Op 12 dec. 2013 om 16:29 heeft "Stephen J Bensman" > het volgende geschreven: I will soon be posting on arXiv an article entitled ?Eugene Garfield, Francis Narin, and PageRank: the Theoretical Bases of the Google Search Engine.? Below is its abstract: Abstract This paper presents a test of the validity of using Google Scholar (GS) to evaluate the publications of researchers. It does this by first comparing the theoretical premises on which the GS search engine PageRank algorithm operates to those on which Garfield based his theory of citation indexing. It finds that the basic premise is the same, i.e., that subject sets of relevant documents are defined semantically better by linkages than by words. Google incorporated this premise into PageRank, amending it with the addition of the citation influence method developed by Francis Narin and the staff of Computer Horizons, Inc. (CHI). This method weighted more heavily citations from documents which themselves were more heavily cited. Garfield himself essentially had also incorporated this method into his theory of citation indexing by restricting as far as possible the coverage of the Science Citation Index (SCI) to a small multidisciplinary core of journals most heavily cited. Stealing a page from Garfield?s book, the paper presents a test of the validity of GS by tracing its citations to the h-index works of 5 Nobel laureates in chemistry?the discipline in which Garfield began his pioneering research?with Anne-Wil Harzing?s revolutionary Publish-or-Perish (PoP) software that has established bibliographic and statistical control over the GS database. Most of these works were journal articles, and the rankings of the journals in which they appeared by both total cites (TC) and impact factor (IF) at the time of their publication were analyzed. The results conformed to the findings of Garfield through citation analysis, confirming his law of concentration and view of the importance of review articles. As a byproduct of this finding, it is shown that Narin had totally misunderstood and mishandled citations from review journals. The evidence of this paper is conclusive: Garfield?s theory of citation indexing and PageRank validate each other, and Eugene Garfield is the grandfather of the Web search engine. I will post this article as soon as my wife finishes her proofreading and copyediting. I will inform you when it has been posted, but I wanted to get out as soon as possible the basic findings of the paper. Respectfully, Stephen J Bensman, Ph.D. LSU Libraries Lousiana State University Baton Rouge, LA 70803 USA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From andrea.scharnhorst at DANS.KNAW.NL Fri Dec 13 04:44:24 2013 From: andrea.scharnhorst at DANS.KNAW.NL (Andrea Scharnhorst) Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 10:44:24 +0100 Subject: Worldwide Topology of the Scientific Subject Profile: A Macro Approach in the Country Level - final version In-Reply-To: <52AA4852.2050408@harzing.com> Message-ID: And one more 'historic' reference ? Manfred Bonitz introduced what was called the science strategy index, and compared the disciplinary profiles of countries ? we even tried to plot this over time for the 80's and 90's ? all inspired by the great work of the Budapest group ? good to see that this mega effort is not forgotten yet http://www.virtualknowledgestudio.nl/staff/andrea-scharnhorst/documents/the-science-strategy-index.pdf Bonitz profiles over time http://www.virtualknowledgestudio.nl/staff/andrea-scharnhorst/documents/constructing-knowledge-landscapes.pdf Andrea From: Anne-Wil Harzing > Reply-To: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics > Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 00:35:46 +0100 To: "SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU" > Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] Worldwide Topology of the Scientific Subject Profile: A Macro Approach in the Country Level - final version Thanks Victor, We just published a paper with a very similar theme in Journal of Informetrics. It is available for free until the end of January through this link: http://elsarticle.com/18ATXK0 The competitive advantage of nations: An application to academia * Anne-Wil Harzinga, * Ax?le Giroudb, * a University of Melbourne, Department of Management and Marketing, Parkville Campus, Victoria 3010, Australia * b Manchester Business School, Booth Street West, Manchester M15 6PB, UK ________________________________ Abstract Within the field of bibliometrics, there is sustained interest in how nations ?compete? in terms of academic disciplines, and what determinants explain why countries may have a specific advantage in one discipline over another. However, this literature has not, to date, presented a comprehensive structured model that could be used in the interpretation of a country's research profile and academic output. In this paper, we use frameworks from international business and economics to present such a model. Our study makes four major contributions. First, we include a very wide range of countries and disciplines, explicitly including the Social Sciences, which unfortunately are excluded in most bibliometrics studies. Second, we apply theories of revealed comparative advantage and the competitive advantage of nations to academic disciplines. Third, we cluster our 34 countries into five different groups that have distinct combinations of revealed comparative advantage in five major disciplines. Finally, based on our empirical work and prior literature, we present an academic diamond that details factors likely to explain a country's research profile and competitiveness in certain disciplines. Best wishes, Anne-Wil The Publish or Perish Book: Your guide to effective and responsible citation analysis http://www.harzing.com/popbook.htm Prof. Anne-Wil Harzing Professor of International Management Faculty of Business and Economics, University of Melbourne website: www.harzing.com, email: anne at harzing.com On 13/12/2013 10:08, Victor Herrero wrote: ml> Worldwide Topology of the Scientific Subject Profile: A Macro Approach in the Country Level Abstract Background Models for the production of knowledge and systems of innovation and science are key elements for characterizing a country in view of its scientific thematic profile. With regard to scientific output and publication in journals of international visibility, the countries of the world may be classified into three main groups according to their thematic bias. Methodology/Principal Findings This paper aims to classify the countries of the world in several broad groups, described in terms of behavioural models that attempt to sum up the characteristics of their systems of knowledge and innovation. We perceive three clusters in our analysis: 1) the biomedical cluster, 2) the basic science & engineering cluster, and 3) the agricultural cluster. The countries are conceptually associated with the clusters via Principal Component Analysis (PCA), and a Multidimensional Scaling (MDS) map with all the countries is presented. Conclusions/Significance As we have seen, insofar as scientific output and publication in journals of international visibility is concerned, the countries of the world may be classified into three main groups according to their thematic profile. These groups can be described in terms of behavioral models that attempt to sum up the characteristics of their systems of knowledge and innovation. F?lix Moya-Aneg?n* & V?ctor Herrero-Solana** * CSIC/CCHS/IPP, SCImago Group, Madrid, Spain ** University Granada, SCImago-UGR, Granada, Spain Published: December 09, 2013 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0083222 final version: http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0083222 ** apologies for cross-postings ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- V?ctor Herrero-Solana victorhs at ugr.es www.ugr.es/~victorhs scholar.google.com/citations?user=OKIleUEAAAAJ orcid.org/0000-0003-1142-5074 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- SCImago-UGR Universidad de Granada www.scimagojr.com www.scimagoir.com www.scimagolab.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From notsjb at LSU.EDU Fri Dec 13 12:56:11 2013 From: notsjb at LSU.EDU (Stephen J Bensman) Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 17:56:11 +0000 Subject: Coming Attractions: Garfield, Narin, & PageRank In-Reply-To: <16A7A62D-AED5-4428-89EC-496FBD55A68F@uu.nl> Message-ID: Jeroen, I have posted the paper in arXiv, and it will be ready for viewing , Monday, December 16, 1:00 GMT. If you are in a hurry, I can send you a pdf, if you give me your individual e-mail address. I do not want to clutter up the list's mail boxes with my musings. You can read it, and make up your own mind. I would be very interested in your reaction. One reason for posting on arXiv is to confront and correct issues before submitting to a journal. That way you can at least confront your accusers instead of facing a referee with dictatorial powers. That is like participating in Pickett's charge. See URL below: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pickett's_Charge As for my reaction, I will just say that working at the cutting edge is not pleasant. Nobody really know anything-including me-and everybody is opinionated as hell. SB From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Bosman, J.M. Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2013 11:59 PM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] Coming Attractions: Garfield, Narin, & PageRank Dear Stephen, Although I do not quite get what you are trying to tell me in your reaction, I await your paper with interest. Best, Jeroen Op 12 dec. 2013 om 21:46 heeft "Stephen J Bensman" > het volgende geschreven: Jeroen, Thank you for the comment. With any luck I should have it posted tomorrow. I have a doctorate in history from one of the top universities in the US in this field-the University of Wisconsin at Madison (Go Badgers!). I have gone through historical documentation, and the evidence is overwhelming. Moreover, the damn thing works, I got the results that would be predicted by Garfield's law of concentration and his view of the importance of review journals. I have also done a Google Cites on myself, and it captures me quite well, pretty much replicating what ISI cites say about me. I was amazed that Google did it in about 45 seconds. The option is that I can make it public, or I can keep it private, but Harzing's program yields the same results. You cannot investigate GS without her program. Page and Brin are astute businessmen, and you really do not think that they will waste the time and money developing a different algorithm just for GS. If you think that, then I have a bridge that I can sell you. They run their operation with cheap computers that you can buy off the shelf at Wal-Mart. GS has an advantage in that it retrieves from institutional repositories, and it seems that institutional repositories are replacing journals as the main source of developing science information. Physics has been that way for a long time. Journals are really just archival. All universities, including LSU, are developing institutional repositories for this reason. GS threatens many vested interests, and I have catching a lot of flak. It is amazing how little understood GS is-almost deliberately so. This is my way of throwing down the gauntlet. Respectfully, SB From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Bosman, J.M. Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2013 1:56 PM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] Coming Attractions: Garfield, Narin, & PageRank I am looking forward to you paper, but I wonder how much really is known about ranking in Scholar. Google states about it "Google Scholar aims to rank documents the way researchers do, weighing the full text of each document, where it was published, who it was written by, as well as how often and how recently it has been cited in other scholarly literature". There are so many vagueries here. First, the bulk of GS search results do not have full text, they are 'citation' parsed from reference list of primary indexed papers. Second, it says that Google weighs who wrote an article, but how is that measured in? Citations indeed play an imporant role that canot be switched off and that results in rankings that for most searches give you old stuff. The majority of GS users do not realize that and thus often miss out on the latest research findings. I also wonder whether Google uses the same kind of PageRank in GS but then with citation numbers. Or do they also take into account weblinks to the various versions of papers? If so, how are these link numbers for various versions added up or corrected for? And if Google uses pagerank based on weblinks to papers combined with pagerank type relevance based on citations, how does the resulting hybrid ranking work? Of course that is a company secret they won't share, but I wonder if there is anybody who has deduced how things really work behind the screens of GS? I will add anything I learn here to our GS guide at http://libguides.library.uu.nl/googlescholar_en Best, Jeroen --------- Jeroen Bosman Utrecht University Library Op 12 dec. 2013 om 16:29 heeft "Stephen J Bensman" > het volgende geschreven: I will soon be posting on arXiv an article entitled "Eugene Garfield, Francis Narin, and PageRank: the Theoretical Bases of the Google Search Engine." Below is its abstract: Abstract This paper presents a test of the validity of using Google Scholar (GS) to evaluate the publications of researchers. It does this by first comparing the theoretical premises on which the GS search engine PageRank algorithm operates to those on which Garfield based his theory of citation indexing. It finds that the basic premise is the same, i.e., that subject sets of relevant documents are defined semantically better by linkages than by words. Google incorporated this premise into PageRank, amending it with the addition of the citation influence method developed by Francis Narin and the staff of Computer Horizons, Inc. (CHI). This method weighted more heavily citations from documents which themselves were more heavily cited. Garfield himself essentially had also incorporated this method into his theory of citation indexing by restricting as far as possible the coverage of the Science Citation Index (SCI) to a small multidisciplinary core of journals most heavily cited. Stealing a page from Garfield's book, the paper presents a test of the validity of GS by tracing its citations to the h-index works of 5 Nobel laureates in chemistry-the discipline in which Garfield began his pioneering research-with Anne-Wil Harzing's revolutionary Publish-or-Perish (PoP) software that has established bibliographic and statistical control over the GS database. Most of these works were journal articles, and the rankings of the journals in which they appeared by both total cites (TC) and impact factor (IF) at the time of their publication were analyzed. The results conformed to the findings of Garfield through citation analysis, confirming his law of concentration and view of the importance of review articles. As a byproduct of this finding, it is shown that Narin had totally misunderstood and mishandled citations from review journals. The evidence of this paper is conclusive: Garfield's theory of citation indexing and PageRank validate each other, and Eugene Garfield is the grandfather of the Web search engine. I will post this article as soon as my wife finishes her proofreading and copyediting. I will inform you when it has been posted, but I wanted to get out as soon as possible the basic findings of the paper. Respectfully, Stephen J Bensman, Ph.D. LSU Libraries Lousiana State University Baton Rouge, LA 70803 USA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From victorherrero at GMAIL.COM Fri Dec 13 15:20:13 2013 From: victorherrero at GMAIL.COM (Victor Herrero) Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 21:20:13 +0100 Subject: Worldwide Topology of the Scientific Subject Profile: A Macro Approach in the Country Level - final version In-Reply-To: <52AA4852.2050408@harzing.com> Message-ID: Dear Anne-Wil Thank you very much for your recommendation. Your paper is very interesting and will be useful for our ongoing research. Greetings from Granada ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- V?ctor Herrero-Solana victorhs at ugr.es www.ugr.es/~victorhs scholar.google.com/citations?user=OKIleUEAAAAJ orcid.org/0000-0003-1142-5074 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- SCImago-UGR Universidad de Granada www.scimagojr.com www.scimagoir.com www.scimagolab.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 12:35 AM, Anne-Wil Harzing wrote: > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > Thanks Victor, > > We just published a paper with a very similar theme in Journal of > Informetrics. It is available for free until the end of January through > this link: > > *http://elsarticle.com/18ATXK0 > * > > The competitive advantage of nations: An application to academia > > - Anne-Wil Harzing > a > , > - Ax?le Giroud > b > , > > > - a University of Melbourne, Department of Management and Marketing, > Parkville Campus, Victoria 3010, Australia > - b Manchester Business School, Booth Street West, Manchester M15 6PB, > UK > > ------------------------------ > Abstract > > Within the field of bibliometrics, there is sustained interest in how > nations ?compete? in terms of academic disciplines, and what determinants > explain why countries may have a specific advantage in one discipline over > another. However, this literature has not, to date, presented a > comprehensive structured model that could be used in the interpretation of > a country's research profile and academic output. In this paper, we use > frameworks from international business and economics to present such a > model. > > Our study makes four major contributions. First, we include a very wide > range of countries and disciplines, explicitly including the Social > Sciences, which unfortunately are excluded in most bibliometrics studies. > Second, we apply theories of revealed comparative advantage and the > competitive advantage of nations to academic disciplines. Third, we cluster > our 34 countries into five different groups that have distinct combinations > of revealed comparative advantage in five major disciplines. Finally, based > on our empirical work and prior literature, we present an academic diamond > that details factors likely to explain a country's research profile and > competitiveness in certain disciplines. > Best wishes, > Anne-Wil > > > * The Publish or Perish Book: Your guide to effective and responsible > citation analysis* > *http://www.harzing.com/popbook.htm* > > *Prof. Anne-Wil Harzing* > Professor of International Management > Faculty of Business and Economics, University of Melbourne > website: www.harzing.com, email: anne at harzing.com > > > On 13/12/2013 10:08, Victor Herrero wrote: > > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > Worldwide Topology of the Scientific Subject Profile: A Macro Approach > in the Country Level > > Abstract > > Background > Models for the production of knowledge and systems of innovation and > science are key elements for characterizing a country in view of its > scientific thematic profile. With regard to scientific output and > publication in journals of international visibility, the countries of the > world may be classified into three main groups according to their thematic > bias. > > Methodology/Principal Findings > This paper aims to classify the countries of the world in several broad > groups, described in terms of behavioural models that attempt to sum up the > characteristics of their systems of knowledge and innovation. We perceive > three clusters in our analysis: 1) the biomedical cluster, 2) the basic > science & engineering cluster, and 3) the agricultural cluster. The > countries are conceptually associated with the clusters via Principal > Component Analysis (PCA), and a Multidimensional Scaling (MDS) map with all > the countries is presented. > > Conclusions/Significance > As we have seen, insofar as scientific output and publication in journals > of international visibility is concerned, the countries of the world may be > classified into three main groups according to their thematic profile. > These groups can be described in terms of behavioral models that attempt to > sum up the characteristics of their systems of knowledge and innovation. > > F?lix Moya-Aneg?n* & V?ctor Herrero-Solana** > > * CSIC/CCHS/IPP, SCImago Group, Madrid, Spain > ** University Granada, SCImago-UGR, Granada, Spain > > Published: December 09, 2013 > DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0083222 > > final version: > http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0083222 > > > ** apologies for cross-postings > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > V?ctor Herrero-Solana > victorhs at ugr.es > www.ugr.es/~victorhs > scholar.google.com/citations?user=OKIleUEAAAAJ > orcid.org/0000-0003-1142-5074 > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > SCImago-UGR > Universidad de Granada > www.scimagojr.com > www.scimagoir.com > www.scimagolab.com > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From victorherrero at GMAIL.COM Fri Dec 13 15:21:50 2013 From: victorherrero at GMAIL.COM (Victor Herrero) Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 21:21:50 +0100 Subject: Worldwide Topology of the Scientific Subject Profile: A Macro Approach in the Country Level - final version In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear Andrea Thank you for your words and these papers. Greetings from Granada ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- V?ctor Herrero-Solana victorhs at ugr.es www.ugr.es/~victorhs scholar.google.com/citations?user=OKIleUEAAAAJ orcid.org/0000-0003-1142-5074 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- SCImago-UGR Universidad de Granada www.scimagojr.com www.scimagoir.com www.scimagolab.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 9:20 PM, Victor Herrero wrote: > Dear Anne-Wil > Thank you very much for your recommendation. > Your paper is very interesting and will be useful for our ongoing > research. > Greetings from Granada > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > V?ctor Herrero-Solana > victorhs at ugr.es > www.ugr.es/~victorhs > scholar.google.com/citations?user=OKIleUEAAAAJ > orcid.org/0000-0003-1142-5074 > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > SCImago-UGR > Universidad de Granada > www.scimagojr.com > www.scimagoir.com > www.scimagolab.com > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 12:35 AM, Anne-Wil Harzing wrote: > >> Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): >> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html >> Thanks Victor, >> >> We just published a paper with a very similar theme in Journal of >> Informetrics. It is available for free until the end of January through >> this link: >> >> *http://elsarticle.com/18ATXK0 >> * >> >> The competitive advantage of nations: An application to academia >> >> - Anne-Wil Harzing >> a >> , >> - Ax?le Giroud >> b >> , >> >> >> - a University of Melbourne, Department of Management and Marketing, >> Parkville Campus, Victoria 3010, Australia >> - b Manchester Business School, Booth Street West, Manchester M15 >> 6PB, UK >> >> ------------------------------ >> Abstract >> >> Within the field of bibliometrics, there is sustained interest in how >> nations ?compete? in terms of academic disciplines, and what determinants >> explain why countries may have a specific advantage in one discipline over >> another. However, this literature has not, to date, presented a >> comprehensive structured model that could be used in the interpretation of >> a country's research profile and academic output. In this paper, we use >> frameworks from international business and economics to present such a >> model. >> >> Our study makes four major contributions. First, we include a very wide >> range of countries and disciplines, explicitly including the Social >> Sciences, which unfortunately are excluded in most bibliometrics studies. >> Second, we apply theories of revealed comparative advantage and the >> competitive advantage of nations to academic disciplines. Third, we cluster >> our 34 countries into five different groups that have distinct combinations >> of revealed comparative advantage in five major disciplines. Finally, based >> on our empirical work and prior literature, we present an academic diamond >> that details factors likely to explain a country's research profile and >> competitiveness in certain disciplines. >> Best wishes, >> Anne-Wil >> >> >> * The Publish or Perish Book: Your guide to effective and responsible >> citation analysis* >> *http://www.harzing.com/popbook.htm* >> >> *Prof. Anne-Wil Harzing* >> Professor of International Management >> Faculty of Business and Economics, University of Melbourne >> website: www.harzing.com, email: anne at harzing.com >> >> >> On 13/12/2013 10:08, Victor Herrero wrote: >> >> Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): >> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html >> Worldwide Topology of the Scientific Subject Profile: A Macro Approach >> in the Country Level >> >> Abstract >> >> Background >> Models for the production of knowledge and systems of innovation and >> science are key elements for characterizing a country in view of its >> scientific thematic profile. With regard to scientific output and >> publication in journals of international visibility, the countries of the >> world may be classified into three main groups according to their thematic >> bias. >> >> Methodology/Principal Findings >> This paper aims to classify the countries of the world in several broad >> groups, described in terms of behavioural models that attempt to sum up the >> characteristics of their systems of knowledge and innovation. We perceive >> three clusters in our analysis: 1) the biomedical cluster, 2) the basic >> science & engineering cluster, and 3) the agricultural cluster. The >> countries are conceptually associated with the clusters via Principal >> Component Analysis (PCA), and a Multidimensional Scaling (MDS) map with all >> the countries is presented. >> >> Conclusions/Significance >> As we have seen, insofar as scientific output and publication in journals >> of international visibility is concerned, the countries of the world may be >> classified into three main groups according to their thematic profile. >> These groups can be described in terms of behavioral models that attempt to >> sum up the characteristics of their systems of knowledge and innovation. >> >> F?lix Moya-Aneg?n* & V?ctor Herrero-Solana** >> >> * CSIC/CCHS/IPP, SCImago Group, Madrid, Spain >> ** University Granada, SCImago-UGR, Granada, Spain >> >> Published: December 09, 2013 >> DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0083222 >> >> final version: >> http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0083222 >> >> >> ** apologies for cross-postings >> >> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> V?ctor Herrero-Solana >> victorhs at ugr.es >> www.ugr.es/~victorhs >> scholar.google.com/citations?user=OKIleUEAAAAJ >> orcid.org/0000-0003-1142-5074 >> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> SCImago-UGR >> Universidad de Granada >> www.scimagojr.com >> www.scimagoir.com >> www.scimagolab.com >> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nancy.g.faget.civ at MAIL.MIL Tue Dec 17 11:12:18 2013 From: nancy.g.faget.civ at MAIL.MIL (Faget, Nancy G CIV (US)) Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2013 16:12:18 +0000 Subject: May be of interest: NISO Altmetrics Project Meeting 23 January (Philadelphia) (UNCLASSIFIED) Message-ID: Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE -----Original Message----- From: Juliana Wood (NISO) [mailto:jwood at niso.org] Sent: Monday, December 16, 2013 9:31 AM To: Juliana Wood Cc: Juliana Wood Subject: Invitation to Attend 3rd In-person NISO Altmetrics Project Meeting NISO Altmetrics Project - In-person Meeting: January 23, 2014 in Philadelphia, PA In June 2013, the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation awarded NISO a grant to undertake a two-phase initiative to explore, identify, and advance standards and/or best practices related to a new suite of potential metrics in the community. This initiative was a direct outgrowth of a breakout discussion group during the altmetrics 12 meeting in Chicago, IL. This project is an important step in the development and adoption of new assessment metrics, which include usage-based metrics, social media references, and network behavioral analysis. In addition, this project will explore potential assessment criteria for non-traditional research outputs, such as data sets, visualizations, software, and other applications. After the first phase, which will expose areas for potential standardization, the community will collectively prioritize those potential projects. The second phase will be to advance and develop those standards/best practices prioritized by the community and approved by the membership. 3rd In-person Meeting: Thursday, January 23 The first two meetings - San Francisco on October 9 and Washington DC on December 11 - were extremely constructive and engaging, and we hope to continue the positive momentum for the third meeting on this initiative. The third in-person meeting in support of this work will take place on Thursday, January 23, 2014 from 8:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. (ET) at The Hub Conference Center in Philadelphia, PA , conveniently scheduled before the 2014 ALA Mid-Winter Conference . This meeting is made possible by the generous support from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, and the objectives of this one-day meeting will include a short opening keynote on the topic of assessment, lightning talks on related projects, brainstorming for identification of topics for discussion, and prioritizing proposed work items. **The meeting is FREE for all attendees. Please RSVP here , which will assist in planning and logistics.** For those wishing to attend, limited funding is available for employees of academic and non-profit organizations for travel and hotel accommodations on a first come, first-serve basis. Please contact Juliana Wood, Educational Programs Manager via email or call the NISO office at 301.654.2512 to determine funding eligibility and to get details about NISO reimbursement policies. For planning purposes, registration for this event will close on Friday, January 17, 2014 at 2:00 p.m. (ET). FREE LIVESTREAM AVAILABLE: For those interested in this work, but unable to attend in-person, NISO will be live streaming this event. Credentials for login will be provided closer to the event date; please make sure to designate your attendance as "virtual" in the RSVP form so that we may be sure to communicate that information to you. We look forward to this initiative and helping to advance the application and use of alternative assessment metrics. If you have any specific questions about the program, please feel free to contact the NISO office. Juliana Wood, Educational Programs Manager National Information Standards Organization (NISO) 3600 Clipper Mill Road, Suite 302 Baltimore, Maryland 21211 E: jwood at niso.org P: 301.654.2512 F: 410.685.5278 Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 5573 bytes Desc: not available URL: From notsjb at LSU.EDU Tue Dec 17 11:20:27 2013 From: notsjb at LSU.EDU (Stephen J Bensman) Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2013 16:20:27 +0000 Subject: Garfield, Narin, and PageRank Message-ID: My article "Eugene Garfield, Francis Narin, and PageRank: The Theoretical Bases of the Google Search Engine" is now available on arXiv at the following URL: http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1312/1312.3872.pdf I have tweaked its abstract so that it now reads as follows: Abstract This paper presents a test of the validity of using Google Scholar (GS) to evaluate the publications of researchers. It does this by first comparing the theoretical premises on which the GS search engine PageRank algorithm operates to those on which Garfield based his theory of citation indexing. It finds that the basic premise is the same, i.e., that subject sets of relevant documents are defined semantically better by linkages than by words. Google incorporated this premise into PageRank, amending it with the addition of the citation influence method developed by Francis Narin and the staff of Computer Horizons, Inc. (CHI). This method weighted more heavily citations from documents which themselves were more heavily cited. Garfield himself essentially had also incorporated this method into his theory of citation indexing by restricting as far as possible the coverage of the Science Citation Index (SCI) to a small multidisciplinary core of journals most heavily cited. From this perspective, PageRank can be considered a further implementation of Garfield's theory of citation index at a higher technical level. Stealing a page from Garfield's book, the paper presents a test of the validity of GS by tracing its citations to the h-index works of 5 Nobel laureates in chemistry-the discipline in which Garfield began his pioneering research-with Anne-Wil Harzing's revolutionary Publish-or-Perish (PoP) software that has established bibliographic and statistical control over the GS database. Most of these works were journal articles, and the rankings of the journals in which they appeared by both total cites (TC) and impact factor (IF) at the time of their publication were analyzed. The results conformed to the findings of Garfield through citation analysis, confirming his law of concentration and his view of the importance of review articles. As a byproduct of this finding, it is shown that Narin had totally misunderstood and mishandled citations from review journals. The evidence of this paper is conclusive: Garfield's theory of citation indexing and PageRank validate each other, and Eugene Garfield is the grandfather of the Web search engine. If anybody reads this paper and has any quibbles with it, please contact me, and we will hash it out. Respectfully, Stephen J Bensman, Ph.D. LSU Libraries Lousiana State University Baton Rouge, LA 70803 USA E-mail: notsjb at lsu.edu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isidro.aguillo at CCHS.CSIC.ES Wed Dec 18 06:19:20 2013 From: isidro.aguillo at CCHS.CSIC.ES (Isidro F. Aguillo) Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 12:19:20 +0100 Subject: A new paper in the ejournal Cybermetrics Message-ID: Tweeting Links to Academic Articles Mike Thelwall, Andrew Tsou, Scott Weingart, Kim Holmberg, Stefanie Haustein Cybermetrics, 17(2013), Issue 1, Paper 1 http://cybermetrics.cindoc.csic.es/articles/v17i1p1.pdf Abstract Academic articles are now frequently tweeted and so Twitter seems to be a useful tool for scholars to use to help keep up with publications and discussions in their fields. Perhaps as a result of this, tweet counts are increasingly used by digital libraries and journal websites as indicators of an article?s interest or impact. Nevertheless, it is not known whether tweets are typically positive, neutral or critical, or how articles are normally tweeted. These are problems for those wishing to tweet articles effectively and for those wishing to know whether tweet counts in digital libraries should be taken seriously. In response, a pilot study content analysis was conducted of 270 tweets linking to articles in four journals, four digital libraries and two DOI URLs, collected over a period of eight months in 2012. The vast majority of the tweets echoed an article title (42%) or a brief summary (41%). One reason for summarising an article seemed to be to translate it for a general audience. Few tweets explicitly praised an article and none were critical. Most tweets did not directly refer to the article author, but some did and others were clearly self-citations. In summary, tweets containing links to scholarly articles generally provide little more than publicity, and so whilst tweet counts may provide evidence of the popularity of an article, the contents of the tweets themselves are unlikely to give deep insights into scientists' reactions to publications, except perhaps in special cases. -- ****************************** Isidro F. Aguillo, HonDr. The Cybermetrics Lab, IPP-CSIC Grupo Scimago Madrid. SPAIN isidro.aguillo at csic.es ORCID: 0000-0001-8927-4873 ResearcherID: A-7280-2008 Scholar Citations: SaCSbeoAAAAJ Twitter: @isidroaguillo Rankings Web: webometrics.info ****************************** --- Este mensaje no contiene virus ni malware porque la protecci?n de avast! Antivirus est? activa. http://www.avast.com From andrea.scharnhorst at DANS.KNAW.NL Wed Dec 18 20:07:13 2013 From: andrea.scharnhorst at DANS.KNAW.NL (Andrea Scharnhorst) Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 02:07:13 +0100 Subject: FW: Invitation to Programme Committee SKIN3 Workshop Budapest Workshop on innovation policy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Call for papers attached and deadline for abstracts January 6. Interesting workshop on the use of simulations to better understand, analyze and design innovation policy. A workshop at E?tv?s Lor?nd University, Budapest, Hungary, 22?23 May 2014 Workshop URL: http://cress.soc.surrey.ac.uk/skin/events/third-skin-workshop This 2-days workshop organised by the EA European Academy of Technology and Innovation Assessment (www.ea-aw.org) as its annual conference with two co-organisers and one local host will bring together two scientific communities to join forces in research on innovation policy modelling. Innovation intersects the concerns of complexity models and social simulation. The intention of the workshop is to explore how complexity models and simulation can be used to improve and inform the innovation policy making process. The workshop will take place at E?tv?s Lor?nd University, Budapest (Hungary), from 22 to 23 May 2014 and is supported by the EGovPoliNet project (http://www.policy-community.eu ). Warmest regards Andrea -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: CfP_SKIN3_Budapest2014.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 437377 bytes Desc: CfP_SKIN3_Budapest2014.pdf URL: From yurdagul at HACETTEPE.EDU.TR Thu Dec 19 08:41:11 2013 From: yurdagul at HACETTEPE.EDU.TR (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?yurdag=FCl_=FCnal?=) Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 15:41:11 +0200 Subject: IMCW2014: 5th International Symposium on Information Management in a Changing World Message-ID: ********* APOLOGIES FOR CROSS-POSTING ************ *IMCW2014: * *5th International Symposium on Information Management in a Changing World*, November 24-26, 2014, Antalya, Turkey *Research Data Management and Knowledge Discovery* (First Call for Papers) Symposium web site: http://imcw2014.bilgiyonetimi.net *SCOPE* *IMCW2014*: The "5th International Symposium on Information Management in a Changing World" will take place at the Club Hotel Sera ( http://www.clubhotelsera.com.tr/) in Antalya, Turkey, from November 24-26, 2014 (http://imcw2014.bilgiyonetimi.net/). To commemorate the 2014 Turkish-German Science Year, IMCW2014 is organized in cooperation with Hacettepe University and the Goethe-Institutes in Turkey. IMCW2014 will be held jointly with the 10th International Conference on Knowledge Management (ICKM2014) at the same venue so that participants will have a chance to attend both events. *MAIN THEME* The main theme of the Symposium is ?*Research Data Management and Knowledge Discovery*?. It aims to bring together researchers, data scientists, computer engineers, data repository managers, information scientists and information professionals, data librarians and archivists to discuss the issues pertinent to research data management and open data repositories, and to contemplate on how to design and develop innovative and collaborative knowledge discovery and mining services over the research data. *CONTRIBUTIONS* Contributions can be theoretical as well as technical and practical. Informative case studies are also welcome. We accept* extended abstracts* (no less than 750 words) for full papers; short communications, Research in Progress reports, visual presentations (?pecha kuchas?) and posters on all aspects of innovative and collaborative research data management and knowledge discovery. Extended abstracts for student papers and posters are also welcome. Extended abstracts of PhD students to present the interim findings of their ongoing research will also be considered. Please use the template available on the Symposium web site to prepare your contributions and send them to us using the Conference Management Software (openconf) *by March 16, 2014.* We also accept proposals to organize workshops. Proposals should include a title, a short abstract, proposal type, the name and contact information of the convener and be addressed toimcw2014 at gmail.com* by* *March 16, 2014*. We also encourage session proposals. The coordinator of a special session will be responsible for the selection of papers (4-6 papers) and will chair the session. For session coordinators, registration fee will be waived. Accepted extended abstracts may be developed as full papers. A short list of papers will be selected so that the revised and extended versions of these papers and posters will appear in the proceedings book to be published by Springer under its Communications in Computer and Information Science (CCIS) series (decision pending) and the Symposium web site. Papers that appear in Springer?s CCIS series are indexed in Thomson Reuter?s Conference Proceedings Citation Index. *MAIN TOPICS* Main topics of the Symposium include (but not limited with) the following: Research Data Research Data Infrastructure Research Data Management Open Access to Research Data Knowledge Discovery in Research Data Education for Research Data Management *IMPORTANT DATES* First Call: December 2013 Second Call: January 2014 Third Call: February 2014 Last date to send all types of extended abstracts and proposals: *16 March 2014 * Authors notification: *1 May 2014* Submission of extended abstracts in final form: *1 June 2014* Registration starts: *2 June 2014* Submission of full papers (if desired):*1 July 2014* Notification of acceptance of full papers: *1 August 2014* Submission of full papers in final form: *1 September 2014* Symposium: *24-26 November 2014 * All suggestions and comments are welcome. Please send us your ideas about possible invited speakers at imcw2014 at gmail.com. *Ya?ar Tonta *and *Serap Kurbano?lu*, General Co-chairs Hacettepe University Department of Information Management 06800 Beytepe, Ankara, Turkey Phone: +90 312 297 82 00 Fax: +90 312 299 20 14 E-mail: {yasartonta, kurbanogluserap}@gmail.com *Nico Sandfuchs* Goethe-Institut Ankara Atat?rk Bulvar? No:131 06640 Bakanl?klar, Ankara, Turkey Phone:+90 312 419 52 83 E-mail: sandfuchs at ankara.goethe.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From katy at INDIANA.EDU Thu Dec 19 18:15:00 2013 From: katy at INDIANA.EDU (Katy Borner) Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 18:15:00 -0500 Subject: The Information Visualization MOOC is back! In-Reply-To: <1116003336498.1111243395708.122.0.401631JL.1002@scheduler.constantcontact.com> Message-ID: CNS Special Announcement | December 19, 2013 *2014 IVMOOC Offers Companion Textbook and Opportunity for Indiana University Credit* *REGISTER NOW ? * Are you interested in running temporal, geospatial, topical, or network analyses and visualizations? Do you want to learn how to harness the power of big data? You'll get all this and more with the Information Visualization Massively Open Online Course (IVMOOC), offered by the Cyberinfrastructure for Network Science (CNS) Center at the School of Informatics and Computing, Indiana University. In its second year, the IVMOOC will run from January 28 to April 14, 2014. The course provides an overview about the state of the art in information visualization, and teaches the process of producing effective visualizations that take the needs of users into account. The target audience is graduate students able to work three to six hours per week. Students will learn basic concepts, practical skills, and team project development. Everybody who registers gains instant free access to the Scholarly Database (26 million paper, patent and grant records) and the Sci2 Tool (180+ algorithms and tools). Information visualization continues to broaden its reach from computer science and human-computer interaction into fields like drug discovery, financial analysis and scientific research. The IVMOOC is one of the first MOOCs offered by IU and the first to offer an opportunity for students to work in teams with actual clients, like researchers interested in understanding data patterns and trends, government agencies developing visual interfaces for data holdings, industry representatives looking to maximize return on investment, medical doctors seeking cures, and not-for-profit organizations hoping to communicate impacts and achievements. Since the launch of the first IVMOOC, Katy B?rner and David E. Polley have written a companion textbook, /Visual Insights: A Practical Guide to Making Sense of Data /, that offers a gentle introduction to the design of insightful visualizations. It seamlessly blends theory and practice, giving readers both the theoretical foundation and the practical skills necessary to render data into insights. The book is recommended reading for IVMOOC 2014 and can be purchased from Amazon , Barnes & Noble , or MIT Press . This year, the course can be taken for three Indiana University credits as part of the Online Data Science Program just announced by the School of Informatics and Computing. Students interested in applying to the program can find more information here . Students who participated in the IVMOOC last year may take the course again for credit in the Online Data Science Program. Those who finish the course with high marks, regardless of whether they are participating in Indiana University's online program, will receive a Mozilla Open Badge and personalized letter to mark their accomplishment. This year's course will include several new lectures dedicated to digital humanities and statistics, for those interested in exploring their data further. We hope to have you in class, and please tell your friends! /Scott Weingart and the IVMOOC Team/ // //*REGISTER NOW ? * *//* Instructors Scott Weingart Instructor Michael Ginda Assistant Instructor Scott Emmons Student Liaison Katy B?rner Previous Instructor FAQ *Will I get actual credit for taking the course? * The 2014 course can be taken for three Indiana University credits as part of the Online Data Science Program just announced by the School of Informatics and Computing. Students seeking enrollment information should contact Rhonda Spencer at 812-855-2018 or datasci at indiana.edu . *How much does it cost to take the course? * The course is free, except for those taking the course for credit through Indiana University's Online Data Science Program (click here for details ). All of the software and services required for the course are free. Throughout the entirety of this course we will use open-source software and/or freely available services to complete the work required to obtain a letter of accomplishment and digital badge. See All FAQs ? Grading Final grade: 30% Midterm, 40% Final, 30% client project. Participants that receive more than 80% of all available points will receive both a personalized letter of accomplishment and Mozilla Open Badge. Student Work Check out the Flickr IVMOOC gallery to see some of the work done by IVMOOC students. This will give you an idea of what you can accomplish with the knowledge gained in this course. Cyberinfrastructure for Network Science Center | cns at indiana.edu | cns.iu.edu ILS | School of Informatics and Computing | Indiana University Wells Library 20 | 1320 East Tenth Street | Bloomington, IN 47405 Like us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Orange Copyright ? 2013 Cyberinfrastructure for Network Science Center at Indiana University. All Rights Reserved. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Mon Dec 23 11:54:30 2013 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2013 16:54:30 +0000 Subject: Papers of Interest to readers of SIG-Metrics List Message-ID: *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326734900004 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Journal Impact as a Diffusion Process: A Conceptualization and the Case of the Journal of Management Studies Authors: Simsek, Z; Heavey, C; Jansen, JJP Author Full Names: Simsek, Zeki; Heavey, Ciaran; Jansen, Justin J. P. Source: JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES, 50 (8):1374-1407; 10.1111/joms.12007 DEC 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: citations, diffusion, journal impact, multidimensional conceptualization KeyWords Plus: CITATION-REPORTS; RESEARCH QUALITY; SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS; ECONOMIC-GEOGRAPHY; SCHOLARLY JOURNALS; SOCIAL-SCIENCES; INDEX; INDICATORS; RANKING; DETERMINANTS Abstract: While the question of what makes a journal impactful continues to draw scholarly attention and debate, the lack of conceptual foundation as to what journal impact represents, and how it manifests itself, has impeded efforts to establish a richer understanding. Drawing from the theory of innovation diffusion, we propose journal impact as a multidimensional concept manifested most prominently in the magnitude, prestige, breadth, dispersion, and duration dynamics of citations accruing to a journal. In doing so, we complement extant representations of journal impact as a unidimensional concept with insights into the pattern and profile of a journal impact across space and time. We illustrate the multidimensionality of journal impact as a diffusion process in a longitudinal analysis of citation patterns at the Journal of Management Studies over a 40-year period. Addresses: Univ Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269 USA. Univ Coll Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. Erasmus Univ, NL-3000 DR Rotterdam, Netherlands. E-mail Addresses: zeki.simsek at Business.uconn.edu Cited Reference Count: 78 Times Cited: 2 Publisher: WILEY-BLACKWELL, 111 RIVER ST, HOBOKEN 07030-5774, NJ USA ISSN: 0022-2380 Web of Science Categories: Business; Management Research Areas: Business & Economics IDS Number: 248VZ Unique ID: WOS:000326734900004 Cited References: Moed HF, 2005, CURRENT SCIENCE, V89, P1990 Kennedy Mark Thomas, 2009, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V52, P897 Jacobs Jerry A., 2009, ANNUAL REVIEW OF SOCIOLOGY, V35, P43 PINSKI G, 1976, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V12, P297 Chen Carl R., 2007, JOURNAL OF CORPORATE FINANCE, V13, P1008 Balaban Alexandru T., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P241 GOMEZMEJIA LR, 1992, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V35, P921 GARFIELD E, 1963, AMERICAN DOCUMENTATION, V14, P195 Kieser Alfred, 2011, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES, V48, P891 Macdonald Stuart, 2007, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES, V44, P640 Van Fleet DD, 2000, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, V26, P839 Ryan Bryce, 1943, RURAL SOCIOLOGY, V8, P15 Magri M, 1996, SCIENTOMETRICS, V35, P93 GARFIELD E, 1975, JOURNAL OF THE INDIAN INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE, V57, P61 Sanni S. A., 2011, MALAYSIAN JOURNAL OF LIBRARY & INFORMATION SCIENCE, V16, P127 Rousseau M., 2012, Journal of Management Studies, V49, P600 Rogers E., 1995, Diffusion of innovations, GARFIELD E, 1972, SCIENCE, V178, P471 Zitt Michel, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P485 Glanzel W, 2002, SCIENTOMETRICS, V53, P169 Vanclay Jerome K., 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS, V78, P3 Rynes Sara L., 2011, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT LEARNING & EDUCATION, V10, P561 Habibzadeh Farrokh, 2008, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V2, P164 Rowlands I, 2002, ASLIB PROCEEDINGS, V54, P77 Zahra Shaker A., 2009, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES, V46, P1059 Bensman Stephen J., 2008, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V59, P1366 Rogers Everett, 2003, Diffusion of Innovations., Johnson Russell E., 2011, JOURNAL OF BUSINESS AND PSYCHOLOGY, V26, P241 Fok Dennis, 2007, JOURNAL OF ECONOMETRICS, V139, P376 Leonidou Leonidas C., 2010, INTERNATIONAL MARKETING REVIEW, V27, P491 Burt RS, 1999, ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF POLITICAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE, V566, P37 BLAUT JM, 1987, ANNALS OF THE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN GEOGRAPHERS, V77, P30 Hecht F, 1998, CANCER GENETICS AND CYTOGENETICS, V104, P77 Shipilov Andrew V., 2010, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V53, P846 Baum Joel A. C., 2011, ORGANIZATION, V18, P449 Herrmann Roland, 2011, JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, V62, P710 Seglen PO, 1998, ACTA ORTHOPAEDICA SCANDINAVICA, V69, P224 Frandsen TF, 2006, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V62, P58 Archambault Eric, 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS, V79, P635 Bollen Johan, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P669 Moed Henk F., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P367 Battilana Julie, 2010, ORGANIZATION STUDIES, V31, P695 Linderman Kevin, 2010, JOURNAL OF OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT, V28, P357 JOHNSON JL, 1994, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V37, P1392 Franceschet Massimo, 2010, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V46, P555 Adler R., 2008, A report of the Joint Committee on Quantitative Assessment of Research, Starbuck WH, 2005, ORGANIZATION SCIENCE, V16, P180 Frandsen TF, 2004, ASLIB PROCEEDINGS, V56, P5 McWilliams A, 2005, ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH METHODS, V8, P185 Cheek J, 2006, QUALITATIVE HEALTH RESEARCH, V16, P423 Garfield E, 1999, CANADIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL, V161, P979 Singh Gangaram, 2007, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT INQUIRY, V16, P319 Wrigley Neil, 2010, JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY, V10, P1 Certo S. Trevis, 2010, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT LEARNING & EDUCATION, V9, P591 Lockett A, 2005, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT INQUIRY, V14, P139 MERTON RK, 1988, ISIS, V79, P606 Podsakoff PM, 2005, STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V26, P473 Seglen PO, 1997, ALLERGY, V52, P1050 Vanclay Jerome K., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P211 Katz Jerome A., 2008, JOURNAL OF SMALL BUSINESS MANAGEMENT, V46, P550 Hitt Michael A., 2012, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT INQUIRY, V21, P236 Moed HF, 1999, SCIENTOMETRICS7th Conference of the International-Society-for-Scientometrics-and-Informetrics, JUL 05-08, 1999, COLIMA, MEXICO, V46, P575 Pieters R, 2002, JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC LITERATURE, V40, P483 Calver Michael C., 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS, V81, P611 West Jevin D., 2010, COLLEGE & RESEARCH LIBRARIES, V71, P236 Pendlebury David A., 2009, ARCHIVUM IMMUNOLOGIAE ET THERAPIAE EXPERIMENTALIS, V57, P1 Zhou Xiaoping, 2009, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON RELIABILITY, V58, P317 Foster Jamie, 2007, TRANSACTIONS OF THE INSTITUTE OF BRITISH GEOGRAPHERS3rd Summer Institute in Economic Geography, JUN 24-30, 2006, Madison, WI, V32, P295 NISONGER TE, 1994, LIBRARY ACQUISITIONS-PRACTICE AND THEORY, V18, P447 Stewart A., International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, Strang D, 1998, ANNUAL REVIEW OF SOCIOLOGY, V24, P265 Paul Ray J., 2008, EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS, V17, P324 Podsakoff Philip M., 2008, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, V34, P641 Floyd Steven W., 2009, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES, V46, P1057 SEGLEN PO, 1992, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V43, P628 Cronin B., 1984, The Citation Process, Harzing A. W., 2010, The Publish Or Perish Book: Your Guide to Effective and Responsible Citation Analysis, Chan Kam C., 2009, ACCOUNTING ORGANIZATIONS AND SOCIETY, V34, P875 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326670800003 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Scientists (of the World) Behave! Authors: Al-Shamery, K Author Full Names: Al-Shamery, Katharina Source: ANGEWANDTE CHEMIE-INTERNATIONAL EDITION, 52 (46):11946-11947; 10.1002/anie.201306690 NOV 11 2013 Language: English Document Type: Editorial Material KeyWords Plus: SCIENCE Addresses: Carl Von Ossietzky Univ Oldenburg, Inst Chem, D-26111 Oldenburg, Germany. E-mail Addresses: katharina.al.shamery at uni-olden-burg.de Cited Reference Count: 3 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH, BOSCHSTRASSE 12, D-69469 WEINHEIM, GERMANY ISSN: 1433-7851 Web of Science Categories: Chemistry, Multidisciplinary Research Areas: Chemistry IDS Number: 248CH Unique ID: WOS:000326670800003 Cited References: Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 GARFIELD E, 1972, SCIENCE, V178, P471 Stroebe Wolfgang, 2012, PERSPECTIVES ON PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, V7, P670 ======================================================================= ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326745500007 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Dedicated Bibliometrics: A More Appropriate *Impact Factor* for Specialty Journals? Authors: Thaler, MM; Heyman, MB Author Full Names: Thaler, M. Michael; Heyman, Melvin B. Source: JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC GASTROENTEROLOGY AND NUTRITION, 57 (4):413-413; 10.1097/MPG.0b013e3182a80c23 OCT 2013 Language: English Document Type: Editorial Material Addresses: [Thaler, M. Michael; Heyman, Melvin B.] Univ Calif San Francisco, Dept Pediat, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA. E-mail Addresses: mheyman at peds.ucsf.edu Cited Reference Count: 1 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS, 530 WALNUT ST, PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106-3621 USA ISSN: 0277-2116 Web of Science Categories: Gastroenterology & Hepatology; Nutrition & Dietetics; Pediatrics Research Areas: Gastroenterology & Hepatology; Nutrition & Dietetics; Pediatrics IDS Number: 248ZM Unique ID: WOS:000326745500007 Cited References: Master Samuel, 2013, JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC GASTROENTEROLOGY AND NUTRITION, V57, P527 ======================================================================= * ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327131300011 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Analysis of the influence of the International Journal of Electrical Engineering Education on electrical engineering and electrical engineering education Authors: Nawaz, S; Usman, M; Strobel, J Author Full Names: Nawaz, Sadia; Usman, Muhammad; Strobel, Johannes Source: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION, 50 (3):316-340; 10.7227/IJEEE.50.3.11 JUL 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: citation analysis, collaboration, engineering education, impact factor, keyword analysis, social network analysis KeyWords Plus: SUPPORT SYSTEMS RESEARCH; CITATION ANALYSIS; IMPACT FACTOR; SCIENCE Abstract: This article researches the influence of IJEEE on electrical engineering and electrical engineering education as a discipline. For this purpose, the history of this journal has been presented from a citation perspective. To identify leading and evolving research areas within IJEEE the authors conducted keyword analysis, which additionally showed how IJEEE contains both educational and technical contributions. The authors also studied the temporal evolution and distribution of keywords. Word co-occurrence was analysed to discover the main context in which the keywords have been used. The analysis also revealed the prominent contributors within the community of IJEEE based on various authorship and citation criteria. It was observed that the influential authors appear in multiple ways, i.e. most of the authors who were influential by one criterion also made to the top list of other criteria. The authors concluded that the single-author pattern is quite prominent within this community, and very little work has been done between the same co-authors. Therefore, there is a need to encourage IJEEE authors to write more collaborative publications so that the authorship/co-authorship network may grow. Addresses: [Nawaz, Sadia] Purdue Univ, Sch Elect & Comp Engn, W Lafayette, IN 47907 USA. [Nawaz, Sadia; Strobel, Johannes] Purdue Univ, Coll Engn, Sch Engn Educ, W Lafayette, IN 47907 USA. [Usman, Muhammad] Tyndall Natl Inst, Cork, Ireland. [Strobel, Johannes] Purdue Univ, Coll Educ, Dept Curriculum & Instruct, W Lafayette, IN 47907 USA. E-mail Addresses: sadia at alumni.purdue.edu; usman at alumni.purdue.edu; jstrobel at purdue.edu Funding Acknowledgement: National Science Foundation (NSF) [0943198] Funding Text: This work is supported by National Science Foundation (NSF) funding under the grant number 0943198. Any opinions, finding and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not reflect the views of the NSF. Cited Reference Count: 50 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: MANCHESTER UNIV PRESS, OXFORD RD, MANCHESTER M13 9PL, ENGLAND ISSN: 0020-7209 Web of Science Categories: Education, Scientific Disciplines; Engineering, Electrical & Electronic Research Areas: Education & Educational Research; Engineering IDS Number: 254AE Unique ID: WOS:000327131300011 Cited References: Chang C.-L., 2010, Journal Impact Factor Versus Eigenfactor and Article Influence, Martin J., 2002, Proc. of the American Society of Engineering Education 2002, Annual Conference, Montreal, Canada, Session 2325, P1737 Johnson K. L., 1951, J. Vocational Education & Training, V3, P173 Moed HF, 2002, NATURE, V415, P731 Rosengren K. E., 1990, Scholarly Communication and Bibliometrics, P107 Garfield E, 2006, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V295, P90 Eom S., 2008, Author cocitation analysis: quantitative methods for mapping the intellectual structure of an academic discipline, HARTLEY MG, 1988, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V25, P197 Hanneman R. A., 2005, Introduction to Social Network Methods, Andrade M. A., 1998, Bioinformatics, V14, P7 Prichard A., 1969, J. Documentation, V25, P348 Semenzato G, 2004, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF RESPIRATORY AND CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, V169, P1070 GARFIELD E, 1972, SCIENCE, V178, P471 EOM SB, 1993, DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS, V9, P237 Rosengren K. E., 1968, Natur och kultur, V4, Moed HK, 2005, CITATION ANALYSIS IN RESEARCH EVALUATION, V9, P1 [Anonymous], 2006, Journal of Engineering Education, V95, P259 Hartley MG, 1998, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V35, P293 PINSKI G, 1976, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V12, P297 Neill J., 2007, Qualitative versus quantitative research: key points in a classic debate, Moed Henk F., 2009, ARCHIVUM IMMUNOLOGIAE ET THERAPIAE EXPERIMENTALIS, V57, P13 Sci2 Team, 2009, Science of Science (Sci2) Tool, Crane D., 1972, Invisible Colleges: Diffusion of knowledge in scientific communities, Seglen PO, 1997, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V314, P498 Baker D. R., 1990, Social Work Research and Abstracts, V26, P29 GARFIELD E, 1980, CURRENT CONTENTS, P5 Streveler R. A., 2006, J. Eng. Educ., V95, P3 Bradshaw E., 1948, J. Vocational Education & Training, V1, P92 Wilson C. J., 2009, Using social network analysis to advance traditional qualitative methods in evaluation and program design' Opinion Dynamics Corporation, EOM SB, 1994, DATA BASE, V25, P35 Koenig M. E. D., 1978, Collection Management, V2, P247 [Anonymous], Tag cloud, Streveler Ruth A., 2006, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V95, P103 Garfield E., 1972, Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation, Institute for Scientific Information, 1994, The application of citation indexing to journals management, Gedeon T. D., 1998, Proc. IEEE International Conference on System Man and Cybernetics (SMC'98), session: Data Analysis & Information Science, 1998, San Diego, V3, P2750 Narin F., 1976, Cason Hulsey, 1936, PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, V33, P95 Redner S, 2005, PHYSICS TODAY, V58, P49 Bollen Johan, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P669 Rousseau R., 2009, On the relation between the WoS impact factor, the Eigen-factor, the SCImago Journal Rank, the Article Influence Score and the journal h-index, Mishra Paras N., 2010, MALAYSIAN JOURNAL OF LIBRARY & INFORMATION SCIENCE, V15, P91 GARFIELD E, 1955, SCIENCE, V122, P108 [Anonymous], 2009, The rise of retractions in science - more misconduct or stiffer scrutiny?, Kostoff RN, 1998, SCIENTOMETRICS, V43, P27 Garfield E., 1998, 41stAnnual Meeting of the Council of Biology Editors, Salt Lake City, UT, SMITH LC, 1981, LIBRARY TRENDS, V30, P83 Dagan I., 1996, Proceedings of the symposium on document analysis and information retrieval (SDAIR-96), Las Vegas, Nevada, [Anonymous], 2002, Nature, V415, P726 Haghighi KY, 2005, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V94, P351 ======================================================================= ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326214700022 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Social change, institutional pressures and knowledge creation: A *bibliometric* analysis Authors: Cadez, S Author Full Names: Cadez, Simon Source: EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS, 40 (17):6885-6893; 10.1016/j.eswa.2013.06.036 DEC 1 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Social change, Institutional pressures, Knowledge creation, Eastern Europe, Business, Economics KeyWords Plus: RESEARCH ASSESSMENT EXERCISES; RESEARCH-AND-DEVELOPMENT; ACCOUNTING RESEARCH; RESEARCH PRODUCTIVITY; RELATIVE EFFICIENCY; CITATION ANALYSIS; PUBLIC RESEARCH; JOURNALS; UNIVERSITIES; PERCEPTIONS Abstract: Contemporary academic environment can be characterized by an overwhelming trend toward enhancing research productivity and knowledge creation. The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of radical social change and subsequent institutional pressures on internationally relevant knowledge creation. The setting examined is business and economics science in Eastern Europe. Using a case study of Slovenian business schools and deploying a bibliometric analysis we find that research productivity is increasing significantly. We note however dilemmas pertaining to the content and quality of knowledge created. Further, we find that international research cooperation has positive quality effects. From a theoretical perspective, we argue that radical social change was not mirrored by such change in normative institutions, whereas recent changes in regulatory institutions seem to have a substantial positive effect on research performance. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Addresses: Univ Ljubljana, Fac Econ, Ljubljana 1000, Slovenia. E-mail Addresses: simon.cadez at ef.uni-lj.si Cited Reference Count: 56 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD, THE BOULEVARD, LANGFORD LANE, KIDLINGTON, OXFORD OX5 1GB, ENGLAND ISSN: 0957-4174 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Artificial Intelligence; Engineering, Electrical & Electronic; Operations Research & Management Science Research Areas: Computer Science; Engineering; Operations Research & Management Science IDS Number: 242CJ Unique ID: WOS:000326214700022 Cited References: Juznic Primoz, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V85, P429 Harvey C., 2010, Academic journal quality guide, Conroy ME, 1995, JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC LITERATURE, V33, P1966 Bruton B. D., 2009, Journal of International Business Studies, V40, P762 Reidpath Daniel D., 2010, HIGHER EDUCATION, V59, P785 Garrod N., 1994, European Accounting Review, V4, P749 Cadez S., 2011, EAA Newsletter, V36, P17 [Anonymous], 2011, Knowledge, networks and nations, Colyvas J, 2002, MANAGEMENT SCIENCEConference on University Entrepreneurship and Technology Transfer, DEC, 2000, ATLANTA, GEORGIA, V48, P61 Meyer J. W., 1991, The new institutionalism in organizational analysis, P41 Raffournier Bernard, 2010, EUROPEAN ACCOUNTING REVIEW, V19, P161 Obadic Alka, 2011, AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC, V13, P362 Salas Velasco Manuel, 2012, JOURNAL OF BUSINESS ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT, V13, P499 Cohen WM, 2002, MANAGEMENT SCIENCEConference on University Entrepreneurship and Technology Transfer, DEC, 2000, ATLANTA, GEORGIA, V48, P1 Abramo Giovanni, 2008, SCIENTOMETRICS, V76, P225 DIMAGGIO PJ, 1983, AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW, V48, P147 Trieschmann JS, 2000, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V43, P1130 Wagner CS, 2005, RESEARCH POLICY, V34, P1608 Long Rebecca, 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS, V78, P231 DiMaggio P. J., 1991, The new institutionalism in organizational analysis, P1 Hopwood A. G., 2011, European Accounting Review, V17, P87 Parker Lee D., 2012, ACCOUNTING AND FINANCE, V52, P1153 Trkman Peter, 2012, JOURNAL OF STRATEGIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS, V21, P1 Williams Paul F., 2006, ACCOUNTING ORGANIZATIONS AND SOCIETY, V31, P783 Bonaccorsi A, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS8th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators, SEP 23-25, 2004, Leiden, NETHERLANDS, V66, P389 Abramo Giovanni, 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P2095 Moxham H., 1992, Science and Technology, Policy, V5, P7 Brown LD, 1996, ACCOUNTING ORGANIZATIONS AND SOCIETY, V21, P723 Geuna A, 2003, MINERVA, V41, P277 Aristovnik Aleksander, 2012, JOURNAL OF BUSINESS ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT, V13, P832 Marrano Mauro Giorgio, 2009, REVIEW OF INCOME AND WEALTH, V55, P686 Scott W. R., 2007, Institutions and organizations: Ideas and interests, Deng Guang-Feng, 2012, EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS, V39, P6229 OLIVER C, 1991, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT REVIEW, V16, P145 North D. C., 1990, Institutions, institutional change, and economic performance, Chan Kam C., 2007, ACCOUNTING AND FINANCE, V47, P187 Capkun V., 2010, EAA Newsletter, V34, P10 Silver Edward A., 2009, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PRODUCTION ECONOMICS14th International Symposium on Inventories, AUG, 2006, Budapest, HUNGARY, V118, P352 Scott W.R., 1995, Institutions and Organizations, Van Raan AFJ, 2005, SCIENTOMETRICSConference on Bibliometric Analysis in Science and Research, NOV 05-07, 2003, Julich, GERMANY, V62, P133 Munoz-Leiva Francisco, 2012, EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS, V39, P11055 Norris Michael, 2007, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V1, P161 Modell S., 2003, Management Accounting Research, V14, P333 HORROBIN DF, 1990, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION1ST INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON PEER REVIEW IN BIOMEDICAL PUBLICATION, MAY 10-12, 1989, CHICAGO, IL, V263, P1438 Lowe A, 2005, ACCOUNTING ORGANIZATIONS AND SOCIETY, V30, P81 Chan K. C., 2007, Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, V28, P417 Czarniawska Barbara, 2011, EUROPEAN ACCOUNTING REVIEW, V20, P53 Greenwood R., 2008, P1 Gendron Yves, 2008, EUROPEAN ACCOUNTING REVIEW, V17, P97 Biehl M, 2006, OMEGA-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, V34, P359 March JG, 1989, Rediscovering Institutions: The Organizational Basis of Politics, Moizer Peter, 2009, ACCOUNTING ORGANIZATIONS AND SOCIETY, V34, P285 Heywood I., 1992, Environment and Planning, V23, P1695 SUCHMAN MC, 1995, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT REVIEW, V20, P571 Leicht K. T., 2008, The sage handbook of organizational institutionalism, P431 Bonner Sarah E., 2006, ACCOUNTING ORGANIZATIONS AND SOCIETY, V31, P663 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326734900004 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: *Journal* Impact as a Diffusion Process: A Conceptualization and the Case of the *Journal* of Management Studies Authors: Simsek, Z; Heavey, C; Jansen, JJP Author Full Names: Simsek, Zeki; Heavey, Ciaran; Jansen, Justin J. P. Source: JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES, 50 (8):1374-1407; 10.1111/joms.12007 DEC 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: citations, diffusion, journal impact, multidimensional conceptualization KeyWords Plus: CITATION-REPORTS; RESEARCH QUALITY; SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS; ECONOMIC-GEOGRAPHY; SCHOLARLY JOURNALS; SOCIAL-SCIENCES; INDEX; INDICATORS; RANKING; DETERMINANTS Abstract: While the question of what makes a journal impactful continues to draw scholarly attention and debate, the lack of conceptual foundation as to what journal impact represents, and how it manifests itself, has impeded efforts to establish a richer understanding. Drawing from the theory of innovation diffusion, we propose journal impact as a multidimensional concept manifested most prominently in the magnitude, prestige, breadth, dispersion, and duration dynamics of citations accruing to a journal. In doing so, we complement extant representations of journal impact as a unidimensional concept with insights into the pattern and profile of a journal impact across space and time. We illustrate the multidimensionality of journal impact as a diffusion process in a longitudinal analysis of citation patterns at the Journal of Management Studies over a 40-year period. Addresses: Univ Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269 USA. Univ Coll Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. Erasmus Univ, NL-3000 DR Rotterdam, Netherlands. E-mail Addresses: zeki.simsek at Business.uconn.edu Cited Reference Count: 78 Times Cited: 2 Publisher: WILEY-BLACKWELL, 111 RIVER ST, HOBOKEN 07030-5774, NJ USA ISSN: 0022-2380 Web of Science Categories: Business; Management Research Areas: Business & Economics IDS Number: 248VZ Unique ID: WOS:000326734900004 Cited References: Moed HF, 2005, CURRENT SCIENCE, V89, P1990 Kennedy Mark Thomas, 2009, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V52, P897 Jacobs Jerry A., 2009, ANNUAL REVIEW OF SOCIOLOGY, V35, P43 PINSKI G, 1976, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V12, P297 Chen Carl R., 2007, JOURNAL OF CORPORATE FINANCE, V13, P1008 Balaban Alexandru T., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P241 GOMEZMEJIA LR, 1992, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V35, P921 GARFIELD E, 1963, AMERICAN DOCUMENTATION, V14, P195 Kieser Alfred, 2011, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES, V48, P891 Macdonald Stuart, 2007, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES, V44, P640 Van Fleet DD, 2000, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, V26, P839 Ryan Bryce, 1943, RURAL SOCIOLOGY, V8, P15 Magri M, 1996, SCIENTOMETRICS, V35, P93 GARFIELD E, 1975, JOURNAL OF THE INDIAN INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE, V57, P61 Sanni S. A., 2011, MALAYSIAN JOURNAL OF LIBRARY & INFORMATION SCIENCE, V16, P127 Rousseau M., 2012, Journal of Management Studies, V49, P600 Rogers E., 1995, Diffusion of innovations, GARFIELD E, 1972, SCIENCE, V178, P471 Zitt Michel, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P485 Glanzel W, 2002, SCIENTOMETRICS, V53, P169 Vanclay Jerome K., 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS, V78, P3 Rynes Sara L., 2011, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT LEARNING & EDUCATION, V10, P561 Habibzadeh Farrokh, 2008, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V2, P164 Rowlands I, 2002, ASLIB PROCEEDINGS, V54, P77 Zahra Shaker A., 2009, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES, V46, P1059 Bensman Stephen J., 2008, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V59, P1366 Rogers Everett, 2003, Diffusion of Innovations., Johnson Russell E., 2011, JOURNAL OF BUSINESS AND PSYCHOLOGY, V26, P241 Fok Dennis, 2007, JOURNAL OF ECONOMETRICS, V139, P376 Leonidou Leonidas C., 2010, INTERNATIONAL MARKETING REVIEW, V27, P491 Burt RS, 1999, ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF POLITICAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE, V566, P37 BLAUT JM, 1987, ANNALS OF THE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN GEOGRAPHERS, V77, P30 Hecht F, 1998, CANCER GENETICS AND CYTOGENETICS, V104, P77 Shipilov Andrew V., 2010, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V53, P846 Baum Joel A. C., 2011, ORGANIZATION, V18, P449 Herrmann Roland, 2011, JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, V62, P710 Seglen PO, 1998, ACTA ORTHOPAEDICA SCANDINAVICA, V69, P224 Frandsen TF, 2006, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V62, P58 Archambault Eric, 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS, V79, P635 Bollen Johan, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P669 Moed Henk F., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P367 Battilana Julie, 2010, ORGANIZATION STUDIES, V31, P695 Linderman Kevin, 2010, JOURNAL OF OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT, V28, P357 JOHNSON JL, 1994, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V37, P1392 Franceschet Massimo, 2010, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V46, P555 Adler R., 2008, A report of the Joint Committee on Quantitative Assessment of Research, Starbuck WH, 2005, ORGANIZATION SCIENCE, V16, P180 Frandsen TF, 2004, ASLIB PROCEEDINGS, V56, P5 McWilliams A, 2005, ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH METHODS, V8, P185 Cheek J, 2006, QUALITATIVE HEALTH RESEARCH, V16, P423 Garfield E, 1999, CANADIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL, V161, P979 Singh Gangaram, 2007, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT INQUIRY, V16, P319 Wrigley Neil, 2010, JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY, V10, P1 Certo S. Trevis, 2010, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT LEARNING & EDUCATION, V9, P591 Lockett A, 2005, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT INQUIRY, V14, P139 MERTON RK, 1988, ISIS, V79, P606 Podsakoff PM, 2005, STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V26, P473 Seglen PO, 1997, ALLERGY, V52, P1050 Vanclay Jerome K., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P211 Katz Jerome A., 2008, JOURNAL OF SMALL BUSINESS MANAGEMENT, V46, P550 Hitt Michael A., 2012, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT INQUIRY, V21, P236 Moed HF, 1999, SCIENTOMETRICS7th Conference of the International-Society-for-Scientometrics-and-Informetrics, JUL 05-08, 1999, COLIMA, MEXICO, V46, P575 Pieters R, 2002, JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC LITERATURE, V40, P483 Calver Michael C., 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS, V81, P611 West Jevin D., 2010, COLLEGE & RESEARCH LIBRARIES, V71, P236 Pendlebury David A., 2009, ARCHIVUM IMMUNOLOGIAE ET THERAPIAE EXPERIMENTALIS, V57, P1 Zhou Xiaoping, 2009, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON RELIABILITY, V58, P317 Foster Jamie, 2007, TRANSACTIONS OF THE INSTITUTE OF BRITISH GEOGRAPHERS3rd Summer Institute in Economic Geography, JUN 24-30, 2006, Madison, WI, V32, P295 NISONGER TE, 1994, LIBRARY ACQUISITIONS-PRACTICE AND THEORY, V18, P447 Stewart A., International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, Strang D, 1998, ANNUAL REVIEW OF SOCIOLOGY, V24, P265 Paul Ray J., 2008, EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS, V17, P324 Podsakoff Philip M., 2008, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, V34, P641 Floyd Steven W., 2009, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES, V46, P1057 SEGLEN PO, 1992, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V43, P628 Cronin B., 1984, The Citation Process, Harzing A. W., 2010, The Publish Or Perish Book: Your Guide to Effective and Responsible Citation Analysis, Chan Kam C., 2009, ACCOUNTING ORGANIZATIONS AND SOCIETY, V34, P875 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326745500029 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: *Bibliometric* Study of the Quality of Celiac Disease Research Publications Authors: Master, S; Lebwohl, B; Ludvigsson, JF; Green, PH Author Full Names: Master, Samuel; Lebwohl, Benjamin; Ludvigsson, Jonas F.; Green, Peter H. Source: JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC GASTROENTEROLOGY AND NUTRITION, 57 (4):527-528; 10.1097/MPG.0b013e3182a321cc OCT 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: celiac disease, pediatrics, research quality KeyWords Plus: GASTROENTEROLOGY JOURNALS; PREVALENCE; IMPACT Abstract: Celiac disease (CD) is common and occurs in both children and adults. A recent bibliometric study revealed that the journal with the most CD articles was the Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition followed by the American Journal of Gastroenterology, a journal predominantly concerned with adult issues. To assess the quality and complexity of CD, research appearing in these journals used strict published criteria to assess the quality of the research in the 30 most recent research articles in each journal. The authors found that the research reported in these articles was of similar high quality and complexity. Addresses: [Master, Samuel; Lebwohl, Benjamin; Green, Peter H.] Columbia Univ Coll Phys & Surg, Celiac Dis Ctr, Dept Med, New York, NY 10032 USA. [Ludvigsson, Jonas F.] Karolinska Univ Hosp, Clin Epidemiol Unit, Dept Med, Stockholm, Sweden. [Ludvigsson, Jonas F.] Karolinska Inst, Stockholm, Sweden. E-mail Addresses: pg11 at columbia.edu Cited Reference Count: 11 Times Cited: 1 Publisher: LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS, 530 WALNUT ST, PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106-3621 USA ISSN: 0277-2116 Web of Science Categories: Gastroenterology & Hepatology; Nutrition & Dietetics; Pediatrics Research Areas: Gastroenterology & Hepatology; Nutrition & Dietetics; Pediatrics IDS Number: 248ZM Unique ID: WOS:000326745500029 Cited References: Maki M, 2003, NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, V348, P2517 Green Peter H. R., 2007, NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, V357, P1731 DICKE W K, 1953, Acta paediatrica, V42, P34 Rubio-Tapia Alberto, 2012, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, V107, P1538 Scott Frank I., 2012, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, V107, P496 Chou Li-Fang, 2009, WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, V15, P2933 Gee S., 1888, St Bartholomews Hosp Rep, V24, P17 Hart Phil A., 2007, GUT, V56, P895 Lewison G, 2001, GUT, V49, P295 Vilppula Anitta, 2009, BMC GASTROENTEROLOGY, V9, Narotsky David, 2012, EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY, V24, P1071 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326602700001 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Impact of GDP, spending on R&D, number of universities and scientific *journals* on research publications in pharmacological sciences in Middle East Authors: Meo, SA; Usmani, AM; Vohra, MS; Bukhari, IA Author Full Names: Meo, S. A.; Usmani, A. M.; Vohra, M. S.; Bukhari, I. A. Source: EUROPEAN REVIEW FOR MEDICAL AND PHARMACOLOGICAL SCIENCES, 17 (20):2697-2705; OCT 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Pharmacological science, Pharmaceutics, Research apers, Middle east, Evaluation of science KeyWords Plus: WORLD Abstract: OBJECTIVES: Research in pharmacological science is vital to support the health needs of human beings. Measuring the research output provides information that forms the basis of strategic decisions. This study aimed to investigate the impact of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), spending on Research and Development (R& D), number of universities and scientific journals on research documents (papers), citable documents, citations per document and H-index in pharmacological science among Middle East countries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All the 16 Middle East countries were included in the study. The information regarding GDP, spending on R& D, total number of universities and indexed scientific journals were collected. We recorded the total number of research documents, citable documents, citations per document and H-index in pharmacological science during the period 1996-2011. The main sources for information were World Bank, Web of Science, Journal Citation Reports (Thomson Reuters) and SCI-mago/Scopus. RESULTS: The mean per capita GDP of all the Middle East countries is 18125.49 +/- 386.28 US$, spending on R& D 0.63 +/- 0.28% of GDP in US$, number of universities 36.56 +/- 11.33 and mean ISI indexed journal are 8.25 +/- 3.93. The number of research documents published in pharmacological science among the Middle East countries during the period 1996-2011 is 1344.44 +/- 499.34; citable documents 1286.37 +/- 476.34; citations per document 7.62 +/- 0.84; and H-index is 30.68 +/- 6.32. There was a positive correlation between spending on R& D and citations per documents (r = 0.56, p = 0.02), H-Index (r = 0.56, p = 0.02); number of universities and research documents (r = 0.72, p = 0.002), citable documents (r = 0.72, p = 0.001); ISI indexed journals and research documents (r = 0.88, p = 0.0001), citable documents (r = 0.88, p = 0.0001), H-Index (r = 0.67, p = 0.004). However, there was no correlation between the GDP per capita and research outcome in pharmacological science. CONCLUSIONS: There is a positive association between spending on R& D, number of universities and indexed scientific journals on research outcome in pharmacological science in Middle East. Addresses: [Meo, S. A.; Bukhari, I. A.] King Saud Univ, Coll Med, Div Pharmacol, Dept Physiol, Riyadh 11461, Saudi Arabia. [Usmani, A. M.] King Saud Univ, Univ Diabet Ctr, Coll Med, Div Pharmacol, Riyadh 11461, Saudi Arabia. [Vohra, M. S.] King Saud Univ, Coll Med, Div Pharmacol, Dept Anat, Riyadh 11461, Saudi Arabia. E-mail Addresses: smeo at ksu.edu.sa Funding Acknowledgement: College of Medicine Research Centre, Deanship of Scientific Research, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia Funding Text: The authors are thankful to the College of Medicine Research Centre, Deanship of Scientific Research, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia for supporting the work. Cited Reference Count: 14 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: VERDUCI PUBLISHER, VIA GREGORIO VII, ROME, 186-00165, ITALY ISSN: 1128-3602 Web of Science Categories: Pharmacology & Pharmacy Research Areas: Pharmacology & Pharmacy IDS Number: 247FU Unique ID: WOS:000326602700001 Cited References: Meo Sultan Ayoub, 2007, PAKISTAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, V23, P946 Amara Nabil, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V93, P553 Masood E, 2002, NATURE, V416, P120 Halpenny Darragh, 2010, ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, V17, P768 Anwar MA, 1997, SCIENTOMETRICS, V40, P23 Durieux Valerie, 2010, RADIOLOGY, V255, P342 Lee Ling-Chu, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V93, P813 Van Noorden Richard, 2012, NATURE, V490, P326 Macilwain Colin, 2010, NATURE, V465, P682 *SCI MAG SJR, SCI MAGO J COUNTRY R, Al-Khader AA, 2004, SAUDI MEDICAL JOURNAL, V25, P1323 MARILYN NM, 2007, AAPS J, V9, PE219 Baskurt Oguz K., 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V86, P645 *PERV AM HOODBH, 2007, PHYS TODAY, V60, P49 ======================================================================= ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326772200030 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: The networks from medical knowledge and clinical practice have small-world, scale-free, and hierarchical features Authors: Tachimori, Y; Iwanaga, H; Tahara, T Author Full Names: Tachimori, Yutaka; Iwanaga, Hiroaki; Tahara, Takashi Source: PHYSICA A-STATISTICAL MECHANICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS, 392 (23):6084-6089; 10.1016/j.physa.2013.07.047 DEC 1 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Small-world, Scale-free Complex network, Natural language, Medical knowledge KeyWords Plus: POWER-LAW DISTRIBUTIONS; HUMAN LANGUAGE; METABOLIC NETWORKS; ZIPFS LAW; ORGANIZATION; EVOLUTION Abstract: Here, we constructed and analyzed a network (henceforth, "medical knowledge network") derived from a commonly used medical text. We show that this medical knowledge network has small-world, scale-free, and hierarchical features. We then constructed a network from data from a hospital information system that reflected actual clinical practice and found that this network also had small-world, scale-free, and hierarchical features. Moreover, we found that both the diagnosis frequency distribution of the hospital network and the diagnosis degree distribution of the medical knowledge network obeyed a similar power law. These findings suggest that the structure of clinical practice may emerge from the mutual influence of medical knowledge and clinical practice, and that the analysis of a medical knowledge network may facilitate the investigation of the characteristics of medical practice. (C) 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Addresses: [Tachimori, Yutaka] Nihon Fukushi Univ, Dept Social Welf, Chita, Aichi 4703295, Japan. [Iwanaga, Hiroaki; Tahara, Takashi] Inst Basic Med & Welf Res, Chuou Ku, Fukuoka 8100051, Japan. E-mail Addresses: tatimori at n-fukushi.ac.jp Cited Reference Count: 27 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, PO BOX 211, 1000 AE AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0378-4371 Web of Science Categories: Physics, Multidisciplinary Research Areas: Physics IDS Number: 249IZ Unique ID: WOS:000326772200030 Cited References: Amaral LAN, 2000, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V97, P11149 Dorogovtsev SN, 2002, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V65, Markosova Mdria, 2008, PHYSICA A-STATISTICAL MECHANICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS, V387, P661 Dorogovtsev SN, 2000, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V62, P1842 Motter AE, 2002, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V65, Newman MEJ, 2004, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V69, Cancho RFI, 2003, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V100, P788 Albert R, 2000, NATURE, V406, P378 Mossa S, 2002, PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS, V88, Barabasi AL, 2001, PHYSICA A-STATISTICAL MECHANICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS, V299, P559 Ravasz E, 2002, SCIENCE, V297, P1551 Maschberger Thomas, 2009, MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY, V395, P931 Cancho RFI, 2001, PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY B-BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES, V268, P2261 Newman MEJ, 2005, CONTEMPORARY PHYSICS, V46, P323 Clauset Aaron, 2009, SIAM REVIEW, V51, P661 Tachimori Y, 2002, FRACTALS-COMPLEX GEOMETRY PATTERNS AND SCALING IN NATURE AND SOCIETY, V10, P341 Sole R, 2005, NATURE, V434, P289 Cancho RFI, 2004, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V69, Newman M. E. J., 2010, Networks: An Introduction, Girvan M, 2002, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V99, P7821 Fink Waltraud, 2009, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FORECASTING, V25, P784 Watts DJ, 1998, NATURE, V393, P440 [Anonymous], 1992, WHO, ICD-10, Ravasz E, 2003, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V67, Jeong H, 2000, NATURE, V407, P651 Barabasi AL, 1999, SCIENCE, V286, P509 Sole Ricard V., 2010, COMPLEXITY, V15, P20 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326772200013 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Non-equilibrium stochastic model for stock exchange market Authors: Kim, Y; Kwon, I; Yook, SH Author Full Names: Kim, Yup; Kwon, Ikhyun; Yook, Soon-Hyung Source: PHYSICA A-STATISTICAL MECHANICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS, 392 (23):5907-5913; 10.1016/j.physa.2013.07.032 DEC 1 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Econophysics, Stochastic model for financial markets, Financial network KeyWords Plus: FINANCIAL-MARKETS; HERD BEHAVIOR; PRICE FLUCTUATIONS; CROSS-CORRELATIONS; SPIN MODEL; INFORMATION; VOLATILITY Abstract: We study the effect of the topology of industrial relationship (IR) between the companies in a stock exchange market on the universal features in the market. For this we propose a stochastic model for stock exchange markets based on the behavior of technical traders. From the numerical simulations we measure the return distribution, P(R), and the autocorrelation function of the volatility, C(T), and find that the observed universal features in real financial markets are originated from the heterogeneity of IR network topology. Moreover, the heterogeneous IR topology can also explain *Zipf-Pareto*'s law for the distribution of market value of equity in the real stock exchange markets. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Addresses: [Kim, Yup] Kyung Hee Univ, Dept Phys, Seoul 130701, South Korea. Kyung Hee Univ, Res Inst Basic Sci, Seoul 130701, South Korea. E-mail Addresses: ykim at khu.ac.kr; syook at khu.ac.kr Funding Acknowledgement: National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF); Korean Government (MEST) [2011-0015257]; Ministry of Education, Science and Technology [2012R1A1A2007430, NRF-2011-330-B00053] Funding Text: This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) Grant funded by the Korean Government (MEST) (Grant No. 2011-0015257) and by the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (Nos. 2012R1A1A2007430 and NRF-2011-330-B00053). Cited Reference Count: 32 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, PO BOX 211, 1000 AE AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0378-4371 Web of Science Categories: Physics, Multidisciplinary Research Areas: Physics IDS Number: 249IZ Unique ID: WOS:000326772200013 Cited References: Podobnik B., 2010, EPL, V90, Podobnik Boris, 2009, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V106, P22079 Jensen H.J., 1998, Self-Organized Criticality: Emergent Complex Behavior in Physical and Biological Systems, Gualdi S., 2011, EUROPEAN PHYSICAL JOURNAL B, V79, P91 Erdos P., 1960, Publ. Math. Inst. Hung. Acad. Sci, V5, P17 Muzy JF, 2000, EUROPEAN PHYSICAL JOURNAL B, V17, P537 Guardiola X, 2002, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V66, Chowdhury D, 1999, EUROPEAN PHYSICAL JOURNAL B, V8, P477 Maslov S, 2001, PHYSICA ANATO Advanced Research Workshop on Application of Physics in Economic Modelling, FEB 08-10, 2001, PRAGUE, CZECH REPUBLIC, V299, P234 Kim Yup, 2010, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V82, Kim Yup, 2011, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V83, Feng Ling, 2012, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V109, P8388 Gopikrishnan P, 1999, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V60, P5305 Mantegna R., 2000, An Introduction to Econophysics: Correlations and Complexity in Finance, Kauffman S.A., 1993, The Origin of Order: Self-Organization and Selection in Evolution, Bouchaud J.-P., 2003, Theory of Financial Risk and Derivative Pricing: From Statistical Physics to Risk Management, Bornholdt S, 2001, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MODERN PHYSICS C, V12, P667 Goh KI, 2001, PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS, V87, Newman MEJ, 2005, CONTEMPORARY PHYSICS, V46, P323 Liu YH, 1999, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V60, P1390 SNEPPEN K, 1992, PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS, V69, P3539 Podobnik Boris, 2011, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V108, P17883 Kim Yup, 2011, PHYSICA A-STATISTICAL MECHANICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS, V390, P3989 Granger CWJ, 1996, JOURNAL OF ECONOMETRICS, V73, P61 Kim Yup, 2008, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V78, Yook Soon-Hyung, 2008, PHYSICA A-STATISTICAL MECHANICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS, V387, P6605 Roehner BM, 2000, EUROPEAN PHYSICAL JOURNAL B, V16, P729 Eguiluz VM, 2000, PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS, V85, P5659 Sutcliffe C.M.S., 2006, Stock Index Futures, MANTEGNA RN, 1995, NATURE, V376, P46 Cont R, 2000, MACROECONOMIC DYNAMICS, V4, P170 Zhou W. -X., 2007, EUROPEAN PHYSICAL JOURNAL B, V55, P175 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326772200017 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Are your data really Pareto distributed? Authors: Cirillo, P Author Full Names: Cirillo, Pasquale Source: PHYSICA A-STATISTICAL MECHANICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS, 392 (23):5947-5962; 10.1016/j.physa.2013.07.061 DEC 1 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Paretianity, Power laws, Zipf plot, Meplot, Graphical tools KeyWords Plus: CURVES Abstract: Pareto distributions, and power laws in general, have demonstrated to be very useful models to describe very different phenomena, from physics to finance. In recent years, the econophysical literature has proposed a large amount of papers and models justifying the presence of power laws in economic data. Most of the times, this Paretianity is inferred from the observation of some plots, such as the *Zipf* plot and the mean excess plot. If the *Zipf* plot looks almost linear, then everything is ok and the parameters of the Pareto distribution are estimated. Often with OLS. Unfortunately, as we show in this paper, these heuristic graphical tools are not reliable. To be more exact, we show that only a combination of plots can give some degree of confidence about the real presence of Paretianity in the data. We start by reviewing some of the most important plots, discussing their points of strength and weakness, and then we propose some additional tools that can be used to refine the analysis. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Addresses: Delft Univ Technol, Delft Inst Appl Math, NL-2628 CD Delft, Netherlands. E-mail Addresses: P.Cirillo at tudelft.nl Cited Reference Count: 22 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, PO BOX 211, 1000 AE AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0378-4371 Web of Science Categories: Physics, Multidisciplinary Research Areas: Physics IDS Number: 249IZ Unique ID: WOS:000326772200017 Cited References: Clauset Aaron, 2009, SIAM REVIEW, V51, P661 Pareto V., 1997, Rivista di Politica Economica, V87, P647 Gabaix Xavier, 2009, ANNUAL REVIEW OF ECONOMICS, V1, P255 Kleiber C., 2003, Statistical Size Distribution in Economics and Actuarial Sciences, Cirillo P., 2009, Physica A, V338, P1546 Gabaix Xavier, 2011, JOURNAL OF BUSINESS & ECONOMIC STATISTICS, V29, P24 Johnson N.I., 1970, Continuous Univariate Distributions, V1-2, Zenga MM, 2007, Statistica & Applicazioni, VV, P3 Ghosh Souvik, 2010, STOCHASTIC PROCESSES AND THEIR APPLICATIONS, V120, P1492 Craig CC, 1936, ANNALS OF MATHEMATICAL STATISTICS, V7, P16 van der Wijk J., 1939, Inkomens-en Vermogensverdeling, V26, Falk M., 2011, Laws of Small Numbers:,Extreme and Rare Events, Zipf G. K., 1949, Human Behavior and the Principle of the Least Effort: An Introduction to Human Ecology, Maria Sarabia Jose, 2008, MODELING INCOME DISTRIBUTIONS AND LORENZ CURVES, V5, P167 Podobnik Boris, 2009, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V106, P22079 Husler J., 2006, Extremes, V9, P69 Arshad M., 2003, Pakistan Journal of Applied Sciences, V3, Vargo Erik, 2010, JOURNAL OF QUALITY TECHNOLOGY, V42, P276 Caldarelli G., 2007, Scale-Free Networks, Embrechts P., 1997, Modelling Extremal Events, 2008, MODELING INCOME DISTRIBUTIONS AND LORENZ CURVES, V5, P1 Zenga M., 1984, Giornale degli Economisti e Annali di Economia, V48, P301 ======================================================================= * *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326428600005 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Understanding Chinese online users and their visits to websites: Application of *Zipf*'s law Authors: Jiang, QQ; Tan, CH; Phang, CW; Sutanto, J; Wei, KK Author Full Names: Jiang, Qiqi; Tan, Chuan-Hoo; Phang, Chee Wei; Sutanto, Juliana; Wei, Kwok-Kee Source: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFORMATION MANAGEMENT, 33 (5):752-763; 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2013.05.006 OCT 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Zipf's law, Internet usage pattern, User demographics, Chinese Internet market KeyWords Plus: GENDER-DIFFERENCES; INTERNET USE; WEB; BEHAVIOR; CLICKSTREAM; USAGE; DISTRIBUTIONS; POPULARITY; ATTRIBUTES; ENGAGEMENT Abstract: Competition for consumers to visit company websites has intensified in recent years. An important indicator of website popularity (and consequent survival) is the extent to which the website can draw consumer visits vis-A-vis other websites. A majority of the current understanding on consumer visits is limited to a single website, and leaves little knowledge on the performance of one website compared with others. In tracking the Internet usage behavior of 200 individuals in Mainland China for 30 consecutive days, we applied *Zipf*'s law to identify the divergence points separating popular websites from non-popular ones. Two measurements were used, namely, visit traffic (number) and visit engagement (time spent). We observed that 94.87% of the entire visit traffic is devoted to 15.08% of all visited websites, whereas 84.63% of engagements are on the top 6.16% visited websites. These findings suggest that few websites accounted for the bulk of online traffic and time. Further, we segmented the dataset based on two key proxy variables of user demographics, which are gender and occupation. The findings on visit traffic remained salient after considering user segments, but the findings on website engagement varied across different user segments. Our further analysis, which categorized the visited websites by their main service, revealed the type of Internet users attracted to popular websites. Crown Copyright (C) 2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Addresses: [Jiang, Qiqi; Wei, Kwok-Kee] City Univ Hong Kong, Dept Informat Syst, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong, Peoples R China. [Tan, Chuan-Hoo] City Univ Hong Kong, Dept Informat Syst, Kowloon, Hong Kong, Peoples R China. [Phang, Chee Wei] Fudan Univ, Shanghai 200433, Peoples R China. [Sutanto, Juliana] ETH, CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland. E-mail Addresses: ch.tan at cityu.edu.hk Cited Reference Count: 59 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: ELSEVIER SCI LTD, THE BOULEVARD, LANGFORD LANE, KIDLINGTON, OXFORD OX5 1GB, OXON, ENGLAND ISSN: 0268-4012 Web of Science Categories: Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: 244ZL Unique ID: WOS:000326428600005 Cited References: Huang MH, 2003, COMPUTERS IN HUMAN BEHAVIOR, V19, P425 Bonniface Leesa, 2007, HEALTH INFORMATION AND LIBRARIES JOURNAL, V24, P67 Montgomery AL, 2001, COMPUTER, V34, P94 Yamakami T., 2006, PDCAT, P240 Oestreicher-Singer G., 2010, Working Papers, Palmer A., 2009, Direct Marketing: an International Journal, V3, Al-Mudimigh Abdullah S., 2011, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFORMATION MANAGEMENT, V31, P38 Sheehan KB, 1999, JOURNAL OF INTERACTIVE MARKETING, V13, P24 Breslau L, 1999, IEEE INFOCOM '99 - THE CONFERENCE ON COMPUTER COMMUNICATIONS, VOLS 1-3, PROCEEDINGS18th Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (INFOCOM 99), MAR 21-25, 1999, NEW YORK, NY, P126 Teo TSH, 1998, INTERNET RESEARCH, V8, P156 Lee J, 2001, DATA MINING AND KNOWLEDGE DISCOVERY, V5, P59 Hanna Richard, 2011, BUSINESS HORIZONS, V54, P265 Yiu Chi Shing, 2007, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFORMATION MANAGEMENT, V27, P336 Gabaix X, 1999, AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW111th Annual Meeting of the American-Economic-Association, JAN 03-05, 1999, NEW YORK, NEW YORK, V89, P129 Benbya H, 2004, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFORMATION MANAGEMENT, V24, P201 Cho YH, 2004, EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS, V26, P233 Elliot S, 2000, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFORMATION MANAGEMENT, V20, P323 Nielsen J., 1997, Zipf Curve and Website Popularity, HILL BM, 1974, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION, V69, P1017 Saxena M., 2008, Methodology, P39 Weiser EB, 2000, CYBERPSYCHOLOGY & BEHAVIOR, V3, P167 CNNIC, 2010, China Internet development statistics, O'Brien H. L., 2012, Information Processing & Management, Gabaix X, 1999, QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, V114, P739 Shah D, 2002, JOURNALISM & MASS COMMUNICATION QUARTERLY, V79, P964 COOK WD, 1985, MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, V31, P26 Zipf G. K., 1949, Human Behavior and the Principle of the Least Effort: An Introduction to Human Ecology, Chiu P. H., 2012, PLoS One, V7, P1 Ford Eric W., 2012, JOURNAL OF HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT, V57, P47 Coleman Renita, 2008, NEW MEDIA & SOCIETY, V10, P179 Schroeder M.R., 2009, Ye X., 2012, The Annals of Regional Science, P1 Li WT, 2002, JOURNAL OF THEORETICAL BIOLOGY, V219, P539 Odell PM, 2000, CYBERPSYCHOLOGY & BEHAVIOR, V3, P855 Zipf G. K., 1935, The Psycho-Biology of Language, Lee S.-M., 2011, The Journal of High Technology Management Research, V22, P67 Park YH, 2004, MARKETING SCIENCE, V23, P280 Barabasi AL, 1999, SCIENCE, V286, P509 Dias C, 2001, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFORMATION MANAGEMENT, V21, P269 Chung J, 2004, INFORMATION & MANAGEMENT, V41, P869 Krashakov SA, 2006, COMPUTER NETWORKS, V50, P1769 Kemeny J., 1978, Mathematical models in the social sciences, Detlor B, 2000, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFORMATION MANAGEMENT, V20, P91 Lin C. J., 2000, International Journal of Information Management, V20, P197 Murray D, 2000, WEB USAGE ANALYSIS AND USER PROFILINGInternational Workshop on Web Usage Analysis and User Profiling, AUG 15, 1999, San Diego, CA, V1836, P7 Chu KK, 2004, 2004 IEEE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SYSTEMS, MAN & CYBERNETICS, VOLS 1-7IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, OCT 10-13, 2004, The Hague, NETHERLANDS, P4095 di Giovanni Julian, 2013, JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS, V89, P283 Schaller D. T., 2004, Museums & the Web, Hansen T, 2004, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFORMATION MANAGEMENT, V24, P539 Teo TSH, 1999, OMEGA-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, V27, P25 Pareto V., 1971, Manual of political economy, Buchner A. G., 1998, ACM SIGMOD Record, V27, P54 Senecal S, 2005, JOURNAL OF BUSINESS RESEARCH6th SMA Retailing Research Symposium, NOV 04-05, 2003, New Orleans, LA, V58, P1599 Edwards Roderick, 2011, LANGUAGE LEARNING, V61, P1 NBS, 2009, Moe WW, 2003, JOURNAL OF CONSUMER PSYCHOLOGY, V13, P29 Granic Andrina, 2011, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFORMATION MANAGEMENT, V31, P339 Albert R, 1999, NATURE, V401, P130 Wolin LD, 2003, INTERNET RESEARCH-ELECTRONIC NETWORKING APPLICATIONS AND POLICY, V13, P375 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326745500007 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Dedicated Bibliometrics: A More Appropriate Impact Factor for Specialty *Journals*? Authors: Thaler, MM; Heyman, MB Author Full Names: Thaler, M. Michael; Heyman, Melvin B. Source: JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC GASTROENTEROLOGY AND NUTRITION, 57 (4):413-413; 10.1097/MPG.0b013e3182a80c23 OCT 2013 Language: English Document Type: Editorial Material Addresses: [Thaler, M. Michael; Heyman, Melvin B.] Univ Calif San Francisco, Dept Pediat, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA. E-mail Addresses: mheyman at peds.ucsf.edu Cited Reference Count: 1 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS, 530 WALNUT ST, PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106-3621 USA ISSN: 0277-2116 Web of Science Categories: Gastroenterology & Hepatology; Nutrition & Dietetics; Pediatrics Research Areas: Gastroenterology & Hepatology; Nutrition & Dietetics; Pediatrics IDS Number: 248ZM Unique ID: WOS:000326745500007 Cited References: Master Samuel, 2013, JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC GASTROENTEROLOGY AND NUTRITION, V57, P527 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326633500001 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Bibliometric Analysis of the Orthopedic Literature Authors: Hui, ZY; Yi, ZM; Peng, J Author Full Names: Hui, Zhaoyang; Yi, Zhongmei; Peng, Jun Source: ORTHOPEDICS, 36 (10):E1225-E1232; 10.3928/01477447-20130920-11 OCT 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Abstract: Bibliometric indicators are used to assess research performance. The goal of this study was to explore publication output to construct a picture of orthopedics that may be beneficial to researchers and orthopedic specialists. All orthopedics articles published in 61 journals from 2000 to 2011 were retrieved from the Science Citation Index Expanded database. The numbers of articles, citations, authors, institutions, and journals were analyzed and subjected to quantitative and qualitative comparisons. The number of published orthopedics articles increased between 2000 and 2011. Articles published by authors from the United States always ranked first in number, although the United States' share is decreasing in the world literature. Authors from the United States published the most-*cited articles* and the most articles in journals with top-10 impact factors; moreover, the United States also had the greatest share of experts and highly ranked institutions. The United Kingdom, Germany, and Japan were always within the world's top 4 in terms of numbers of articles and citations. The shares of Germany, South Korea, and China among total orthopedics articles increased, especially that of China. In 2011, China ranked the fifth in the world, with its world share increasing from 0.64% in 2000 to 5.05% in 2011. However, China lags behind in average citations per article, top research institutions, and most prolific authors. According to the total citations per article, the University of Pittsburgh, Harvard University, and the Hospital for Special Surgery were the most prolific institutions. Addresses: [Hui, Zhaoyang; Yi, Zhongmei; Peng, Jun] Lib Second Mil Med Univ, Shanghai 200433, Peoples R China. E-mail Addresses: pengjun at smmu.edu.cn ResearcherID Numbers: PENG, Jun/L-1780-2013 ORCID Numbers: PENG, Jun/0000-0002-5935-7501 Funding Acknowledgement: Library of the Second Military Medical University Funding Text: The Library of the Second Military Medical University provided research support for this study. Cited Reference Count: 5 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SLACK INC, 6900 GROVE RD, THOROFARE, NJ 08086 USA ISSN: 0147-7447 Web of Science Categories: Orthopedics Research Areas: Orthopedics IDS Number: 247QI Unique ID: WOS:000326633500001 Cited References: [Anonymous], 2010, Journal Citation Reports, Qiu JP, 2001, Inf Stud Theory Appl., V24, P474 Orthopedics journals, 2010, Journal Citation Reports, Middleton A., 2005, Perform Meas Metr., V6, P7 May W.L., 1997, Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, V26, ======================================================================= ======================================================================= From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Mon Dec 23 11:59:23 2013 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2013 16:59:23 +0000 Subject: Papers of Interest to readers of the SIG-Metrics List Message-ID: *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327219900014 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Comparison of a citation-based indicator and peer review for absolute and specific measures of *research*-group excellence Authors: Mryglod, O; Kenna, R; Holovatch, Y; Berche, B Author Full Names: Mryglod, O.; Kenna, R.; Holovatch, Yu.; Berche, B. Source: SCIENTOMETRICS, 97 (3):767-777; 10.1007/s11192-013-1058-9 DEC 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Peer review, Citations, Research assessment exercise (RAE), Research excellence framework (REF) KeyWords Plus: SCIENTOMETRIC INDICATORS; RANKING; UNIVERSITIES; INDEX Abstract: Many different measures are used to assess academic research excellence and these are subject to ongoing discussion and debate within the scientometric, university-management and policy-making communities internationally. One topic of continued importance is the extent to which citation-based indicators compare with peer-review-based evaluation. Here we analyse the correlations between values of a particular citation-based impact indicator and peer-review scores in several academic disciplines, from natural to social sciences and humanities. We perform the comparison for research groups rather than for individuals. We make comparisons on two levels. At an absolute level, we compare total impact and overall strength of the group as a whole. At a specific level, we compare academic impact and quality, normalised by the size of the group. We find very high correlations at the former level for some disciplines and poor correlations at the latter level for all disciplines. This means that, although the citation-based scores could help to describe research-group strength, in particular for the so-called hard sciences, they should not be used as a proxy for ranking or comparison of research groups. Moreover, the correlation between peer-evaluated and citation-based scores is weaker for soft sciences. Addresses: [Mryglod, O.; Holovatch, Yu.] Natl Acad Sci Ukraine, Inst Condensed Matter Phys, UA-79011 Lvov, Ukraine. [Kenna, R.] Coventry Univ, Appl Math Res Ctr, Coventry CV1 5FB, W Midlands, England. [Berche, B.] Univ Lorraine, F-54506 Vandoeuvre Les Nancy, France. E-mail Addresses: olesya at icmp.lviv.ua Funding Acknowledgement: 7th FP, IRSES project [269139]; IRSES project [295302] Funding Text: This work was supported in part by the 7th FP, IRSES project No. 269139 "Dynamics and cooperative phenomena in complex physical and biological environments" and IRSES project No. 295302 "Statistical physics in diverse realizations". The authors thank Jonathan Adams from Thomson Reuters Research Analytics for the data and Ihor Mryglod for fruitful discussions. Cited Reference Count: 31 Times Cited: 1 Publisher: SPRINGER, VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0138-9130 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications; Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Computer Science; Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: 255DP Unique ID: WOS:000327219900014 Cited References: Norris M, 2003, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V59, P709 Vinkler P, 2003, SCIENTOMETRICS, V58, P687 Stauffer Dietrich, 2013, JOURNAL OF STATISTICAL PHYSICS, V151, P9 Evidence, 2011, A University Alliance report, Schubert A, 1996, SCIENTOMETRICS, V36, P311 Nature, 2010, Editorial, Metrics Special, V465, P845 Donovan C., 2007, Science and Public Policy, V34, P538 Moed H. F., 2005, Citation analysis in research evaluation, Warner J., 2003, American Society for Information Science and Technology, V30, P26 Oppenheim C., 2008, Information Research, V13, Garfield E., 1973, Current Contents, V1, P406 Ioannidis John Pa, 2007, BMC MEDICINE, V5, Mryglod O., 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V95, P115 Billaut Jean-Charles, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V84, P237 Vinkler P, 2001, SCIENTOMETRICS, V50, P539 Bornmann Lutz, 2008, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V17, P149 Macilwain Colin, 2010, NATURE, V463, P291 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Bornmann Lutz, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V91, P857 Derrick G. E., 2001, PLoS One, V6, Egghe Leo, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P131 Kenna R., 2010, Scientometrics, V86, P527 Florian Razvan V., 2007, SCIENTOMETRICS, V72, P25 Evidence, 2010, Evidence (a Thomson Reuters business) report, RAE, 2008, Panel E., Williams R., 2012, Report of the project sponsored by Universitas 21, Butler Declan, 2010, NATURE, V464, P16 Evidence, 2012, Summary report prepared for the Institute of Physics by Evidence, Kenna R., 2011, Higher Education Management and Policy, V23, P1 GARFIELD E, 1955, SCIENCE, V122, P108 Van Raan AFJ, 2005, SCIENTOMETRICSConference on Bibliometric Analysis in Science and Research, NOV 05-07, 2003, Julich, GERMANY, V62, P133 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327219900012 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Some citation-related characteristics of *scientific* journals published in *individual* countries Authors: Sangwal, K Author Full Names: Sangwal, Keshra Source: SCIENTOMETRICS, 97 (3):719-741; 10.1007/s11192-013-1053-1 DEC 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Impact factors, Journal self-citations, Journal categories, Journal language KeyWords Plus: ICEBERG HYPOTHESIS; IMPACT FACTOR; LANGUAGE Abstract: Relationships between publication language, impact factors and self-citations of journals published in individual countries, eight from Europe and one from South America (Brazil), are analyzed using bibliometric data from Thomson Reuters JCR Science Edition databases of ISI Web of Knowledge. It was found that: (1) English-language journals, as a rule, have higher impact factors than non-English-language journals, (2) all countries investigated in this study have journals with very high self-citations but the proportion of journals with high self-citations with reference to the total number of journals published in different countries varies enormously, (3) there are relatively high percentages of low self-citations in high subject-category journals published in English as well as non-English journals but national-language journals have higher self-citations than English-language journals, and (4) irrespective of the publication language, journals devoted to very specialized scientific disciplines, such as electrical and electronic engineering, metallurgy, environmental engineering, surgery, general and internal medicine, pharmacology and pharmacy, gynecology, entomology and multidisciplinary engineering, have high self-citations. Addresses: Lublin Univ Technol, Dept Appl Phys, PL-20618 Lublin, Poland. E-mail Addresses: k.sangwal at pollub.pl Cited Reference Count: 24 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0138-9130 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications; Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Computer Science; Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: 255DP Unique ID: WOS:000327219900012 Cited References: Gonzalez-Alcaide Gregorio, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P297 Liang Liming, 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V95, P333 Miguel Campanario Juan, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V87, P189 Lancho-Barrantes Barbara S., 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V94, P817 Sangwal Keshra, 2013, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V7, P487 Vinkler Peter, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P471 Lancho-Barrantes Barbara S., 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V85, P443 Harzing Anne-Wil, 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V94, P1057 Aksnes DW, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS8th ISSI Conference, JUL, 2001, Sydney, AUSTRALIA, V59, P213 Lin Min-Wei, 2007, SCIENTOMETRICS, V70, P555 Rousseau R, 2001, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V57, P349 Moed Henk F., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P367 Bornmann L., 2008, Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, V8, P93 CAMPBELL FM, 1990, BULLETIN OF THE MEDICAL LIBRARY ASSOCIATION, V78, P376 Mingers John, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V85, P613 Raj R. G., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V93, P305 Didegah Fereshteh, 2012, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V6, P516 Sangwal Keshra, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V93, P987 Zitt Michel, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P485 Poomkottayil Deepak, 2011, SWISS MEDICAL WEEKLY, V141, Mueller Paul S., 2006, SWISS MEDICAL WEEKLY, V136, P441 GARFIELD E, 1978, CURRENT CONTENTS, P5 Guerrero-Bote Vicente P., 2007, SCIENTOMETRICS, V71, P423 van Raan Ton, 2011, NATURE, V469, P34 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327210000001 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: *An* Editor'*s* journey: 6 years with European Radiology Authors: Dixon, AK Author Full Names: Dixon, A. K. Source: EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 23 (12):3219-3220; 10.1007/s00330-013-3000-1 DEC 2013 Language: English Document Type: Editorial Material Author Keywords: Radiology publication, Medical journal, Editing KeyWords Plus: ONLINE WORLD; THINK OPEN Abstract: Recent changes in the journal European Radiology and the development of our sister journal Insights into Imaging are discussed. So too are problems related to redundant publications and assessments of quality. In particular, it must be realised that the *Impact Factor* of a journal is not the only parameter of success. Addresses: Univ Cambridge, Dept Radiol, Cambridge, England. E-mail Addresses: adrian.dixon at european-radiology.org Cited Reference Count: 4 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, 233 SPRING ST, NEW YORK, NY 10013 USA ISSN: 0938-7994 Web of Science Categories: Radiology, Nuclear Medicine & Medical Imaging Research Areas: Radiology, Nuclear Medicine & Medical Imaging IDS Number: 254ZX Unique ID: WOS:000327210000001 Cited References: Guenther Rolf W., 2013, EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, V23, P1178 Bryan R. Nick, 2013, EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, V23, P1 Sconfienza Luca Maria, 2013, EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, V23, P1175 Kressel Herbert Y., 2011, RADIOLOGY, V259, P324 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327086200014 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Link-based approach for bibliometric journal ranking Authors: Su, P; Shang, CJ; Shen, Q Author Full Names: Su, Pan; Shang, Changjing; Shen, Qiang Source: SOFT COMPUTING, 17 (12):2399-2410; SI 10.1007/s00500-013-1052-4 DEC 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Link-based analysis, Journal ranking, Indicator fusion, Classification, Clustering KeyWords Plus: CLASSIFICATION; METRICS; IMPACT; VALIDATION Abstract: The ISI *impact factor* is widely accepted as a possible measurement of academic journal quality. However, much debate has recently surrounded this use, and several complex alternative journal impact indicators have been reported. To avoid the bias which may be caused by using a single quality indicator, ensemble of multiple indicators is a promising method for producing a more robust quality estimation. In this paper, an approach based on links between journals is proposed for the capturing and fusion of impact indicators. In particular, a number of popular indicators are combined and transformed to fused-links between academic journals, and two distance metrics: Euclidean distance and Manhattan distance are utilised to support the development and analysis of the fused-links. The approach is applied to both supervised and unsupervised learning, in an effort to estimate the impact and therefore the ranking of journals. Results of systematic experimental evaluation demonstrate that by exploiting the fused-links, simple algorithms such as K-Nearest Neighbours and K-means can perform as well as advanced techniques like support vector machines, in terms of accuracy and within-1 accuracy, while exhibiting the advantage of being more intuitive and interpretable. Addresses: [Su, Pan; Shang, Changjing; Shen, Qiang] Aberystwyth Univ, Dept Comp Sci, Aberystwyth SY23 3DB, Dyfed, Wales. E-mail Addresses: pas23 at aber.ac.uk; cns at aber.ac.uk; qqs at aber.ac.uk Funding Acknowledgement: Aberystwyth University Funding Text: The authors are grateful to the comments provided by the reviewers which have helped revise this work. The first author is grateful to Aberystwyth University for providing a full-fees PhD scholarship in support of this research. Cited Reference Count: 43 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, 233 SPRING ST, NEW YORK, NY 10013 USA ISSN: 1432-7643 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Artificial Intelligence; Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications Research Areas: Computer Science IDS Number: 253LB Unique ID: WOS:000327086200014 Cited References: Aggarwal CC, 2001, DATABASE THEORY - ICDT 2001, PROCEEDINGS8th International Conference on Database Theory (ICDT 2001), JAN 04-06, 2001, LONDON, ENGLAND, V1973, P420 Cooper S, 2011, Aust Univ Rev, V53, P57 Lu Q, 2003, Int Conf Mach Learn, V20, P496 Rousseau R, 2002, LIBRARY TRENDS, V50, P418 Stegmann J, 2001, SCIENTOMETRICS, V50, P483 Holsapple Clyde W., 2009, COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM, V52, P117 Pena JM, 1999, PATTERN RECOGNITION LETTERS, V20, P1027 Shen Qiang, 2012, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON KNOWLEDGE AND DATA ENGINEERING, V24, P649 CAMPBELL C., 2000, SIGKDD Explorations, V2, P1 COVER TM, 1967, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION THEORY, V13, P21 Oh HJ, 2000, International ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval, P264 Anderberg MR, 1973, DTIC Document, Bergstrom Carl T., 2008, NEUROLOGY, V71, P1850 Shen Q, 2012, Proceedings of the Alan Turing centenary conference, P289 Bergstrom C., 2007, College & Research Libraries News, V68, P314 Getoor L., 2005, SIGKDD Explor. Newsl., V7, P3 Perlibakas V, 2004, PATTERN RECOGNITION LETTERS, V25, P711 Lafferty J, 2001, International conference on machine learning, P282 Bhagat S, 2007, Proceedings of the 9th WebKDD and 1st SNA-KDD 2007 workshop on web mining and social network analysis, P92 Su P, 2012, Int J Mach Learn Cybern, Witten I.H., 2005, Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques, Bengio Y, 2005, STATISTICAL MODELING AND ANALYSIS FOR COMPLEX DATA PROBLEMS, V1, P75 Boongoen Tossapon, 2011, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SYSTEMS MAN AND CYBERNETICS PART B-CYBERNETICS, V41, P1705 Chakrabarti S., 1998, ACM SIGMOD Record, V27, P307 Garfield E, 2006, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V295, P90 Gorriz J.M., 2006, Speech Communication, V48, Weinberger Kilian Q., 2009, JOURNAL OF MACHINE LEARNING RESEARCH, V10, P207 Ley M, 2002, String processing and information retrieval, P481 Giles CL, 1998, Proceedings of the third ACM conference on Digital libraries, P89 Kohavi R., 1995, Proceedings of the 14th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, V2, P1137 Dietterich TG, 1998, NEURAL COMPUTATION, V10, P1895 Bollen J, 2005, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V41, P1419 Stegmann J, 1997, NATURE, V390, P550 Beliakov Gleb, 2011, FUZZY SETS AND SYSTEMSAGOP 2009 Conference, JUN 06-10, 2009, Palma, SPAIN, V167, P101 Brin S, 1998, COMPUTER NETWORKS AND ISDN SYSTEMS7th International World Wide Web Conference, APR 14-18, 1998, BRISBANE, AUSTRALIA, V30, P107 Furey TS, 2000, BIOINFORMATICS, V16, P906 Dudani SA, 1976, IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern SMC, V6, P323 Jain AK, 1999, ACM COMPUTING SURVEYS, V31, P264 Fu Xin, 2010, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON FUZZY SYSTEMS, V18, P823 Boongoen Tossapon, 2010, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SYSTEMS MAN AND CYBERNETICS PART B-CYBERNETICS, V40, P1622 Drucker H, 1999, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON NEURAL NETWORKS, V10, P1048 Eigenfactor.org, 2012, Eigenfactor score and article influence score: Detailed methods, SALTON G, 1991, SCIENCE, V253, P974 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326987100002 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Toward more meaningful evaluation of contributions and journals across different specialties: Introducing specialty *impact factor* Authors: Singh, S Author Full Names: Singh, Sanjay Source: INDIAN JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY VENEREOLOGY & LEPROLOGY, 79 (6):737-738; 10.4103/0378-6323.120717 NOV-DEC 2013 Language: English Document Type: Editorial Material Addresses: [Singh, Sanjay] Banaras Hindu Univ, Inst Med Sci, Dept Dermatol & Venereol, Varanasi 221005, Uttar Pradesh, India. E-mail Addresses: sanjaye2 at gmail.com Cited Reference Count: 2 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: MEDKNOW PUBLICATIONS & MEDIA PVT LTD, B-9, KANARA BUSINESS CENTRE, OFF LINK RD, GHAKTOPAR-E, MUMBAI, 400075, INDIA ISSN: 0378-6323 Web of Science Categories: Dermatology Research Areas: Dermatology IDS Number: 252EE Unique ID: WOS:000326987100002 Cited References: Malathi M., 2012, INDIAN JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY VENEREOLOGY & LEPROLOGY, V78, P1 Hayes SC, 2005, Get Out of Your Mind and Into Your Life, P17 ======================================================================= ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327219900011 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: The lengthening of papers' life expectancy: a diachronous analysis Authors: Bouabid, H; Lariviere, V Author Full Names: Bouabid, Hamid; Lariviere, Vincent Source: SCIENTOMETRICS, 97 (3):695-717; 10.1007/s11192-013-0995-7 DEC 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Aging, Obsolescence, Life expectancy, Life-time, Citation distribution, Diachronous, Synchronous, Journals, Countries, Fields KeyWords Plus: CITATION DISTRIBUTION; SOCIAL-SCIENCES; HALF-LIFE; OBSOLESCENCE; MODEL; GROWTH; INDEX; TIME Abstract: The aging of scientific has generally been studied using synchronous approaches, i.e., based on references made by papers. This paper uses a diachronous model based on citations received by papers to study the changes in the life expectancy of three corpus of papers: papers from G6 and BRICS countries, papers published in Science, Nature, Physical Review and the Lancet and all papers divided into four broad fields: medical sciences, natural sciences and engineering, social sciences and arts and humanities. It shows that that: (i) life expectancy is extensively different from a corpus to another and may be either finite or infinite, meaning that the corpus would never be obsolete from a mathematical perspective; (ii) life expectancy for scientific literature has lengthened over the 1980-2000 period; (iii) life expectancy of developed countries' (G6) literature is on average shorter than that of emerging countries (BRICS). Addresses: [Bouabid, Hamid] Mohammed V Agdal Univ, Fac Sci, Rabat 1014, Morocco. [Lariviere, Vincent] Univ Montreal, Ecole Bibliotheconomie & Sci Informat, Montreal, PQ H3C 3J7, Canada. [Lariviere, Vincent] Univ Quebec, CIRST, OST, Montreal, PQ H3C 3P8, Canada. E-mail Addresses: h.bouabid at hotmail.com; vincent.lariviere at umontreal.ca Cited Reference Count: 28 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0138-9130 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications; Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Computer Science; Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: 255DP Unique ID: WOS:000327219900011 Cited References: Burrell QL, 2002, SCIENTOMETRICS, V53, P309 RAFSNIDER J, 1975, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V26, P344 BURTON RE, 1960, AMERICAN DOCUMENTATION, V11, P18 LINE MB, 1974, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V30, P283 Lariviere Vincent, 2008, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V59, P288 Gross P L, 1927, Science (New York, N.Y.), V66, P385 Yu Guang, 2007, SCIENTOMETRICS, V71, P339 LINE MB, 1993, LIBRARY TRENDS, V41, P665 Kay Luciano, 2009, JOURNAL OF NANOPARTICLE RESEARCH, V11, P259 Egghe L., 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V82, P243 Glanzel W, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS9th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informatics, AUG, 2003, Beijing, PEOPLES R CHINA, V60, P511 SMALL HG, 1979, SCIENTOMETRICS, V1, P445 Nakamoto H., 1988, Informetrics 87/88, P157 Sotudeh Hajar, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V91, P231 Zhou P, 2006, RESEARCH POLICY, V35, P83 Bouabid Hamid, 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS, V78, P203 CANO V, 1991, SCIENTOMETRICS, V22, P297 ROUSSEAU R, 1994, SCIENTOMETRICS4th International Conference on Bibliometrics, Informetrics and Scientometrics, in Memory of Derek John de Solla Price (1922-1983), SEP 11-15, 1993, BERLIN, GERMANY, V30, P213 Szava-Kovats E, 2002, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V53, P1098 Bouabid Hamid, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V88, P199 Yang Siluo, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V85, P755 Leydesdorff L, 2003, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V59, P84 Vanclay Jerome K., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P211 Archambault E., 2009, Scientometrics, V79, P639 BARNETT GA, 1989, COMMUNICATION RESEARCH, V16, P510 EGGHE L, 1995, SCIENTOMETRICS, V34, P285 Egghe L, 2000, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V51, P1004 STINSON ER, 1987, JOURNAL OF INFORMATION SCIENCE, V13, P65 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327219900015 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Measuring institutional research productivity for the life sciences: the importance of accounting for the order of authors in the byline Authors: Abramo, G; D'Angelo, CA; Rosati, F Author Full Names: Abramo, Giovanni; D'Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea; Rosati, Francesco Source: SCIENTOMETRICS, 97 (3):779-795; 10.1007/s11192-013-1013-9 DEC 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Research evaluation, Co-authorship, Fractional counting, Bibliometrics, Biology, Medicine KeyWords Plus: G-INDEX Abstract: Accurate measurement of institutional research productivity should account for the real contribution of the research staff to the output produced in collaboration with other organizations. In the framework of bibliometric measurement, this implies accounting for both the number of co-authors and each individual's real contribution to scientific publications. Common practice in the life sciences is to indicate such contribution through the order of author names in the byline. In this work, we measure the distortion introduced to university-level bibliometric productivity rankings when the number of co-authors or their position in the byline is ignored. The field of observation consists of all Italian universities active in the life sciences (Biology and Medicine). The analysis is based on the research output of the university staff over the period 2004-2008. Based on the results, we recommend against the use of bibliometric indicators that ignore co-authorship and real contribution of each author to research outputs. Addresses: [Abramo, Giovanni] Natl Res Council Italy, Inst Syst Anal & Comp Sci IASI CNR, I-00185 Rome, Italy. [D'Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea; Rosati, Francesco] Univ Roma Tor Vergata, Dept Management, Sch Engn, I-00133 Rome, Italy. E-mail Addresses: giovanni.abramo at uniroma2.it; dangelo at dii.uniroma2.it; francesco.rosati at uniroma2.it Cited Reference Count: 16 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0138-9130 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications; Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Computer Science; Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: 255DP Unique ID: WOS:000327219900015 Cited References: D'Angelo Ciriaco Andrea, 2011, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V62, P257 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Lundberg Jonas, 2007, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V1, P145 Gauffriau Marianne, 2008, SCIENTOMETRICS, V77, P147 Verhagen JV, 2003, NATURE, V426, P602 Aksnes Dag W., 2012, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V6, P36 Carbone V., 2011, arXiv, 1106.0114, Egghe Leo, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P131 Abramo Giovanni, 2013, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V7, P198 He Bing, 2012, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V6, P359 Laurance WF, 2006, NATURE, V442, P26 Egghe Leo, 2008, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V59, P1608 Wan J. K., 2008, The pure h-index: calculating an author's h-index by taking co-authors into account, Bhandari M, 2003, JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, V85A, P1605 Batista Pablo D., 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V68, P179 Abramo Giovanni, 2008, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V17, P111 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327219900014 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Comparison of a citation-based indicator and peer review for absolute and specific measures of research-group excellence Authors: Mryglod, O; Kenna, R; Holovatch, Y; Berche, B Author Full Names: Mryglod, O.; Kenna, R.; Holovatch, Yu.; Berche, B. Source: SCIENTOMETRICS, 97 (3):767-777; 10.1007/s11192-013-1058-9 DEC 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Peer review, Citations, Research assessment exercise (RAE), Research excellence framework (REF) KeyWords Plus: SCIENTOMETRIC INDICATORS; RANKING; UNIVERSITIES; INDEX Abstract: Many different measures are used to assess academic research excellence and these are subject to ongoing discussion and debate within the scientometric, university-management and policy-making communities internationally. One topic of continued importance is the extent to which citation-based indicators compare with peer-review-based evaluation. Here we analyse the correlations between values of a particular citation-based impact indicator and peer-review scores in several academic disciplines, from natural to social sciences and humanities. We perform the comparison for research groups rather than for individuals. We make comparisons on two levels. At an absolute level, we compare total impact and overall strength of the group as a whole. At a specific level, we compare academic impact and quality, normalised by the size of the group. We find very high correlations at the former level for some disciplines and poor correlations at the latter level for all disciplines. This means that, although the citation-based scores could help to describe research-group strength, in particular for the so-called hard sciences, they should not be used as a proxy for ranking or comparison of research groups. Moreover, the correlation between peer-evaluated and citation-based scores is weaker for soft sciences. Addresses: [Mryglod, O.; Holovatch, Yu.] Natl Acad Sci Ukraine, Inst Condensed Matter Phys, UA-79011 Lvov, Ukraine. [Kenna, R.] Coventry Univ, Appl Math Res Ctr, Coventry CV1 5FB, W Midlands, England. [Berche, B.] Univ Lorraine, F-54506 Vandoeuvre Les Nancy, France. E-mail Addresses: olesya at icmp.lviv.ua Funding Acknowledgement: 7th FP, IRSES project [269139]; IRSES project [295302] Funding Text: This work was supported in part by the 7th FP, IRSES project No. 269139 "Dynamics and cooperative phenomena in complex physical and biological environments" and IRSES project No. 295302 "Statistical physics in diverse realizations". The authors thank Jonathan Adams from Thomson Reuters Research Analytics for the data and Ihor Mryglod for fruitful discussions. Cited Reference Count: 31 Times Cited: 1 Publisher: SPRINGER, VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0138-9130 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications; Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Computer Science; Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: 255DP Unique ID: WOS:000327219900014 Cited References: Norris M, 2003, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V59, P709 Vinkler P, 2003, SCIENTOMETRICS, V58, P687 Stauffer Dietrich, 2013, JOURNAL OF STATISTICAL PHYSICS, V151, P9 Evidence, 2011, A University Alliance report, Schubert A, 1996, SCIENTOMETRICS, V36, P311 Nature, 2010, Editorial, Metrics Special, V465, P845 Donovan C., 2007, Science and Public Policy, V34, P538 Moed H. F., 2005, Citation analysis in research evaluation, Warner J., 2003, American Society for Information Science and Technology, V30, P26 Oppenheim C., 2008, Information Research, V13, Garfield E., 1973, Current Contents, V1, P406 Ioannidis John Pa, 2007, BMC MEDICINE, V5, Mryglod O., 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V95, P115 Billaut Jean-Charles, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V84, P237 Vinkler P, 2001, SCIENTOMETRICS, V50, P539 Bornmann Lutz, 2008, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V17, P149 Macilwain Colin, 2010, NATURE, V463, P291 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Bornmann Lutz, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V91, P857 Derrick G. E., 2001, PLoS One, V6, Egghe Leo, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P131 Kenna R., 2010, Scientometrics, V86, P527 Florian Razvan V., 2007, SCIENTOMETRICS, V72, P25 Evidence, 2010, Evidence (a Thomson Reuters business) report, RAE, 2008, Panel E., Williams R., 2012, Report of the project sponsored by Universitas 21, Butler Declan, 2010, NATURE, V464, P16 Evidence, 2012, Summary report prepared for the Institute of Physics by Evidence, Kenna R., 2011, Higher Education Management and Policy, V23, P1 GARFIELD E, 1955, SCIENCE, V122, P108 Van Raan AFJ, 2005, SCIENTOMETRICSConference on Bibliometric Analysis in Science and Research, NOV 05-07, 2003, Julich, GERMANY, V62, P133 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326734900004 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Journal Impact as a Diffusion Process: A Conceptualization and the Case of the Journal of Management Studies Authors: Simsek, Z; Heavey, C; Jansen, JJP Author Full Names: Simsek, Zeki; Heavey, Ciaran; Jansen, Justin J. P. Source: JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES, 50 (8):1374-1407; 10.1111/joms.12007 DEC 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: citations, diffusion, journal impact, multidimensional conceptualization KeyWords Plus: CITATION-REPORTS; RESEARCH QUALITY; SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS; ECONOMIC-GEOGRAPHY; SCHOLARLY JOURNALS; SOCIAL-SCIENCES; INDEX; INDICATORS; RANKING; DETERMINANTS Abstract: While the question of what makes a journal impactful continues to draw scholarly attention and debate, the lack of conceptual foundation as to what journal impact represents, and how it manifests itself, has impeded efforts to establish a richer understanding. Drawing from the theory of innovation diffusion, we propose journal impact as a multidimensional concept manifested most prominently in the magnitude, prestige, breadth, dispersion, and duration dynamics of citations accruing to a journal. In doing so, we complement extant representations of journal impact as a unidimensional concept with insights into the pattern and profile of a journal impact across space and time. We illustrate the multidimensionality of journal impact as a diffusion process in a longitudinal analysis of citation patterns at the Journal of Management Studies over a 40-year period. Addresses: Univ Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269 USA. Univ Coll Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. Erasmus Univ, NL-3000 DR Rotterdam, Netherlands. E-mail Addresses: zeki.simsek at Business.uconn.edu Cited Reference Count: 78 Times Cited: 2 Publisher: WILEY-BLACKWELL, 111 RIVER ST, HOBOKEN 07030-5774, NJ USA ISSN: 0022-2380 Web of Science Categories: Business; Management Research Areas: Business & Economics IDS Number: 248VZ Unique ID: WOS:000326734900004 Cited References: Moed HF, 2005, CURRENT SCIENCE, V89, P1990 GOMEZMEJIA LR, 1992, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V35, P921 Jacobs Jerry A., 2009, ANNUAL REVIEW OF SOCIOLOGY, V35, P43 Hecht F, 1998, CANCER GENETICS AND CYTOGENETICS, V104, P77 Chen Carl R., 2007, JOURNAL OF CORPORATE FINANCE, V13, P1008 GARFIELD E, 1963, AMERICAN DOCUMENTATION, V14, P195 Kennedy Mark Thomas, 2009, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V52, P897 Balaban Alexandru T., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P241 Kieser Alfred, 2011, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES, V48, P891 Macdonald Stuart, 2007, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES, V44, P640 Ryan Bryce, 1943, RURAL SOCIOLOGY, V8, P15 Van Fleet DD, 2000, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, V26, P839 Magri M, 1996, SCIENTOMETRICS, V35, P93 GARFIELD E, 1975, JOURNAL OF THE INDIAN INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE, V57, P61 Seglen PO, 1998, ACTA ORTHOPAEDICA SCANDINAVICA, V69, P224 Rousseau M., 2012, Journal of Management Studies, V49, P600 GARFIELD E, 1972, SCIENCE, V178, P471 Zitt Michel, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P485 Rogers E., 1995, Diffusion of innovations, Vanclay Jerome K., 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS, V78, P3 Glanzel W, 2002, SCIENTOMETRICS, V53, P169 Rynes Sara L., 2011, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT LEARNING & EDUCATION, V10, P561 Habibzadeh Farrokh, 2008, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V2, P164 Rowlands I, 2002, ASLIB PROCEEDINGS, V54, P77 Zahra Shaker A., 2009, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES, V46, P1059 Bensman Stephen J., 2008, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V59, P1366 Rogers EM, 2003, Diffusion of innovations, Johnson Russell E., 2011, JOURNAL OF BUSINESS AND PSYCHOLOGY, V26, P241 BLAUT JM, 1987, ANNALS OF THE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN GEOGRAPHERS, V77, P30 PINSKI G, 1976, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V12, P297 Burt RS, 1999, ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF POLITICAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE, V566, P37 Fok Dennis, 2007, JOURNAL OF ECONOMETRICS, V139, P376 Baum Joel A. C., 2011, ORGANIZATION, V18, P449 Shipilov Andrew V., 2010, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V53, P846 Leonidou Leonidas C., 2010, INTERNATIONAL MARKETING REVIEW, V27, P491 Moed Henk F., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P367 Herrmann Roland, 2011, JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, V62, P710 Frandsen TF, 2006, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V62, P58 Sanni S. A., 2011, MALAYSIAN JOURNAL OF LIBRARY & INFORMATION SCIENCE, V16, P127 Bollen Johan, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P669 Archambault Eric, 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS, V79, P635 JOHNSON JL, 1994, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V37, P1392 Battilana Julie, 2010, ORGANIZATION STUDIES, V31, P695 Linderman Kevin, 2010, JOURNAL OF OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT, V28, P357 Franceschet Massimo, 2010, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V46, P555 Adler R., 2008, A report of the Joint Committee on Quantitative Assessment of Research, Cronin B., 1984, The Citation Process, Cheek J, 2006, QUALITATIVE HEALTH RESEARCH, V16, P423 Vanclay Jerome K., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P211 Harzing A. W., 2010, The Publish Or Perish Book: Your Guide to Effective and Responsible Citation Analysis, Garfield E, 1999, CANADIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL, V161, P979 Singh Gangaram, 2007, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT INQUIRY, V16, P319 Wrigley Neil, 2010, JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY, V10, P1 Certo S. Trevis, 2010, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT LEARNING & EDUCATION, V9, P591 Lockett A, 2005, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT INQUIRY, V14, P139 MERTON RK, 1988, ISIS, V79, P606 Podsakoff PM, 2005, STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V26, P473 Seglen PO, 1997, ALLERGY, V52, P1050 Katz Jerome A., 2008, JOURNAL OF SMALL BUSINESS MANAGEMENT, V46, P550 McWilliams A, 2005, ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH METHODS, V8, P185 Moed HF, 1999, SCIENTOMETRICS7th Conference of the International-Society-for-Scientometrics-and-Informetrics, JUL 05-08, 1999, COLIMA, MEXICO, V46, P575 Hitt Michael A., 2012, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT INQUIRY, V21, P236 Pieters R, 2002, JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC LITERATURE, V40, P483 Calver Michael C., 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS, V81, P611 Pendlebury David A., 2009, ARCHIVUM IMMUNOLOGIAE ET THERAPIAE EXPERIMENTALIS, V57, P1 West Jevin D., 2010, COLLEGE & RESEARCH LIBRARIES, V71, P236 Zhou Xiaoping, 2009, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON RELIABILITY, V58, P317 Foster Jamie, 2007, TRANSACTIONS OF THE INSTITUTE OF BRITISH GEOGRAPHERS3rd Summer Institute in Economic Geography, JUN 24-30, 2006, Madison, WI, V32, P295 NISONGER TE, 1994, LIBRARY ACQUISITIONS-PRACTICE AND THEORY, V18, P447 Stewart A., International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, Strang D, 1998, ANNUAL REVIEW OF SOCIOLOGY, V24, P265 Paul Ray J., 2008, EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS, V17, P324 Podsakoff Philip M., 2008, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, V34, P641 Floyd Steven W., 2009, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES, V46, P1057 Frandsen TF, 2004, ASLIB PROCEEDINGS, V56, P5 SEGLEN PO, 1992, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V43, P628 Starbuck WH, 2005, ORGANIZATION SCIENCE, V16, P180 Chan Kam C., 2009, ACCOUNTING ORGANIZATIONS AND SOCIETY, V34, P875 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326328500002 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: On the Predictability of Future Impact in Science Authors: Penner, O; Pan, RK; Petersen, AM; Kaski, K; Fortunato, S Author Full Names: Penner, Orion; Pan, Raj K.; Petersen, Alexander M.; Kaski, Kimmo; Fortunato, Santo Source: SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 3 10.1038/srep03052 OCT 29 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article KeyWords Plus: ACADEMIC CAREER; PREDICTIVE POWER; H-INDEX; STRATIFICATION; PERFORMANCE; SELECTION Abstract: Correctly assessing a scientist's past research impact and potential for future impact is key in recruitment decisions and other evaluation processes. While a candidate's future impact is the main concern for these decisions, most measures only quantify the impact of previous work. Recently, it has been argued that linear regression models are capable of predicting a scientist's future impact. By applying that future impact model to 762 careers drawn from three disciplines: physics, biology, and mathematics, we identify a number of subtle, but critical, flaws in current models. Specifically, cumulative non-decreasing measures like the h-index contain intrinsic autocorrelation, resulting in significant overestimation of their "predictive power". Moreover, the predictive power of these models depend heavily upon scientists' career age, producing least accurate estimates for young researchers. Our results place in doubt the suitability of such models, and indicate further investigation is required before they can be used in recruiting decisions. Addresses: [Penner, Orion] IMT Inst Adv Studies Lucca, Lab Innovat Management & Econ, I-55100 Lucca, Italy. [Pan, Raj K.; Kaski, Kimmo; Fortunato, Santo] Aalto Univ, Sch Sci, Dept Biomed Engn & Computat Sci, FI-00076 Espoo, Finland. [Petersen, Alexander M.] IMT Inst Adv Studies Lucca, Lab Anal Complex Econ Syst, I-55100 Lucca, Italy. E-mail Addresses: petersen.xander at gmail.com; santo.fortunato at aalto.fi Funding Acknowledgement: Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada Funding Text: O.P. acknowledges funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Certain data included herein are derived from the Science Citation Index Expanded, Social Science Citation Index and Arts & Humanities Citation Index, prepared by Thomson Reuters, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, Copyright Thomson Reuters, 2011. Cited Reference Count: 25 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP, MACMILLAN BUILDING, 4 CRINAN ST, LONDON N1 9XW, ENGLAND ISSN: 2045-2322 Article Number: 3052 Web of Science Categories: Multidisciplinary Sciences Research Areas: Science & Technology - Other Topics IDS Number: 243PI Unique ID: WOS:000326328500002 Cited References: LONG JS, 1978, AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW, V43, P889 Acuna Daniel E., 2012, NATURE, V489, P201 Mantegna R., 1999, Introduction to econophysics: correlations and complexity in finance, Malkiel BG, 2003, JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES, V17, P59 Jones Benjamin F., 2008, SCIENCE, V322, P1259 Duch Jordi, 2012, PLOS ONE, V7, Moss-Racusin Corinne A., 2012, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V109, P16474 Schreiber Michael, 2013, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V7, P325 LONG JS, 1979, AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW, V44, P816 HARGENS LL, 1984, AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW, V49, P685 [Anonymous], 2007, Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering, Hirsch J. E., 2007, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V104, P19193 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Petersen Alexander M., 2012, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V109, P5213 van den Besselaar Peter, 2009, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V18, P273 Petersen Alexander M., 2011, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V108, P18 Petersen A. M., 2013, arXiv: 1303.7274, Cole J. R., 1973, Social Stratification in Science, Malmgren R. Dean, 2010, NATURE, V465, P622 Zou H, 2005, JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY SERIES B-STATISTICAL METHODOLOGY, V67, P301 Penner Orion, 2013, PHYSICS TODAY, V66, P8 Ginther DK, 2004, JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES, V18, P193 Radicchi Filippo, 2008, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V105, P17268 Mazloumian Amin, 2012, PLOS ONE, V7, Stephan P., 2012, How Economics Shapes Science, ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326881900004 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Group size, h-index, and efficiency in publishing in top journals explain expert panel assessments of research group quality and productivity Authors: Engels, TCE; Goos, P; Dexters, N; Spruyt, EHJ Author Full Names: Engels, Tim C. E.; Goos, Peter; Dexters, Nele; Spruyt, Eric H. J. Source: RESEARCH EVALUATION, 22 (4):224-236; 10.1093/reseval/rvt013 OCT 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: peer review, group size, research assessment exercise, research quality, research productivity KeyWords Plus: BIBLIOMETRIC INDICATORS; EVALUATING RESEARCH; PERFORMANCE; UNIVERSITY; CRITERIA; REVIEWS Abstract: Assessments of research groups by expert panels are commonplace. A conceptual distinction between nationwide evaluations, approaches fitting within a national framework, and approaches fulfilling a national, regional, or local regulatory requirement can be made. Few papers exploit the wealth of the data made available to panels: most analyses and discussions focus on the relation between assessments scores and bibliometric indicators. However, expert panels are expected to take other information such as funding and PhDs into account as well. Using a data set on 52 science research groups that have been evaluated in view of an on-going series of research assessments at the University of Antwerp (Belgium), we build cumulative logistic regression models that explain the assessments of research group quality and productivity. In addition to the discipline, the predictors in the models explaining quality and productivity are group size, h-index of the group leader, and efficiency in terms of publishing in top journals. Strikingly, the same predictors apply in the model for quality and in the model for productivity. Addresses: [Engels, Tim C. E.; Dexters, Nele; Spruyt, Eric H. J.] Univ Antwerp, Dept Res Affairs, B-2020 Antwerp, Belgium. [Engels, Tim C. E.; Dexters, Nele; Spruyt, Eric H. J.] Univ Antwerp, Ctr R&D Monitoring ECOOM, B-2020 Antwerp, Belgium. [Engels, Tim C. E.] Antwerp Maritime Acad, B-2030 Antwerp, Belgium. [Goos, Peter] Univ Antwerp, Fac Appl Econ, B-2020 Antwerp, Belgium. [Goos, Peter] Univ Antwerp, StatUa Ctr Stat, B-2020 Antwerp, Belgium. [Goos, Peter] Erasmus Univ, Inst Econometr, Erasmus Sch Econ, NL-3000 DR Rotterdam, Netherlands. E-mail Addresses: tim.engels at uantwerpen.be Cited Reference Count: 41 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: OXFORD UNIV PRESS, GREAT CLARENDON ST, OXFORD OX2 6DP, ENGLAND ISSN: 0958-2029 Web of Science Categories: Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: 250UR Unique ID: WOS:000326881900004 Cited References: Waltman Ludo, 2012, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V63, P406 Rinia EJ, 1998, RESEARCH POLICY, V27, P95 Hicks Diana, 2012, RESEARCH POLICY, V41, P251 Spruyt E. H. J., 2008, Thema: Tijdschrift voor Hoger Onderwijs en Management, V15, P39 Moed H. F., 2005, Citation analysis in research evaluation, Adams J., 2011, Funding Research Excellence: Research Group Size, Critical Mass & Performance, de Andres A., 2011, Europhysics News, V42, P29 Glanzel W, 2003, SCIENTOMETRICS, V56, P357 Lariviere Vincent, 2011, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V5, P392 Rons N., 2008, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V17, P45 European Commission, 2010, Assessing Europe's University-Based Research, Braun T., 1988, P137 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Agresti A., 2010, Analysis of ordinal categorical data, SCImago Research Group, 2012, SIR World Report, Butler Linda, 2011, EUROPEAN POLITICAL SCIENCE, V10, P44 Aksnes DW, 2004, RESEARCH EVALUATION9th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informatics, AUG, 2003, Beijing, PEOPLES R CHINA, V13, P33 Spruyt E. H. J., 2010, Thema: Tijdschrift voor Hoger Onderwijs en Management, V3, P31 Franceschet Massimo, 2011, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V5, P275 Leydesdorff L., 2011, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, V63, P1370 VSNU, 2009, Standard Evaluation Protocol 2009-2015. Protocol for Research Assessment in the Netherlands, Langfeldt L, 2004, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V13, P51 van Drooghe L., 2013, Twintig jaar onderzoeksevaluatie, Jayasinghe Upali W., 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P591 Agresti A., 2002, Categorical Data Analysis, KNAW, 2011, Quality indicators for research in the Humanities, Abramo Giovanni, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V89, P929 Ochsner Michael, 2013, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V22, P79 Olsson L., 2012, LEADERSHIP QUARTERLY, V23, P604 KRETSCHMER H, 1985, SCIENTOMETRICS, V7, P39 Kenna R., 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V86, P527 Van Raan AFJ, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V67, P491 VSNU, 2003, Standard Evaluation Protocol 2003-2009 for Public Research Organisations, Himanen L., 2009, Science and Public Policy, V36, P417 Goos Peter, 2012, TECHNOMETRICS, V54, P340 Richardson M., 2011, Research Trends, V25, P13 Lawrenz Frances, 2012, EVALUATION AND PROGRAM PLANNING, V35, P390 Hansen H. F., 2009, Research Evaluation: Methods, Practice, and Experience, Engels T. C. E., 2012, Proceedings of the 17th Science and Technology Indicators Conference, P247 Hansson Finn, 2010, SCIENCE AND PUBLIC POLICY, V37, P239 Rons Nadine, 2012, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V6, P1 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326218500005 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: EVALUATING JOURNAL QUALITY: BEYOND "EXPERT" JOURNAL ASSESSMENTS IN THE IS DISCIPLINE Authors: Chen, L; Holsapple, CW Author Full Names: Chen, Liang; Holsapple, Clyde W. Source: JOURNAL OF ORGANIZATIONAL COMPUTING AND ELECTRONIC COMMERCE, 23 (4):392-412; 10.1080/10919392.2013.840467 OCT 1 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: bibliometrics, breadth, citation, H-index, impact factor, impact measures, intensity, journal evaluation, journal quality, journal stature, power measures, revealed preference KeyWords Plus: GOOGLE SCHOLAR; IMPACT FACTOR; H-INDEX; SYSTEMS; POWER Abstract: Assessing the relative stature of journals devoted to the information systems (IS) discipline is an important issue for IS scholars and those who evaluate them. Even though journal assessment results are often dubiously applied by those making hiring, promotion, and merit decisions, the fact that they are so often a major ingredient in these decisions demands that we understand underlying journal assessment processes. Beyond processes involving the opinions of various experts, we here examine how IS journals can be evaluated based on overt behaviors of crowds of IS scholars. These behaviors are revealed preferences, in contrast to stated preferences found in opinions. Two classes of objective journal assessments are studied: impact measures and power measures. Among the former, we find that so-called journal impact factors are problematic, rendering their meaningfulness in evaluating journal stature highly suspect. Another kind of impact measure, the H-index, is found to be a more straightforward way to gauge journal impact. Two power measures for assessing IS journal stature are examined: publishing intensity and publishing breadth. The stature of IS journals according to each of the impact measures and power measures is determined. A comparison of the results shows that a small group of four or five IS journals are repeatedly found at the top across multiple objective assessment approaches. To account for both the consumption and production of IS research, it is suggested that a combined use of impact and power measures be employed in exercises aimed at evaluating relative statures of journals devoted to IS research. Addresses: [Chen, Liang; Holsapple, Clyde W.] Univ Kentucky, Gatton Coll Business & Econ, Lexington, KY 40506 USA. E-mail Addresses: cwhols at uky.edu Cited Reference Count: 30 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC, 325 CHESTNUT ST, SUITE 800, PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 USA ISSN: 1091-9392 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Information Systems; Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications Research Areas: Computer Science IDS Number: 242DV Unique ID: WOS:000326218500005 Cited References: Romano Jr N. C., 2009, Communications of the Association for Information Systems, V25, P41 Garfield E, 2006, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V295, P90 Jacso Peter, 2008, ONLINE INFORMATION REVIEW, V32, P102 Egghe Leo, 2010, ANNUAL REVIEW OF INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V44, P65 Lorzano G. A., 2012, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, V63, P2140 Curry S., 2012, Sick of impact factors, Gehanno Jean-Fran?ois, 2013, BMC medical informatics and decision making, V13, P7 Holsapple Clyde W., 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P318 O'Leary Daniel E., 2008, DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS, V45, P972 American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB), 2012, San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment, Garfield E., 2003, International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, V3, P363 Hirsch J. E., 2007, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V104, P19193 Holsapple Clyde W., 2008, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V59, P166 Lariviere V., 2013, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Smith SD, 2004, FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, V33, P133 Chen H., 2011, ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems, V2, P1 Jacso Peter, 2008, ONLINE INFORMATION REVIEW, V32, P437 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Jacso P, 2001, CORTEX, V37, P590 Harzing Anne-Wil, 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P41 O'Leary D.E., 2009, Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, V16, Holsapple C. W., 2009, Communications of the Association for Information Systems, V25, P11 Seglen PO, 1997, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V314, P498 Garfield E., 1986, Information Processing & Management, V22, P445 Noruzi A, 2005, LIBRI, V55, P170 Walters William H., 2007, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V43, P1121 Vanclay Jerome K., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P211 Simons Kai, 2008, SCIENCE, V322, P165 Lariviere Vincent, 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P858 Harzing A.-W.K., 2008, Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, V8, P61 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326510500019 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: The use of the Hirsch index in benchmarking hepatic surgery research Authors: Cucchetti, A; Mazzotti, F; Pellegrini, S; Cescon, M; Maroni, L; Ercolani, G; Pinna, AD Author Full Names: Cucchetti, Alessandro; Mazzotti, Federico; Pellegrini, Sara; Cescon, Matteo; Maroni, Lorenzo; Ercolani, Giorgio; Pinna, Antonio Daniele Source: AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 206 (4):560-566; 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2013.01.037 OCT 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Hepatic surgery, Surgical therapy, H-index, Academic research, Bibliometric measures KeyWords Plus: H-INDEX; INDICATORS; RANKING Abstract: BACKGROUND: The Hirsch index (h-index) is recognized as an effective way to summarize an individual's scientific research output. However, a benchmark for evaluating surgeon scientists in the field of hepatic surgery is still not available. METHODS: A total of 3,251 authors who published between 1949 and 2011 were identified using the Scopus identification number. The h-index, the total number of cited document, the total number of citations, and the scientific age were calculated for each author using both Scopus and Google Scholar. RESULTS: The median h-index was 6 and the median scientific age, assessed with Google Scholar, was 19 years. The numbers of cited documents, numbers of citations, and h-indexes obtained from Scopus and Google Scholar showed good correlation with one another; however, the results from the 2 databases were modified in different ways by scientific age. By plotting scientific age against h-index percentiles an h-index growth chart for both Scopus database and Google Scholar was provided. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis provides a first benchmark to assess surgeon scientists' productivity in the field of liver surgery. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Addresses: [Cucchetti, Alessandro; Mazzotti, Federico; Pellegrini, Sara; Cescon, Matteo; Maroni, Lorenzo; Ercolani, Giorgio; Pinna, Antonio Daniele] Univ Bologna, S Orsola M Malpighi Hosp, Dept Med & Surg Sci DIMEC, Alma Mater Studiorum, I-40138 Bologna, Italy. E-mail Addresses: aleqko at libero.it Cited Reference Count: 15 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: EXCERPTA MEDICA INC-ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC, 685 ROUTE 202-206 STE 3, BRIDGEWATER, NJ 08807 USA ISSN: 0002-9610 Web of Science Categories: Surgery Research Areas: Surgery IDS Number: 246BF Unique ID: WOS:000326510500019 Cited References: Podlubny Igor, 2006, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V15, P154 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Hirsch J. E., 2007, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V104, P19193 Harzing AW, Publish or Perish 2007, Lee Janet, 2009, JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, V111, P387 Ball P, 2005, NATURE, V436, P900 Egghe Leo, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P131 Jin B., 1997, ISSI Newsletter, V3, P6 Horne Rob, 2009, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V339, Martin BR, 1996, SCIENTOMETRICS, V36, P343 Fersht Alan, 2009, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V106, P6883 Ashrafian Hutan, 2009, LANCET, V374, P1045 Poynard Thierry, 2011, CLINICS AND RESEARCH IN HEPATOLOGY AND GASTROENTEROLOGY, V35, P375 Ball Philip, 2007, NATURE, V448, P737 Costas Rodrigo, 2007, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V1, P193 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326254400002 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Assessment of psychology journals: correlation of impact factor and h-index vs. Latindex criteria Authors: Gamez, AM Author Full Names: Matias Gamez, A. Source: INVESTIGACION BIBLIOTECOLOGICA, 27 (61):15-27; SEP-DEC 2013 Language: Spanish Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Scientific Journals, Impact factor, h-index, Latindex, Research evaluation KeyWords Plus: SCIENTIFIC JOURNALS; SPANISH JOURNALS; QUALITY; LIMITATIONS; INDICATORS Abstract: The goal of this study is to explore the extent to which several psychology journals may be similarly classified on the basis of citation count through the impact factor proposed by Journal Citation Reports and the h-index (Hirsch, 2005), against a given journal's compliance with the Latindex Catalogue criteria for assessing editorial quality. Using these parameters, we carried out three separate journal rankings and found that the correlation between the Latindex ranking and either of the former is not statistically distinct from zero. The suitability of applying editorial- rather than citation-based criteria to evaluate the quality of psychology journals is discussed. This discussion proposes using a mix of editorial criteria such as circulation, international reach and the journal's manuscript review process and editorial policies. Addresses: Univ Jaen, Jaen, Spain. E-mail Addresses: amatiasgm at gmail.com Cited Reference Count: 24 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: UNIV NACIONAL AUTONOMA MEXICO, CIUDAD UNIV, CENTRO UNIV BIBLIOTECOLOGICAS, TORRE II HUMANIDADES, PISO 11, 12 & 13, MEXICO CITY, CP 04510, MEXICO ISSN: 0187-358X Web of Science Categories: Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: 242PL Unique ID: WOS:000326254400002 Cited References: Garfield E., 2003, International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, V3, P363 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Aleixandre-Benavent Rafael, 2007, PROFESIONAL DE LA INFORMACION, V16, P4 ANECA, 2008, Como se cumplimenta el apartado ''indicios de calidad'' de una publicacion cientifica en el modelo de CV?, Coslado Maria-Angeles, 2011, PROFESIONAL DE LA INFORMACION, V20, P159 Torres-Salinas Daniel, 2010, PROFESIONAL DE LA INFORMACION, V19, P201 RESH, 2012, Revistas Espanolas de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades: valoracion integrada e indice de citas, Carbonell, 2009, Anales de psicologia, V25, P209 Cami J, 1997, MEDICINA CLINICA, V109, P515 SCImago, 2007, SJR-SCImago Journal & Country Rank, Lopez A. J., 2005, Revista Espanola de Documentacion Cientifica, V28, P22 Sternberg R. J., 2001, Observer, V14, Matias Gamez A., 2011, INVESTIGACION BIBLIOTECOLOGICA, V25, P63 Buela-Casal G, 2002, PSICOTHEMA, V14, P837 Seglen PO, 1997, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V314, P498 Carretero-Dios H, 2005, PSICOTHEMA, V17, P669 Braun Tibor, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P169 Buela-Casal G, 2003, PSICOTHEMA, V15, P23 Alcain MD, 2005, PSICOTHEMA, V17, P179 Bordons M, 2002, SCIENTOMETRICS8th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, JUL 17, 2001, SYDNEY, AUSTRALIA, V53, P195 Gonzalez-Pereira Borja, 2010, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V4, P379 GARFIELD E, 1955, SCIENCE, V122, P108 Cangas A.J., 2006, International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, V6, P417 Buela-Casal G, 2001, Papeles del Psicologo, V79, P53 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326759700003 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Rhinology fellowship training and its scholarly impact Authors: Svider, PF; Blake, DM; Setzen, M; Folbe, AJ; Baredes, S; Eloy, JA Author Full Names: Svider, Peter F.; Blake, Danielle M.; Setzen, Michael; Folbe, Adam J.; Baredes, Soly; Eloy, Jean Anderson Source: AMERICAN JOURNAL OF RHINOLOGY & ALLERGY, 27 (5):E131-E134; 10.2500/ajra.2013.27.3947 SEP-OCT 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article KeyWords Plus: H-INDEX; ACADEMIC OTOLARYNGOLOGY; RESEARCH PRODUCTIVITY; HEAD; SURGEONS; SOCIETY Abstract: Background: Previous examination of the impact of fellowship training on scholarly productivity among otolaryngologists found that head and neck surgeons and otologists had a higher mean h-index than fellowship-trained rhinologists. Because fellowship training in rhinology is a historically newer trend, the objectives of the present analysis were to further characterize research productivity among fellowship-trained academic rhinologists, including geographic and temporal trends, to gain insight into the future direction of scholarly pursuits within the field. Methods: Fellowship-trained rhinologists in academic practices were identified from the American Rhinologic Society online listings and organized by academic rank, number of years in practice, location, and h-index, as calculated using the Scopus database. Results: Mean h-index rose with increasing years in practice after fellowship. The h-index, number of publications, and the E-factor (a newly described bibliometric) increased with successive academic rank. The E-factor for rhinologists in this current analysis was not statistically different from the values calculated for other otolaryngology subspecialties (p > 0.05). Conclusion: Fellowship-training in rhinology is a relatively recent development, with half of the academic rhinologists included in this analysis having completed fellowship training within the past 5 years. Scholarly productivity among academic rhinologists increases with academic seniority. As the current cohort of fellowship-trained rhinologists progress in their academic careers, previously described deficits in scholarly productivity relative to other subspecialties are expected to diminish. Addresses: [Svider, Peter F.; Blake, Danielle M.; Baredes, Soly; Eloy, Jean Anderson] Univ Med & Dent New Jersey, Dept Otolaryngol Head & Neck Surg, New Jersey Med Sch, Newark, NJ 07103 USA. [Setzen, Michael] N Shore Univ Hosp, Rhinol Sect, Manhasset, NY USA. [Setzen, Michael] NYU, Dept Otolaryngol, Sch Med, New York, NY 10016 USA. [Folbe, Adam J.] Wayne State Univ, Dept Otolaryngol Head & Neck Surg, Detroit, MI USA. [Baredes, Soly; Eloy, Jean Anderson] Univ Med & Dent New Jersey, Ctr Skull Base & Pituitary Surg, Neurol Inst New Jersey, New Jersey Med Sch, Newark, NJ 07103 USA. [Eloy, Jean Anderson] Univ Med & Dent New Jersey, Dept Neurol Surg, New Jersey Med Sch, Newark, NJ 07103 USA. E-mail Addresses: Jean.Anderson.Eloy at gmail.com Cited Reference Count: 27 Times Cited: 1 Publisher: OCEAN SIDE PUBLICATIONS INC, 95 PITMAN ST, PROVIDENCE, RI 02906 USA ISSN: 1945-8924 Web of Science Categories: Otorhinolaryngology Research Areas: Otorhinolaryngology IDS Number: 249EL Unique ID: WOS:000326759700003 Cited References: Kaga Kimitaka, 2007, ACTA OTO-LARYNGOLOGICA, V127, P408 Tabaee A, 2012, Int Forum Allergy Rhinol, V3, P254 Svider Peter F., 2013, LARYNGOSCOPE, V123, P118 BAILEY BJ, 1994, ARCHIVES OF OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD & NECK SURGERY, V120, P1065 Pagel P. S., 2011, ACTA ANAESTHESIOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA, V55, P1085 KENNEDY DW, 1985, ARCHIVES OF OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD & NECK SURGERY, V111, P643 Eloy Jean Anderson, 2013, OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD AND NECK SURGERY, V148, P215 Golub Justin S., 2011, LARYNGOSCOPE, V121, P882 Thomaz Petronio Generoso, 2011, ARQUIVOS BRASILEIROS DE CARDIOLOGIA, V96, P90 Eloy JA, 2013, Laryngoscope, Tabaee Abtin, 2009, ARCHIVES OF OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD & NECK SURGERY54th Annual Fall Meeting of the American-Rhinologic-Society, SEP20, 2008, Chicago, IL, V135, P571 Eloy JA, 2013, Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, Svider Peter F., 2013, LARYNGOSCOPE, V123, P103 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Hsu Amy K., 2010, LARYNGOSCOPEAnnual Meeting of the Southern Section of the Triological-Society, FEB 04-07, 2010, Orlando, FL, V120, P1263 Engqvist Leif, 2008, TRENDS IN ECOLOGY & EVOLUTION, V23, P250 Lee Janet, 2009, JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, V111, P387 Purvis Andy, 2006, TRENDS IN ECOLOGY & EVOLUTION, V21, P422 Eloy Jean Anderson, 2012, LARYNGOSCOPE, V122, P2690 Heller KS, 2003, ARCHIVES OF OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD & NECK SURGERY, V129, P9 Sataloff Robert T., 2009, ENT-EAR NOSE & THROAT JOURNAL, V88, P1084 Eloy Jean Anderson, 2013, OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD AND NECK SURGERY, V148, P764 Svider Peter F., 2013, LARYNGOSCOPE, V123, P884 Benway Brian M., 2009, UROLOGY, V74, P30 Raynor Eileen M., 2008, ENT-EAR NOSE & THROAT JOURNAL, V87, P666 Batra Pete S., 2011, INTERNATIONAL FORUM OF ALLERGY & RHINOLOGY, V1, P206 Gantz BJ, 2002, OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY, V23, P623 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327026800001 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: The case for caution in predicting scientists' future impact Authors: Penner, O; Petersen, AM; Pan, RK; Fortunato, S Author Full Names: Penner, Orion; Petersen, Alexander M.; Pan, Raj K.; Fortunato, Santo Source: PHYSICS TODAY, 66 (4):8-9; APR 2013 Language: English Document Type: Editorial Material KeyWords Plus: INDEX Addresses: [Penner, Orion; Petersen, Alexander M.] IMT Inst Adv Studies Lucca, Lucca, Italy. [Pan, Raj K.; Fortunato, Santo] Aalto Univ, Sch Sci, Aalto, Finland. Cited Reference Count: 5 Times Cited: 1 Publisher: AMER INST PHYSICS, CIRCULATION & FULFILLMENT DIV, 2 HUNTINGTON QUADRANGLE, STE 1 N O 1, MELVILLE, NY 11747-4501 USA ISSN: 0031-9228 Web of Science Categories: Physics, Multidisciplinary Research Areas: Physics IDS Number: 252RI Unique ID: WOS:000327026800001 Cited References: Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Hirsch J. E., 2007, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V104, P19193 Acuna Daniel E., 2012, NATURE, V489, P201 Mazloumian Amin, 2012, PLOS ONE, V7, Petersen Alexander M., 2012, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V109, P5213 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326241400056 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Making the H-index more relevant: A Step Towards Standard Classes For Citation Classification Authors: Abdullatif, M Author Full Names: Abdullatif, Mohammad Editor(s): Chan CY; Lu J; Norvag K; Tanin E Source: 2013 IEEE 29TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON DATA ENGINEERING WORKSHOPS (ICDEW), 330-333; 2013 Book Series: IEEE International Conference on Data Engineering Workshop Language: English Document Type: Proceedings Paper Conference Title: 29th IEEE International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE) Conference Date: APR 08-12, 2013 Conference Location: Brisbane, AUSTRALIA Conference Sponsors: IEEE, IEEE Comp Soc, IEEE Tech Comm Data Engn, SAP, Microsoft, Tourism & Events Queensland, HP, Univ Queensland, CSIRO, RMIT Univ, Oracle Labs, Renmin Univ, SA Ctr Big Data Res, Univ Melbourne, NICTA, Google, NEC, Facebook, Univ New S Wales KeyWords Plus: QUALITY; SCIENCE Abstract: The H-index is gaining popularity as a way of measuring the research impact of an academic paper. However, it has been criticized because it gives all citations equal weight. Citation classification can solve this criticism by categorising citations based on the purpose or function of the citation. An important element for performing citation classification is the presence of a standard set of classes (known as a classification scheme) to enable the comparison between the accuracy of the different techniques currently used to perform citation classification. Such a standard scheme is not available and therefore we aim to fill this gap by generating a citation classification scheme automatically. The scheme is generated by clustering four large datasets of sentences containing citations using X-means. The main contribution of this research is adapting the similarity distance between verbs extracted from the citation sentences using WordNet. Addresses: Univ Auckland, Dept Comp Sci, Auckland 1, New Zealand. Cited Reference Count: 12 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: IEEE, 345 E 47TH ST, NEW YORK, NY 10017 USA ISSN: 1943-2895 ISBN: 978-1-4673-5304-5 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Theory & Methods; Engineering, Electrical & Electronic Research Areas: Computer Science; Engineering IDS Number: BHP47 Unique ID: WOS:000326241400056 Cited References: Lawrence Peter A., 2007, CURRENT BIOLOGY, V17, PR583 MORAVCSIK MJ, 1975, SOCIAL STUDIES OF SCIENCE, V5, P86 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 GARFIELD E, 1965, STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION METHODS FOR MECHANIZED DOCUMENTATION SYMPOSIUM PROCEEDINGS, V1964, P189 Dong Cailing, 2011, Proceedings of the 5th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (IJCNLP), Chiang Mai, Thailand, P623 Fellbaum Christiane, 1998, Language, Speech, and Communication, LINDSEY D, 1989, SCIENTOMETRICS, V15, P189 Radoulov R., 2008, Exploring automatic citation classification, Leacock C., 1998, Combining local context and WordNet similarity for word sense identification, P305 Jain AK, 1999, ACM COMPUTING SURVEYS, V31, P264 Pelleg D, 2000, Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Machine Learning, San Francisco, P727 Jain A., 1988, Algorithms for clustering data, ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326315400002 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: On the measurement and benchmarking of research impact among active logistics scholars Authors: Rao, S; Iyengar, D; Goldsby, TJ Author Full Names: Rao, Shashank; Iyengar, Deepak; Goldsby, Thomas J. Source: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL DISTRIBUTION & LOGISTICS MANAGEMENT, 43 (10):814-832; 10.1108/IJPDLM-07-2012-0207 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Citation, Bibliometics, Logistics scholarship, Research impact KeyWords Plus: SUPPLY-CHAIN MANAGEMENT; CITATION ANALYSIS; GOOGLE SCHOLAR; ACADEMIC JOURNALS; HIRSCH-INDEX; H-INDEX; BUSINESS; SCIENCE; COLLABORATION; AFFILIATION Abstract: Purpose - Scholarly interest in carrying out impactful research continues to remain high. Yet, given that citations of scholarly work can never decrease with time, traditional measures of research impact (such as raw counts of citations) unwittingly discriminate against early career researchers and also make it hard to identify future high impact scholars. In the current study, the paper compares several commonly used measures of research impact to identify one that best normalizes for the effect of career stage. The measure thus applies equally across most career stages, providing a usable impact benchmark for logistics scholars irrespective of seniority level. The paper also aims to present benchmarks on that metric to help logistics scholars identify their research impact vis-d-vis their peers. Design/methodology/approach - Bibliometric data on the research of 702 logistics scholars were collected and analyzed by dividing the scholars into different cohorts based on seniority. Comparisons of different citation metrics were then made. Findings - The h-rate provides the most appropriate basis for comparing research impact across logistics scholars of various career stages. Benchmark h-rates are provided for scholars to identify their research impact. Originality/value - The authors are unaware of any other work in the logistics field that measures the research impact of logistics scholars in this manner. Addresses: [Rao, Shashank] Auburn Univ, Coll Business, Dept Supply Chain & Informat Syst, Auburn, AL 36849 USA. [Iyengar, Deepak] Cent Washington Univ, Coll Business, Dept Finance & Supply Chain Management, Washington, DC USA. [Goldsby, Thomas J.] Ohio State Univ, Fisher Coll Business, Columbus, OH 43210 USA. E-mail Addresses: shashank.rao at auburn.edu Cited Reference Count: 57 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LIMITED, HOWARD HOUSE, WAGON LANE, BINGLEY BD16 1WA, W YORKSHIRE, ENGLAND ISSN: 0960-0035 Web of Science Categories: Management Research Areas: Business & Economics IDS Number: 243KN Unique ID: WOS:000326315400002 Cited References: Meho Lokman I., 2007, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V58, P2105 Carter C. R., 2003, The Journal of Supply Chain Management, V39, P27 Franceschet Massimo, 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P1950 Maloni Michael, 2012, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL DISTRIBUTION & LOGISTICS MANAGEMENT, V42, P83 Srivastava Samir K., 2007, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT REVIEWS, V9, P53 Wolf J., 2008, The nature of SCM research, Carter Craig R., 2005, TRANSPORTATION JOURNAL, V44, P54 Harzing AW, 2007, Publish or perish, Kuhn T. S., 1962, The structure of scientific revolutions, van Raan AJ., 2005, Scientometrics, V67, P491 PETERS HPF, 1994, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V45, P39 Mingers John, 2006, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V42, P1451 Bennis WG, 2005, HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW, V83, P96 Wolfgang G., 2004, Scientometrics, V59, P281 Menachof D.A., 2004, International J. of Logistics: Research and Applications, V7, P297 LIEBOWITZ SJ, 1984, JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC LITERATURE, V22, P77 Kumar V., 2004, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, V34, Cantor David E., 2010, JOURNAL OF BUSINESS LOGISTICS, V31, P197 Bar-Llan J., 2008, Scientometrics, V74, P257 Halldorsson A., 2005, Research Methodologies in SCM, P107 Burrell Quentin L., 2007, SCIENTOMETRICS, V73, P19 Vincent A., 2011, J of Applied Bus. Res., V16, P1 Mckinnon A., 2013, Intl J. of Physical Distribution and Logistics Mgmt, V43, P1 Carter Craig R., 2009, TRANSPORTATION JOURNAL, V48, P42 Ford JB, 2001, INDUSTRIAL MARKETING MANAGEMENT, V30, P441 Wunsch D, 1986, Bus. Education Forum, V40, P31 Kovacs G., 2005, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, V35, Holsapple Clyde W., 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P318 CRONIN B, 1981, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V37, P16 Mingers J., 2009, JOURNAL OF THE OPERATIONAL RESEARCH SOCIETY, V60, P1143 Vokurka R. J., 1996, J. of Operations Management, V14, P345 PRITCHAR.A, 1969, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V25, P348 MACROBERTS MH, 1989, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V40, P342 Leimu R, 2005, BIOSCIENCE, V55, P438 Reinsch Jr N.L., 1993, J. of Business Communication, V30, P435 Harzing Anne-Wil, 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P41 Gupta UG, 1997, INTERFACES, V27, P85 Ranatunga J., 1997, J. of Business Venturing, V12, P197 Bernauer Thomas, 2010, SWISS POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW, V16, P279 Fawcett S.E., 2011, Journal of Business Logistics, V32, P115 Charvet Francois F., 2008, JOURNAL OF BUSINESS LOGISTICS, V29, P47 Hult G. Tomas M., 2008, DECISION SCIENCES, V39, P323 Chapman Karen, 2009, JOURNAL OF BUSINESS LOGISTICS, V30, P197 Bartlett JE, 2001, Info Technol Learning Perform J, V19, P43 Walters William H., 2007, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V43, P1121 Holsapple Clyde W., 2008, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V59, P166 van Raan A.J., 2003, Technological - Assessment Theory & Practice, V1, P20 Autry Chad, 2005, TRANSPORTATION JOURNAL, V44, P27 Mingers John, 2007, EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS, V16, P303 Menachof David A., 2009, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL DISTRIBUTION & LOGISTICS MANAGEMENT, V39, P145 Mingers J., 2008, JOURNAL OF THE OPERATIONAL RESEARCH SOCIETY, V59, P1013 Frankel R., 2012, Transportation J., V51, P164 Spens K.M., 2006, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, V36, PERITZ BC, 1992, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V43, P448 Svensson Goran, 2008, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL DISTRIBUTION & LOGISTICS MANAGEMENT, V38, P588 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Saad Gad, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P117 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326396401135 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: TOO FEW TOO FAR: RESEARCH PRODUCTIVITY ASSESSMENT IN MALAYSIA BASED ON H-INDEX ANALYSIS Authors: Alfred, R; Tanakinjal, GH; Obit, JH Author Full Names: Alfred, Rayner; Tanakinjal, Geoffrey Harvey; Obit, Joe Henry Editor(s): Chova LG; Martinez AL; Torres IC Source: INTED2012: INTERNATIONAL TECHNOLOGY, EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT CONFERENCE, 1925-1934; 2012 Book Series: INTED Proceedings Language: English Document Type: Proceedings Paper Conference Title: 6th International Conference of Technology, Education and Development (INTED) Conference Date: MAR 05-07, 2012 Conference Location: Valencia, SPAIN Author Keywords: Research activities, Innovation, Education, Staff performance, Research assessment Abstract: The h-index is an index that attempts to measure both the productivity and impact of the published work of a scientist or scholar. This paper outlines studies that have been conducted in Malaysia related to h-index analysis. The aim of this paper is to assess the performance of academic staffs according to schools in Universiti Malaysia Sabah (UMS) based on the h-index analysis. Then, the relative performance of academic staffs in engineering school in UMS is further compared with other academic staffs from other engineering schools or faculties in four research universities in Malayisa. These universities include Universiti Malaya, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Universiti Putra Malaysia and finally Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. Based on the findings, this paper outlines recommended strategies to the management of Universiti Malaysia Sabah (UMS) in order to improve the research productivity based on the h-index analysis. Addresses: [Alfred, Rayner] Univ Malaysia Sabah, Sch Engn & Informat Technol, Sabah, Malaysia. E-mail Addresses: ralfred at ums.edu.my; tanakinjal at yahoo.com; joehenryobit at yahoo.com Cited Reference Count: 4 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: IATED-INT ASSOC TECHNOLOGY EDUCATION A& DEVELOPMENT, LAURI VOLPI 6, VALENICA, BURJASSOT 46100, SPAIN ISSN: 2340-1079 ISBN: 978-84-615-5563-5 Web of Science Categories: Education & Educational Research Research Areas: Education & Educational Research IDS Number: BHQ76 Unique ID: WOS:000326396401135 Cited References: Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Ho-Abdullah I., 2007, Institutional benchmarking: some reflections on the operational definitions of indicators: Knowledge for Development: Assessing the Capacity, Quality and Relevance of Universities in Asia, Meho Lokman I., 2007, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V58, P2105 MOSTI, 2010, Science and Technology Knowledge Productivity in Malaysia, Bibliometric Study 2008, ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327197900004 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Most-Cited Scholars in Four International *Journals* Authors: Cohn, EG; Farrington, DP; Iratzoqui, A Author Full Names: Cohn, Ellen G.; Farrington, David P.; Iratzoqui, Amaia Book Author(s): Cohn, EG (Cohn, EG); Farrington, DP (Farrington, DP); Iratzoqui, A (Iratzoqui, A) Book Author Full Names: Cohn, EG; Farrington, DP; Iratzoqui, A Source: MOST-CITED SCHOLARS IN CRIMINOLOGY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE, 1986-2010, 27-44; 10.1007/978-3-319-01222-3_3 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article; Book Chapter Addresses: [Cohn, Ellen G.] Florida Int Univ, Miami, FL 33199 USA. [Farrington, David P.] Univ Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 1TN, England. [Farrington, David P.] Univ Cambridge, Inst Criminol, Cambridge CB2 1TN, England. [Iratzoqui, Amaia] Florida Int Univ, Coll Criminol & Criminal Justice, Miami, FL 33199 USA. Cited Reference Count: 0 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, 233 SPRING STREET, NEW YORK, NY 10013, UNITED STATES ISBN: 978-3-319-01221-6 Book DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-01222-3 IDS Number: BIB14 Unique ID: WOS:000327197900004 ======================================================================= *Record 4 of 89. Search terms matched: JOURNALS(1) *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327197900005 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Most-Cited Scholars in Six American Criminology and Criminal Justice *Journals* Authors: Cohn, EG; Farrington, DP; Iratzoqui, A Author Full Names: Cohn, Ellen G.; Farrington, David P.; Iratzoqui, Amaia Book Author(s): Cohn, EG (Cohn, EG); Farrington, DP (Farrington, DP); Iratzoqui, A (Iratzoqui, A) Book Author Full Names: Cohn, EG; Farrington, DP; Iratzoqui, A Source: MOST-CITED SCHOLARS IN CRIMINOLOGY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE, 1986-2010, 45-68; 10.1007/978-3-319-01222-3_4 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article; Book Chapter Addresses: [Cohn, Ellen G.] Florida Int Univ, Miami, FL 33199 USA. [Farrington, David P.] Univ Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 1TN, England. [Farrington, David P.] Univ Cambridge, Inst Criminol, Cambridge CB2 1TN, England. [Iratzoqui, Amaia] Florida Int Univ, Coll Criminol & Criminal Justice, Miami, FL 33199 USA. Cited Reference Count: 0 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, 233 SPRING STREET, NEW YORK, NY 10013, UNITED STATES ISBN: 978-3-319-01221-6 Book DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-01222-3 IDS Number: BIB14 Unique ID: WOS:000327197900005 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327197900002 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: *Citation Analysis* in Criminology and Criminal Justice Authors: Cohn, EG; Farrington, DP; Iratzoqui, A Author Full Names: Cohn, Ellen G.; Farrington, David P.; Iratzoqui, Amaia Book Author(s): Cohn, EG (Cohn, EG); Farrington, DP (Farrington, DP); Iratzoqui, A (Iratzoqui, A) Book Author Full Names: Cohn, EG; Farrington, DP; Iratzoqui, A Source: MOST-CITED SCHOLARS IN CRIMINOLOGY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE, 1986-2010, 1-13; 10.1007/978-3-319-01222-3_1 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article; Book Chapter Addresses: [Cohn, Ellen G.] Florida Int Univ, Miami, FL 33199 USA. [Farrington, David P.] Univ Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 1TN, England. [Farrington, David P.] Univ Cambridge, Inst Criminol, Cambridge CB2 1TN, England. [Iratzoqui, Amaia] Florida Int Univ, Coll Criminol & Criminal Justice, Miami, FL 33199 USA. Cited Reference Count: 0 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, 233 SPRING STREET, NEW YORK, NY 10013, UNITED STATES ISBN: 978-3-319-01221-6 Book DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-01222-3 IDS Number: BIB14 Unique ID: WOS:000327197900002 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327197900006 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Most-Cited Scholars in 20 *Journals* Authors: Cohn, EG; Farrington, DP; Iratzoqui, A Author Full Names: Cohn, Ellen G.; Farrington, David P.; Iratzoqui, Amaia Book Author(s): Cohn, EG (Cohn, EG); Farrington, DP (Farrington, DP); Iratzoqui, A (Iratzoqui, A) Book Author Full Names: Cohn, EG; Farrington, DP; Iratzoqui, A Source: MOST-CITED SCHOLARS IN CRIMINOLOGY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE, 1986-2010, 69-85; 10.1007/978-3-319-01222-3_5 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article; Book Chapter Addresses: [Cohn, Ellen G.] Florida Int Univ, Miami, FL 33199 USA. [Farrington, David P.] Univ Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 1TN, England. [Farrington, David P.] Univ Cambridge, Inst Criminol, Cambridge CB2 1TN, England. [Iratzoqui, Amaia] Florida Int Univ, Coll Criminol & Criminal Justice, Miami, FL 33199 USA. Cited Reference Count: 0 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, 233 SPRING STREET, NEW YORK, NY 10013, UNITED STATES ISBN: 978-3-319-01221-6 Book DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-01222-3 IDS Number: BIB14 Unique ID: WOS:000327197900006 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327219900019 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Knowledge-transfer analysis based on *co-citation* clustering Authors: Wang, XZ; Zhao, YJ; Liu, R; Zhang, J Author Full Names: Wang, Xuezhao; Zhao, Yajuan; Liu, Rui; Zhang, Jing Source: SCIENTOMETRICS, 97 (3):859-869; 10.1007/s11192-013-1077-6 DEC 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Knowledge-transfer, Co-citation, Cluster analysis, Transgenic rice KeyWords Plus: SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE; SCIENCE; PATENTS; PROTOPLASTS; TECHNOLOGY; PLANTS; GENE Abstract: Based on co-citation cluster analysis, we propose a knowledge-transfer analysis model for any technology field. In this model, patent data with backward citations to non-patent literature and forward citations by later patents would be analyzed. Co-citation clustering of the cited articles defines scientific knowledge sources, while that of the patents themselves defines technology fronts. According to the citation between the article and patent clusters, the landscape of knowledge-transfer including route and strength between scientific knowledge sources and technology fronts can be mapped out. The model has been applied to the field of transgenic rice. As a result of the analysis, ten scientific knowledge sources and eight technology fronts have emerged, and reasonable links between them have been established, which clearly show how knowledge has been transferred in this field. Addresses: [Wang, Xuezhao; Zhao, Yajuan; Zhang, Jing] Chinese Acad Sci, Natl Sci Lib, Beijing, Peoples R China. [Liu, Rui] Chinese Acad Sci, Inst Phys, Beijing 100080, Peoples R China. E-mail Addresses: wangxz at mail.las.ac.cn Funding Acknowledgement: Youth Talent Frontier Project of Knowledge Innovation Project of National Science Library of Chinese Academy of Sciences [Q110031] Funding Text: The research was supported by Youth Talent Frontier Project of Knowledge Innovation Project of National Science Library of Chinese Academy of Sciences (Grant No. Q110031). The authors would thank Dr. B. Zhang for helpful identification and discussion on the details of article and patent clusters, and Dr. T. Han for helpful discussion on the analysis model. Cited Reference Count: 19 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0138-9130 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications; Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Computer Science; Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: 255DP Unique ID: WOS:000327219900019 Cited References: SMALL H, 1973, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V24, P265 Meyer M, 2000, RESEARCH POLICY, V29, P409 Wang Xianwen, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V88, P761 Zhao Dangzhi, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V87, P115 Schiebel Edgar, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS13th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, JUL 04-07, 2011, Durban, SOUTH AFRICA, V91, P557 NARIN F, 1985, SCIENTOMETRICS, V7, P369 Lai KK, 2005, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V41, P313 Neil R., 1979, IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems, V26, P377 Mogee ME, 1998, EXPERT OPINION ON THERAPEUTIC PATENTS, V8, P1323 SMALL H, 1985, SCIENTOMETRICS, V8, P321 Han Y., 2004, Knowledge-transfer and its analysis methods: From basic research to technology, TORIYAMA K, 1988, BIO-TECHNOLOGY, V6, P1072 OECD, 2011, The section of Connecting to Knowledge, SMALL H, 1985, SCIENTOMETRICS, V7, P391 Mogee ME, 1999, EXPERT OPINION ON THERAPEUTIC PATENTS, V9, P291 ZHANG W, 1988, THEORETICAL AND APPLIED GENETICS, V76, P835 Hu Chang-Ping, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V86, P657 Chen CM, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS, V59, P199 Pang J., 2011, Research on measuring S&T fronts based on theoretic framework of knowledge flow-a case study on solar cell, ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327219900014 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Comparison of a *citation-based* indicator and peer review for absolute and specific measures of research-group excellence Authors: Mryglod, O; Kenna, R; Holovatch, Y; Berche, B Author Full Names: Mryglod, O.; Kenna, R.; Holovatch, Yu.; Berche, B. Source: SCIENTOMETRICS, 97 (3):767-777; 10.1007/s11192-013-1058-9 DEC 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Peer review, Citations, Research assessment exercise (RAE), Research excellence framework (REF) KeyWords Plus: SCIENTOMETRIC INDICATORS; RANKING; UNIVERSITIES; INDEX Abstract: Many different measures are used to assess academic research excellence and these are subject to ongoing discussion and debate within the scientometric, university-management and policy-making communities internationally. One topic of continued importance is the extent to which citation-based indicators compare with peer-review-based evaluation. Here we analyse the correlations between values of a particular citation-based impact indicator and peer-review scores in several academic disciplines, from natural to social sciences and humanities. We perform the comparison for research groups rather than for individuals. We make comparisons on two levels. At an absolute level, we compare total impact and overall strength of the group as a whole. At a specific level, we compare academic impact and quality, normalised by the size of the group. We find very high correlations at the former level for some disciplines and poor correlations at the latter level for all disciplines. This means that, although the citation-based scores could help to describe research-group strength, in particular for the so-called hard sciences, they should not be used as a proxy for ranking or comparison of research groups. Moreover, the correlation between peer-evaluated and citation-based scores is weaker for soft sciences. Addresses: [Mryglod, O.; Holovatch, Yu.] Natl Acad Sci Ukraine, Inst Condensed Matter Phys, UA-79011 Lvov, Ukraine. [Kenna, R.] Coventry Univ, Appl Math Res Ctr, Coventry CV1 5FB, W Midlands, England. [Berche, B.] Univ Lorraine, F-54506 Vandoeuvre Les Nancy, France. E-mail Addresses: olesya at icmp.lviv.ua Funding Acknowledgement: 7th FP, IRSES project [269139]; IRSES project [295302] Funding Text: This work was supported in part by the 7th FP, IRSES project No. 269139 "Dynamics and cooperative phenomena in complex physical and biological environments" and IRSES project No. 295302 "Statistical physics in diverse realizations". The authors thank Jonathan Adams from Thomson Reuters Research Analytics for the data and Ihor Mryglod for fruitful discussions. Cited Reference Count: 31 Times Cited: 1 Publisher: SPRINGER, VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0138-9130 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications; Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Computer Science; Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: 255DP Unique ID: WOS:000327219900014 Cited References: Norris M, 2003, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V59, P709 Vinkler P, 2003, SCIENTOMETRICS, V58, P687 Stauffer Dietrich, 2013, JOURNAL OF STATISTICAL PHYSICS, V151, P9 Evidence, 2011, A University Alliance report, Schubert A, 1996, SCIENTOMETRICS, V36, P311 Warner J., 2003, American Society for Information Science and Technology, V30, P26 Donovan C., 2007, Science and Public Policy, V34, P538 Moed H. F., 2005, Citation analysis in research evaluation, Nature, 2010, Editorial, Metrics Special, V465, P845 Oppenheim C., 2008, Information Research, V13, Garfield E., 1973, Current Contents, V1, P406 Ioannidis John Pa, 2007, BMC MEDICINE, V5, Mryglod O., 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V95, P115 Billaut Jean-Charles, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V84, P237 Vinkler P, 2001, SCIENTOMETRICS, V50, P539 Bornmann Lutz, 2008, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V17, P149 Macilwain Colin, 2010, NATURE, V463, P291 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Bornmann Lutz, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V91, P857 Derrick G. E., 2001, PLoS One, V6, Egghe Leo, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P131 Kenna R., 2010, Scientometrics, V86, P527 Florian Razvan V., 2007, SCIENTOMETRICS, V72, P25 Evidence, 2010, Evidence (a Thomson Reuters business) report, RAE, 2008, Panel E., Williams R., 2012, Report of the project sponsored by Universitas 21, Butler Declan, 2010, NATURE, V464, P16 Evidence, 2012, Summary report prepared for the Institute of Physics by Evidence, Kenna R., 2011, Higher Education Management and Policy, V23, P1 GARFIELD E, 1955, SCIENCE, V122, P108 Van Raan AFJ, 2005, SCIENTOMETRICSConference on Bibliometric Analysis in Science and Research, NOV 05-07, 2003, Julich, GERMANY, V62, P133 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327219900007 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Analysis of *bibliometric* indicators for individual scholars in a large data set Authors: Radicchi, F; Castellano, C Author Full Names: Radicchi, Filippo; Castellano, Claudio Source: SCIENTOMETRICS, 97 (3):627-637; 10.1007/s11192-013-1027-3 DEC 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Statistical analysis, Citations, h-Index KeyWords Plus: H-INDEX; GOOGLE-SCHOLAR; HIRSCH-INDEX; CITATION ANALYSIS; IMPACT; SCIENCE; SCOPUS; DISTRIBUTIONS; APPLICANTS; FACULTY Abstract: Citation numbers and other quantities derived from bibliographic databases are becoming standard tools for the assessment of productivity and impact of research activities. Though widely used, still their statistical properties have not been well established so far. This is especially true in the case of bibliometric indicators aimed at the evaluation of individual scholars, because large-scale data sets are typically difficult to be retrieved. Here, we take advantage of a recently introduced large bibliographic data set, Google Scholar Citations, which collects the entire publication record of individual scholars. We analyze the scientific profile of more than 30,000 researchers, and study the relation between the h-index, the number of publications and the number of citations of individual scientists. While the number of publications of a scientist has a rather weak relation with his/her h-index, we find that the h-index of a scientist is strongly correlated with the number of citations that she/he has received so that the number of citations can be effectively be used as a proxy of the h-index. Allowing for the h-index to depend on both the number of citations and the number of publications, we find only a minor improvement. Addresses: [Radicchi, Filippo] Univ Rovira & Virgili, Dept Engn Quim, Tarragona 43007, Spain. [Castellano, Claudio] Ist Sistemi Complessi ISC CNR, I-00185 Rome, Italy. [Castellano, Claudio] Univ Roma La Sapienza, Dipartimento Fis, I-00185 Rome, Italy. E-mail Addresses: f.radicchi at gmail.com; claudio.castellano at roma1.infn.it Cited Reference Count: 50 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0138-9130 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications; Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Computer Science; Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: 255DP Unique ID: WOS:000327219900007 Cited References: Hendricks WA, 1936, ANNALS OF MATHEMATICAL STATISTICS, V7, P129 Bornmann Lutz, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS10th International Conference of the International-Society-for-Scientometrics-and-Informetrics, JUL 24-28, 2005, Stockholm, SWEDEN, V68, P427 Egghe Leo, 2010, ANNUAL REVIEW OF INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V44, P65 Meho Lokman I., 2007, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V58, P2105 Schubert Andras, 2007, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V1, P179 Hirsch J., 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United states of America, V102, P569 Lehmann Sune, 2006, NATURE, V444, P1003 Cabanac G., 2013, Scientometrics., Adler Robert, 2009, STATISTICAL SCIENCE, V24, P1 Costas Rodrigo, 2007, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V1, P193 Redner S, 1998, EUROPEAN PHYSICAL JOURNAL B, V4, P131 Laherrere J, 1998, EUROPEAN PHYSICAL JOURNAL B, V2, P525 Iglesias Juan E., 2007, SCIENTOMETRICS, V73, P303 Bornmann Lutz, 2008, PLOS ONE, V3, Jacso P, 2005, CURRENT SCIENCE, V89, P1537 Costas Rodrigo, 2008, SCIENTOMETRICS, V77, P267 MacRoberts MH, 1996, SCIENTOMETRICS, V36, P435 Harzing A.-W.K., 2008, Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, V8, P61 Jacso Peter, 2010, ONLINE INFORMATION REVIEW, V34, P175 DE SOLLA PRICE DEREK J., 1965, SCIENCE, V149, P510 Kinney A. L., 2007, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V104, P17943 DAVIS P, 1984, AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, V74, P225 Van Raan AFJ, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V67, P491 Stringer Michael J., 2008, PLOS ONE, V3, Radicchi F., 2009, Physical Review E, V80, Egghe Leo, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P131 West Jevin, 2010, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V61, P1800 Radicchi F., 2012, PLoS ONE, V7, Radicchi Filippo, 2008, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V105, P17268 Alonso S., 2009, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V3, P273 Redner S., 2010, Journal of Statistical Mechanics, Labbe C., 2011, ISSI newsletter, V6, P48 Wallace M. L., 2008, Journal of Informetrics, V3, P296 Pratelli Luca, 2012, SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF STATISTICS, V39, P681 Jacso P., 2005, Online Information Review, V29, Spruit H.C., 2012, ArXiv e-prints 1201.5476, Rosvall Martin, 2008, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V105, P1118 Stringer Michael J., 2010, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V61, P1377 Schreiber M., 2011, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V20, P397 Bornmann Luti, 2008, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V64, P45 Petersen A. M., 2010, Physical Review E, V81, P1 Bar-Ilan Judit, 2008, SCIENTOMETRICS, V74, P257 Hartley James, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P313 Glanzel W, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V67, P67 Petersen Alexander M., 2011, SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, V1, Petersen Alexander M., 2012, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V109, P5213 Petersen A. M., 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, V108, P18 MACROBERTS MH, 1989, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V40, P342 Garfield E, 1998, UNFALLCHIRURG, V101, P413 Egghe Leo, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P121 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327219900012 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Some *citation-related* characteristics of scientific *journals* published in individual countries Authors: Sangwal, K Author Full Names: Sangwal, Keshra Source: SCIENTOMETRICS, 97 (3):719-741; 10.1007/s11192-013-1053-1 DEC 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Impact factors, Journal self-citations, Journal categories, Journal language KeyWords Plus: ICEBERG HYPOTHESIS; IMPACT FACTOR; LANGUAGE Abstract: Relationships between publication language, impact factors and self-citations of journals published in individual countries, eight from Europe and one from South America (Brazil), are analyzed using bibliometric data from Thomson Reuters JCR Science Edition databases of ISI Web of Knowledge. It was found that: (1) English-language journals, as a rule, have higher impact factors than non-English-language journals, (2) all countries investigated in this study have journals with very high self-citations but the proportion of journals with high self-citations with reference to the total number of journals published in different countries varies enormously, (3) there are relatively high percentages of low self-citations in high subject-category journals published in English as well as non-English journals but national-language journals have higher self-citations than English-language journals, and (4) irrespective of the publication language, journals devoted to very specialized scientific disciplines, such as electrical and electronic engineering, metallurgy, environmental engineering, surgery, general and internal medicine, pharmacology and pharmacy, gynecology, entomology and multidisciplinary engineering, have high self-citations. Addresses: Lublin Univ Technol, Dept Appl Phys, PL-20618 Lublin, Poland. E-mail Addresses: k.sangwal at pollub.pl Cited Reference Count: 24 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0138-9130 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications; Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Computer Science; Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: 255DP Unique ID: WOS:000327219900012 Cited References: Gonzalez-Alcaide Gregorio, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P297 Liang Liming, 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V95, P333 Miguel Campanario Juan, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V87, P189 Lancho-Barrantes Barbara S., 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V94, P817 Sangwal Keshra, 2013, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V7, P487 Vinkler Peter, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P471 Lancho-Barrantes Barbara S., 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V85, P443 Harzing Anne-Wil, 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V94, P1057 Aksnes DW, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS8th ISSI Conference, JUL, 2001, Sydney, AUSTRALIA, V59, P213 Lin Min-Wei, 2007, SCIENTOMETRICS, V70, P555 Rousseau R, 2001, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V57, P349 Moed Henk F., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P367 Bornmann L., 2008, Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, V8, P93 CAMPBELL FM, 1990, BULLETIN OF THE MEDICAL LIBRARY ASSOCIATION, V78, P376 Mingers John, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V85, P613 Raj R. G., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V93, P305 Didegah Fereshteh, 2012, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V6, P516 Sangwal Keshra, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V93, P987 Zitt Michel, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P485 Poomkottayil Deepak, 2011, SWISS MEDICAL WEEKLY, V141, Mueller Paul S., 2006, SWISS MEDICAL WEEKLY, V136, P441 GARFIELD E, 1978, CURRENT CONTENTS, P5 Guerrero-Bote Vicente P., 2007, SCIENTOMETRICS, V71, P423 van Raan Ton, 2011, NATURE, V469, P34 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327086200014 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Link-based approach for *bibliometric* *journal* ranking Authors: Su, P; Shang, CJ; Shen, Q Author Full Names: Su, Pan; Shang, Changjing; Shen, Qiang Source: SOFT COMPUTING, 17 (12):2399-2410; SI 10.1007/s00500-013-1052-4 DEC 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Link-based analysis, Journal ranking, Indicator fusion, Classification, Clustering KeyWords Plus: CLASSIFICATION; METRICS; IMPACT; VALIDATION Abstract: The ISI impact factor is widely accepted as a possible measurement of academic journal quality. However, much debate has recently surrounded this use, and several complex alternative journal impact indicators have been reported. To avoid the bias which may be caused by using a single quality indicator, ensemble of multiple indicators is a promising method for producing a more robust quality estimation. In this paper, an approach based on links between journals is proposed for the capturing and fusion of impact indicators. In particular, a number of popular indicators are combined and transformed to fused-links between academic journals, and two distance metrics: Euclidean distance and Manhattan distance are utilised to support the development and analysis of the fused-links. The approach is applied to both supervised and unsupervised learning, in an effort to estimate the impact and therefore the ranking of journals. Results of systematic experimental evaluation demonstrate that by exploiting the fused-links, simple algorithms such as K-Nearest Neighbours and K-means can perform as well as advanced techniques like support vector machines, in terms of accuracy and within-1 accuracy, while exhibiting the advantage of being more intuitive and interpretable. Addresses: [Su, Pan; Shang, Changjing; Shen, Qiang] Aberystwyth Univ, Dept Comp Sci, Aberystwyth SY23 3DB, Dyfed, Wales. E-mail Addresses: pas23 at aber.ac.uk; cns at aber.ac.uk; qqs at aber.ac.uk Funding Acknowledgement: Aberystwyth University Funding Text: The authors are grateful to the comments provided by the reviewers which have helped revise this work. The first author is grateful to Aberystwyth University for providing a full-fees PhD scholarship in support of this research. Cited Reference Count: 43 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, 233 SPRING ST, NEW YORK, NY 10013 USA ISSN: 1432-7643 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Artificial Intelligence; Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications Research Areas: Computer Science IDS Number: 253LB Unique ID: WOS:000327086200014 Cited References: Aggarwal CC, 2001, DATABASE THEORY - ICDT 2001, PROCEEDINGS8th International Conference on Database Theory (ICDT 2001), JAN 04-06, 2001, LONDON, ENGLAND, V1973, P420 Cooper S, 2011, Aust Univ Rev, V53, P57 Lu Q, 2003, Int Conf Mach Learn, V20, P496 Rousseau R, 2002, LIBRARY TRENDS, V50, P418 Stegmann J, 2001, SCIENTOMETRICS, V50, P483 Holsapple Clyde W., 2009, COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM, V52, P117 Pena JM, 1999, PATTERN RECOGNITION LETTERS, V20, P1027 Shen Qiang, 2012, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON KNOWLEDGE AND DATA ENGINEERING, V24, P649 CAMPBELL C., 2000, SIGKDD Explorations, V2, P1 COVER TM, 1967, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION THEORY, V13, P21 Oh HJ, 2000, International ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval, P264 Anderberg MR, 1973, DTIC Document, Bergstrom Carl T., 2008, NEUROLOGY, V71, P1850 Shen Q, 2012, Proceedings of the Alan Turing centenary conference, P289 Bergstrom C., 2007, College & Research Libraries News, V68, P314 Getoor L., 2005, SIGKDD Explor. Newsl., V7, P3 Perlibakas V, 2004, PATTERN RECOGNITION LETTERS, V25, P711 Lafferty J, 2001, International conference on machine learning, P282 Bhagat S, 2007, Proceedings of the 9th WebKDD and 1st SNA-KDD 2007 workshop on web mining and social network analysis, P92 Su P, 2012, Int J Mach Learn Cybern, Witten I.H., 2005, Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques, Bengio Y, 2005, STATISTICAL MODELING AND ANALYSIS FOR COMPLEX DATA PROBLEMS, V1, P75 Boongoen Tossapon, 2011, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SYSTEMS MAN AND CYBERNETICS PART B-CYBERNETICS, V41, P1705 Chakrabarti S., 1998, ACM SIGMOD Record, V27, P307 Garfield E, 2006, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V295, P90 Gorriz J.M., 2006, Speech Communication, V48, Weinberger Kilian Q., 2009, JOURNAL OF MACHINE LEARNING RESEARCH, V10, P207 Ley M, 2002, String processing and information retrieval, P481 Giles CL, 1998, Proceedings of the third ACM conference on Digital libraries, P89 Kohavi R., 1995, Proceedings of the 14th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, V2, P1137 Dietterich TG, 1998, NEURAL COMPUTATION, V10, P1895 Bollen J, 2005, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V41, P1419 Stegmann J, 1997, NATURE, V390, P550 Beliakov Gleb, 2011, FUZZY SETS AND SYSTEMSAGOP 2009 Conference, JUN 06-10, 2009, Palma, SPAIN, V167, P101 Brin S, 1998, COMPUTER NETWORKS AND ISDN SYSTEMS7th International World Wide Web Conference, APR 14-18, 1998, BRISBANE, AUSTRALIA, V30, P107 Furey TS, 2000, BIOINFORMATICS, V16, P906 Dudani SA, 1976, IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern SMC, V6, P323 Jain AK, 1999, ACM COMPUTING SURVEYS, V31, P264 Fu Xin, 2010, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON FUZZY SYSTEMS, V18, P823 Boongoen Tossapon, 2010, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SYSTEMS MAN AND CYBERNETICS PART B-CYBERNETICS, V40, P1622 Drucker H, 1999, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON NEURAL NETWORKS, V10, P1048 Eigenfactor.org, 2012, Eigenfactor score and article influence score: Detailed methods, SALTON G, 1991, SCIENCE, V253, P974 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327219900010 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Network closure, brokerage, and structural influence of *journals*: a longitudinal study of *journal* *citation* network in Internet research (2000-2010) Authors: Peng, TQ; Wang, ZZ Author Full Names: Tai Quan Peng; Wang, Zhen-Zhen Source: SCIENTOMETRICS, 97 (3):675-693; 10.1007/s11192-013-1012-x DEC 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Internet research, Network closure, Brokerage, Citation network, Scholarly influence KeyWords Plus: COLLABORATION NETWORKS; MULTILEVEL MODELS; IMPACT; INDICATORS; CENTRALITY; INDEX; PERFORMANCE; DISCIPLINE; MANAGEMENT; EMERGENCE Abstract: The study aims to assess journals' structural influence in Internet research and uncover the impacts of network structures on journals' structural influence drawing on theories of network closure and structural holes. The data of the study are the citation exchanges among 1,210 journals in Communication and other seven social scientific fields (i.e., Business, Economics/Finance, Education, Information Science, Political Science, Psychology, and Sociology) in Internet research. The top two most influential journals in Internet research are American Economic Review and Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Journals in "Communication" field emerge to be an important source of influence in Internet research, whose mean structural influence ranks third among the eight fields, below "Business" and "Economics/Finance", but above other five fields. Journals' structural influences are found to grow over time and the growth rates vary across journals. Network brokerage is found to exert a significant impact on journals' structural influence, while the impact of network closure on journals' structural influences is not significant. The impact of network brokerage on journals' structural influence will increase over time. Addresses: [Tai Quan Peng] Nanyang Technol Univ, Wee Kim Wee Sch Commun & Informat, Singapore 639798, Singapore. [Wang, Zhen-Zhen] City Univ Hong Kong, Dept Media & Commun, Kowloon, Hong Kong, Peoples R China. E-mail Addresses: winsonpeng at gmail.com Funding Acknowledgement: GRF from the Hong Kong Research Grants Council [CityU154412] Funding Text: The study was supported in part by a GRF Grant (CityU154412) from the Hong Kong Research Grants Council. Cited Reference Count: 65 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0138-9130 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications; Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Computer Science; Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: 255DP Unique ID: WOS:000327219900010 Cited References: Bryant J, 2004, JOURNAL OF COMMUNICATION, V54, P662 Klenk Nicole L., 2010, SOCIAL STUDIES OF SCIENCE, V40, P931 AMSTERDAMSKA O, 1989, SCIENTOMETRICS, V15, P449 Raudenbush SW, 2001, ANNUAL REVIEW OF PSYCHOLOGY, V52, P501 Jansen Dorothea, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V83, P219 Milgram S., 1967, Psychology Today, V2, P60 Burt RS, 2000, RESEARCH IN ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR, VOL 22, 2000, V22, P345 Hox J., 2002, Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications, Reagans R, 2003, ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCE QUARTERLY, V48, P240 Burt R. S., 2001, Social capital: Theory and research, P31 Singer J. D., 2003, Applied longitudinal data analysis, SALANCIK GR, 1986, ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCE QUARTERLY, V31, P194 Abbasi Alireza, 2011, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V5, P594 Putnam R. D., 1993, Making democracy work, Barabasi AL, 1999, SCIENCE, V286, P509 Burt R. S., 2010, Neighbor networks, BROWN LD, 1985, JOURNAL OF ACCOUNTING RESEARCH, V23, P84 WHITE DR, 1994, SOCIAL NETWORKS, V16, P335 Peng Tai-Quan, 2012, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V63, P1789 Baron NS, 2005, INFORMATION SOCIETY, V21, P269 Abbasi Alireza, 2012, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V48, P671 Baumgartner H, 2003, JOURNAL OF MARKETING, V67, P123 Leydesdorff L, 2003, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V59, P84 Burt R. S., 1992, Structural holes: The social structure of competition, DELEEUW J, 1995, JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL AND BEHAVIORAL STATISTICS, V20, P171 Podolny JM, 2001, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY, V107, P33 Kwok Oi-Man, 2008, REHABILITATION PSYCHOLOGY, V53, P370 SPSS, 2005, Linear mixed-effects modeling in SPSS: An introduction to the mixed procedure, van Campenhout Geert, 2008, SCIENTOMETRICS, V77, P61 Peugh J. L, 2005, Education and Psychological Measures, V65, P717 Reagans R, 2001, ORGANIZATION SCIENCE, V12, P502 Garfield E., 1979, Citation indexing: Its theory and application in science, technology, and humanities, Wang Jyun-Cheng, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V84, P735 Moed HF, 1999, SCIENTOMETRICS7th Conference of the International-Society-for-Scientometrics-and-Informetrics, JUL 05-08, 1999, COLIMA, MEXICO, V46, P575 Gargiulo M, 2000, ORGANIZATION SCIENCE, V11, P183 KIM MT, 1992, LIBRARY & INFORMATION SCIENCE RESEARCH, V14, P75 Zhou Y. B., 2012, New Journal of Physics, V14, P1 Hedeker D., 2004, Quantitative methodology for the social sciences, P215 Oh W, 2005, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS2nd Pre-ICIS Workshop on HCI Research in MIS, DEC, 2003, Seattle, WA, V22, P265 Peng T. Q., 2013, New Media & Society, FREEMAN LC, 1979, SOCIAL NETWORKS, V1, P215 Watts DJ, 1998, NATURE, V393, P440 Snijders T. A., 1999, Multilevel Analysis: An Introduction to Basic and Advanced Multilevel Modeling, Leibowitz S. J., 1984, Journal of Economic Literature, V22, P77 COTE JA, 1991, JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH, V18, P402 COLEMAN JS, 1988, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY, V94, PS95 Zhang Xiaoquan (Michael), 2012, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS, V29, P11 Moed HF, 1996, NATURE, V381, P186 JOHNSON JL, 1994, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V37, P1392 Clauset Aaron, 2009, SIAM REVIEW, V51, P661 Borgatti S. P., 1995, Connections, V18.1, P112 Hite JM, 2001, STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V22, P275 Easley D., 2010, Networks, crowds, and markets: Reasoning about a highly connected world, Abbasi Alireza, 2012, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V6, P403 Burt R. S., 2005, Brokerage and closure: An introduction to social capital, Burt RS, 2004, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY, V110, P349 Rowley T, 2000, STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V21, P369 Berg S., 1982, Joint venture and corporate innovation, Cohen J., 2003, Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral; sciences, Franceschet Massimo, 2012, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V63, P837 Garfield E, 2006, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V295, P90 Ahuja G., 2000, Administrative Science Quarterly, V45, P425 Bourdieu P., 1992, An invitation to reflexive sociology, Stovel Katherine, 2012, ANNUAL REVIEW OF SOCIOLOGY, VOL 38, V38, P139 Burt RS, 1997, ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCE QUARTERLY1996 Social Science and Statistics Conference in Honor of Clifford C Clogg, 1996, UNIVERSITY PK, PA, V42, P339 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327219900020 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Computer models for identifying instrumental *citations* in the biomedical literature Authors: Fu, LD; Aphinyanaphongs, Y; Aliferis, CF Author Full Names: Fu, Lawrence D.; Aphinyanaphongs, Yindalon; Aliferis, Constantin F. Source: SCIENTOMETRICS, 97 (3):871-882; 10.1007/s11192-013-0983-y DEC 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Bibliometrics, Citation analysis, Machine learning, Information retrieval KeyWords Plus: TEXT CATEGORIZATION; AGREEMENT; COUNTS Abstract: The most popular method for evaluating the quality of a scientific publication is citation count. This metric assumes that a citation is a positive indicator of the quality of the cited work. This assumption is not always true since citations serve many purposes. As a result, citation count is an indirect and imprecise measure of impact. If instrumental citations could be reliably distinguished from non-instrumental ones, this would readily improve the performance of existing citation-based metrics by excluding the non-instrumental citations. A citation was operationally defined as instrumental if either of the following was true: the hypothesis of the citing work was motivated by the cited work, or the citing work could not have been executed without the cited work. This work investigated the feasibility of developing computer models for automatically classifying citations as instrumental or non-instrumental. Instrumental citations were manually labeled, and machine learning models were trained on a combination of content and bibliometric features. The experimental results indicate that models based on content and bibliometric features are able to automatically classify instrumental citations with high predictivity (AUC = 0.86). Additional experiments using independent hold out data and prospective validation show that the models are generalizeable and can handle unseen cases. This work demonstrates that it is feasible to train computer models to automatically identify instrumental citations. Addresses: [Fu, Lawrence D.; Aphinyanaphongs, Yindalon] NYU Med Ctr, Ctr Hlth Informat & Bioinformat, Dept Med, New York, NY 10016 USA. [Aliferis, Constantin F.] NYU Med Ctr, Ctr Hlth Informat & Bioinformat, Dept Pathol, New York, NY 10016 USA. E-mail Addresses: lawrence.fu at nyumc.org Funding Acknowledgement: [R56 LM007948-04A1]; [1UL1RR029893] Funding Text: The authors gratefully acknowledge support from R56 LM007948-04A1 and 1UL1RR029893. Cited Reference Count: 20 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0138-9130 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications; Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Computer Science; Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: 255DP Unique ID: WOS:000327219900020 Cited References: Seglen PO, 1998, ACTA ORTHOPAEDICA SCANDINAVICA, V69, P224 Phelan TJ, 1999, SCIENTOMETRICS, V45, P117 Nicolaisen J, 2003, ASIST 2003: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 66TH ASIST ANNUAL MEETING, VOL 40, 200366th Annual Meeting of the American-Society-for-Information-Science-and-Technology, OCT 19-22, 2003, Long Beach, CA, V40, P12 PORTER MF, 1980, PROGRAM-AUTOMATED LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS, V14, P130 Brin S, 1998, COMPUTER NETWORKS AND ISDN SYSTEMS7th International World Wide Web Conference, APR 14-18, 1998, BRISBANE, AUSTRALIA, V30, P107 LANDIS JR, 1977, BIOMETRICS, V33, P159 Aliferis Constantin F, 2006, Cancer informatics, V2, P133 Mercer R. E., 2004, 2004 Joint Conference on Human Language Technology/North American Association for Computational Linguistics (HLT-NAACL), Aliferis Constantin F., 2010, JOURNAL OF MACHINE LEARNING RESEARCH, V11, P171 COHEN J, 1960, EDUCATIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT, V20, P37 Teufel S., 2006, Proceedings of EMNLP, Bornmann Luti, 2008, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V64, P45 Cronin B, 1998, SCIENTOMETRICS, V43, P45 Fu Lawrence D., 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V85, P257 Leopold E, 2002, MACHINE LEARNING, V46, P423 Garfield E., 1962, Essays of an Information Scientist, V1, P84 HECHT SS, 1993, NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, V329, P1543 Aphinyanaphongs Y, 2005, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL INFORMATICS ASSOCIATION, V12, P207 MacRoberts MH, 1996, SCIENTOMETRICS, V36, P435 EGASHIRA K, 1993, NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, V328, P1659 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327219900018 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Are academics who publish more also more cited? Individual determinants of publication and *citation* records Authors: Bosquet, C; Combes, PP Author Full Names: Bosquet, Clement; Combes, Pierre-Philippe Source: SCIENTOMETRICS, 97 (3):831-857; 10.1007/s11192-013-0996-6 DEC 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Economics of science, Productivity determinants, Knowledge diffusion, Publication scores, Citation indexes KeyWords Plus: PRODUCTIVITY; ECONOMICS; SALARIES; GENDER; NETWORKS; INDEX Abstract: Thanks to a unique individual dataset of French academics in economics, we explain individual publication and citation records by gender and age, co-authorship patterns (average number of authors per article and size of the co-author network) and specialisation choices (percentage of output in each JEL code). The analysis is performed on both EconLit publication scores (adjusted for journal quality) and Google Scholar citation indexes, which allows us to present a broad picture of knowledge diffusion in economics. Citations are largely driven by publication records, which means that these two measures are partly substitutes, but citations are also substantially increased by larger research team size and co-author networks. Addresses: [Bosquet, Clement] Aix Marseille Univ, Aix Marseille Sch Econ, London Sch Econ & Polit Sci SERC, London WC2A 2AE, England. [Combes, Pierre-Philippe] Aix Marseille Univ, Aix Marseille Sch Econ, CNRS, F-13002 Marseille, France. [Combes, Pierre-Philippe] Ctr Econ Policy Res, EHESS, F-13002 Marseille, France. E-mail Addresses: c.bosquet at lse.ac.uk; ppcombes at univmed.fr Cited Reference Count: 23 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0138-9130 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications; Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Computer Science; Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: 255DP Unique ID: WOS:000327219900018 Cited References: Harzing A.-W., 2013, Scientometrics, KATZ DA, 1973, AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, V63, P469 Amara Nabil, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V93, P553 Combes P.-P., 2010, GREQAM Working Paper (2010-25), LOVELL MC, 1973, JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC LITERATURE, V11, P27 Zinovyevay N., 2012, IZA Working Paper 6821, HANSEN WL, 1978, JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY, V86, P729 STIGLER GJ, 1975, JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY, V83, P477 KENNY LW, 1995, SOUTHERN ECONOMIC JOURNAL, V62, P382 Badar Kamal, 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V94, P755 van Arensbergen Pleun, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V93, P857 DIAMOND AM, 1986, JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCES, V21, P200 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Egghe Leo, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P131 HAMERMESH DS, 1982, SOUTHERN ECONOMIC JOURNAL, V49, P472 SAUER RD, 1988, JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY, V96, P855 Schreiber M., 2008, New Journal of Physics, V10, MCDOWELL JM, 1992, ECONOMIC INQUIRY, V30, P68 Abramo Giovanni, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V84, P821 Mishra V., 2013, Scientometrics, V94, P755 Bramoulle Yann, 2009, JOURNAL OF ECONOMETRICS, V150, P41 Egghe Leo, 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V95, P55 Combes Pierre-Philippe, 2008, LABOUR ECONOMICS, V15, P423 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327053200024 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Benchmarking research performance of the IITs using Web of Science and Scopus *bibliometric* databases Authors: Prathap, G Author Full Names: Prathap, Gangan Source: CURRENT SCIENCE, 105 (8):1134-1143; OCT 25 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Bibliometrics, benchmarking, engineering education, research evaluation KeyWords Plus: MACHINE; INDIA; NPL Abstract: Although engineering education at the tertiary level in India is now more than 150 years old, it was only since independence that the IITs have been set up as institutions of national importance with an emphasis on postgraduate education and research. In this communication, we benchmark the recent research performance of the IITs in academic research in the area of engineering science and technology in the country against that of similarly placed institutions in the world using bibliometric indicators from the Web of Science and Scopus databases. Addresses: CSIR, Natl Inst Interdisciplinary Sci & Technol, Thiruvananthapuram 695019, Kerala, India. E-mail Addresses: gp at niist.res.in Cited Reference Count: 10 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: INDIAN ACAD SCIENCES, C V RAMAN AVENUE, SADASHIVANAGAR, P B #8005, BANGALORE 560 080, INDIA ISSN: 0011-3891 Web of Science Categories: Multidisciplinary Sciences Research Areas: Science & Technology - Other Topics IDS Number: 253AE Unique ID: WOS:000327053200024 Cited References: International Standards Organization, 1995, ISO GUM Document, Jain K. K., 2005, Mapan - J. Metrol. Soc. India, V20, P249 Sawla A., 2000, Proceedings of XVIth IMEKO World Congress, 25-28 September, 2000, Vienna, [Anonymous], ISO 376:2011, Heamawatanachai S., 2011, Proceedings of the International Conference on Mechanical Engineering, October, 2011, Krabi, Jain S. K., 2012, MEASUREMENT, V45, P590 Woger W, 1999, PTB-MITTEILUNGEN, V109, P24 NPLI, 1987, Technical Bulletin, Kumar Rajesh, 2012, MEASUREMENT SCIENCE REVIEW, V12, P149 Kumme R., 2001, IMEKO TC 3Proceedings of the International Conference on Force, Mass, Torque and Pressure Measurement, September, 2001, Istanbul, Turkey, ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326881900004 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Group size, h-index, and efficiency in publishing in top *journals* explain expert panel assessments of research group quality and productivity Authors: Engels, TCE; Goos, P; Dexters, N; Spruyt, EHJ Author Full Names: Engels, Tim C. E.; Goos, Peter; Dexters, Nele; Spruyt, Eric H. J. Source: RESEARCH EVALUATION, 22 (4):224-236; 10.1093/reseval/rvt013 OCT 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: peer review, group size, research assessment exercise, research quality, research productivity KeyWords Plus: BIBLIOMETRIC INDICATORS; EVALUATING RESEARCH; PERFORMANCE; UNIVERSITY; CRITERIA; REVIEWS Abstract: Assessments of research groups by expert panels are commonplace. A conceptual distinction between nationwide evaluations, approaches fitting within a national framework, and approaches fulfilling a national, regional, or local regulatory requirement can be made. Few papers exploit the wealth of the data made available to panels: most analyses and discussions focus on the relation between assessments scores and bibliometric indicators. However, expert panels are expected to take other information such as funding and PhDs into account as well. Using a data set on 52 science research groups that have been evaluated in view of an on-going series of research assessments at the University of Antwerp (Belgium), we build cumulative logistic regression models that explain the assessments of research group quality and productivity. In addition to the discipline, the predictors in the models explaining quality and productivity are group size, h-index of the group leader, and efficiency in terms of publishing in top journals. Strikingly, the same predictors apply in the model for quality and in the model for productivity. Addresses: [Engels, Tim C. E.; Dexters, Nele; Spruyt, Eric H. J.] Univ Antwerp, Dept Res Affairs, B-2020 Antwerp, Belgium. [Engels, Tim C. E.; Dexters, Nele; Spruyt, Eric H. J.] Univ Antwerp, Ctr R&D Monitoring ECOOM, B-2020 Antwerp, Belgium. [Engels, Tim C. E.] Antwerp Maritime Acad, B-2030 Antwerp, Belgium. [Goos, Peter] Univ Antwerp, Fac Appl Econ, B-2020 Antwerp, Belgium. [Goos, Peter] Univ Antwerp, StatUa Ctr Stat, B-2020 Antwerp, Belgium. [Goos, Peter] Erasmus Univ, Inst Econometr, Erasmus Sch Econ, NL-3000 DR Rotterdam, Netherlands. E-mail Addresses: tim.engels at uantwerpen.be Cited Reference Count: 41 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: OXFORD UNIV PRESS, GREAT CLARENDON ST, OXFORD OX2 6DP, ENGLAND ISSN: 0958-2029 Web of Science Categories: Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: 250UR Unique ID: WOS:000326881900004 Cited References: Spruyt E. H. J., 2010, Thema: Tijdschrift voor Hoger Onderwijs en Management, V3, P31 Rinia EJ, 1998, RESEARCH POLICY, V27, P95 Hicks Diana, 2012, RESEARCH POLICY, V41, P251 Spruyt E. H. J., 2008, Thema: Tijdschrift voor Hoger Onderwijs en Management, V15, P39 Moed H. F., 2005, Citation analysis in research evaluation, Adams J., 2011, Funding Research Excellence: Research Group Size, Critical Mass & Performance, de Andres A., 2011, Europhysics News, V42, P29 Glanzel W, 2003, SCIENTOMETRICS, V56, P357 Lariviere Vincent, 2011, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V5, P392 Rons N., 2008, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V17, P45 European Commission, 2010, Assessing Europe's University-Based Research, Braun T., 1988, P137 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Agresti A., 2010, Analysis of ordinal categorical data, SCImago Research Group, 2012, SIR World Report, Butler Linda, 2011, EUROPEAN POLITICAL SCIENCE, V10, P44 Aksnes DW, 2004, RESEARCH EVALUATION9th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informatics, AUG, 2003, Beijing, PEOPLES R CHINA, V13, P33 Waltman Ludo, 2012, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V63, P406 Franceschet Massimo, 2011, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V5, P275 Leydesdorff L., 2011, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, V63, P1370 VSNU, 2009, Standard Evaluation Protocol 2009-2015. Protocol for Research Assessment in the Netherlands, Langfeldt L, 2004, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V13, P51 van Drooghe L., 2013, Twintig jaar onderzoeksevaluatie, Jayasinghe Upali W., 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P591 Agresti A., 2002, Categorical Data Analysis, KNAW, 2011, Quality indicators for research in the Humanities, Abramo Giovanni, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V89, P929 Ochsner Michael, 2013, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V22, P79 Olsson L., 2012, LEADERSHIP QUARTERLY, V23, P604 KRETSCHMER H, 1985, SCIENTOMETRICS, V7, P39 Kenna R., 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V86, P527 Van Raan AFJ, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V67, P491 Hansen H. F., 2009, Research Evaluation: Methods, Practice, and Experience, Himanen L., 2009, Science and Public Policy, V36, P417 Goos Peter, 2012, TECHNOMETRICS, V54, P340 VSNU, 2003, Standard Evaluation Protocol 2003-2009 for Public Research Organisations, Lawrenz Frances, 2012, EVALUATION AND PROGRAM PLANNING, V35, P390 Richardson M., 2011, Research Trends, V25, P13 Engels T. C. E., 2012, Proceedings of the 17th Science and Technology Indicators Conference, P247 Hansson Finn, 2010, SCIENCE AND PUBLIC POLICY, V37, P239 Rons Nadine, 2012, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V6, P1 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000319783000029 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: *Citation* patterns of the four seminal DNA double-helix model papers by Watson and Crick in 1953-54 Authors: Kantha, SS Author Full Names: Kantha, Sachi Sri Source: CURRENT SCIENCE, 104 (9):1237-1239; MAY 10 2013 Language: English Document Type: Editorial Material KeyWords Plus: DEOXYRIBONUCLEIC-ACID Abstract: Properly citing the contributions of rival groups in research papers is a contentious issue which touches many inter-related themes such as due acknowledgement, priority and deception. To felicitate the 60th anniversary of the announcement of the accurate double helix model of DNA by James Watson and Francis Crick, I analysed the citation patterns of rival groups in their four seminal papers that they published in 1953 and 1954. I found that proper citations of the previous model-building studies of William Astbury and Bruce Fraser appear somewhat sloppy in the four seminal papers. Addresses: Gifu Univ, Ctr Gen Educ, Gifu 5011193, Japan. E-mail Addresses: srikanth at gifu-u.ac.jp Cited Reference Count: 17 Times Cited: 1 Publisher: INDIAN ACAD SCIENCES, C V RAMAN AVENUE, SADASHIVANAGAR, P B #8005, BANGALORE 560 080, INDIA ISSN: 0011-3891 Web of Science Categories: Multidisciplinary Sciences Research Areas: Science & Technology - Other Topics IDS Number: 155XF Unique ID: WOS:000319783000029 Cited References: WATSON JD, 1953, NATURE, V171, P737 CRICK FHC, 1954, PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF LONDON SERIES A-MATHEMATICAL AND PHYSICAL SCIENCES, V223, P80 WILKINS M, 2003, 3 MAN DOUBLE HELIX, CHARGAFF E, 1971, SCIENCE, V172, P637 WATSON JD, 1953, COLD SPRING HARBOR SYMPOSIA ON QUANTITATIVE BIOLOGY, V18, P123 Avery Oswald T., 1944, JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE, V79, P137 Maddox Brenda, 2002, Rosalind Franklin: The Dark Lady of DNA, Sayre Anne, 1975, Rosalind Franklin and DNA, CRICK F, 1988, WHAT MAD PURSUIT PE, OLBY R, 2009, F CRICK HUNTER LIFE, Lwoff A., 1968, Science, V219, P133 ASTBURY WT, 1938, NATURE, V141, P747 CHARGAFF E, 1950, EXPERIENTIA, V6, P201 STERT G, 1980, DOUBLE HELIX, WATSON JD, 1953, NATURE, V171, P964 Watson J. D., 1968, The double helix: A personal account of the discovery of the structure of DNA, FRASER MJ, 1951, NATURE, V167, P761 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326475400221 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Data *Citation* Standard: A Means to Support Data Sharing, Attribution, and Traceability Authors: McCallum, I; Plag, HP; Fritz, S; Nativi, S Author Full Names: McCallum, I.; Plag, H. -P.; Fritz, S.; Nativi, S. Editor(s): Pirrone N Source: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 16TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON HEAVY METALS IN THE ENVIRONMENT, 1 10.1051/e3sconf/20130128002 2013 Book Series: E3S Web of Conferences Language: English Document Type: Proceedings Paper Conference Title: 16th International Conference on Heavy Metals in the Environment (ICHMET) Conference Date: SEP 23-27, 2012 Conference Location: Rome, ITALY Author Keywords: data citation, GEOSS, GEO Abstract: An important incentive for scientists and researchers is the recognition and renown given to them in citations of their work. While citation rules are well developed for the use of papers published by others, very little rules are available for the citation of data made available by others. Increasingly, citation of the source of data is also requested in the context of socially relevant topics, such as climate change and its potential impacts. Providing means for data citation would be a strong incentive for data sharing. Geo-referenced data are crucial for addressing many of the burning societal problems and to support related interdisciplinary research. The lack of a widely accepted method for giving credit to those who make their data freely available and for tracking the use of data throughout their life-cycle hampers data sharing. Furthermore, only clear and transparent data citation allows other scientists to obtain the identical data to replicate findings or for further research. E-mail Addresses: mccallum at iiasa.ac.at; hpplag at unr.edu; fritz at iiasa.ac.at; stefano.nativi at cnr.it Cited Reference Count: 1 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: E D P SCIENCES, 17 AVE DU HOGGAR PARC D ACTIVITES COUTABOEUF BP 112, F-91944 CEDEX A, FRANCE ISSN: 2267-1242 Article Number: 28002 Web of Science Categories: Environmental Sciences; Geosciences, Multidisciplinary Research Areas: Environmental Sciences & Ecology; Geology IDS Number: BHR45 Unique ID: WOS:000326475400221 Cited References: Ball A., 2011, Elements of a data citation, ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327047100019 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: RESEARCH INTO THE GEOGRAPHY OF TOURISM IN SPAIN THROUGH *BIBLIOMETRIC* ANALYSIS OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE GEOGRAPHY OF TOURISM, LEISURE AND RECREATION CONFERENCE (1990-2012) Authors: Marfil, JAC; Vela, JD Author Full Names: Corral Marfil, Jose Antonio; de San Eugenio Vela, Jordi Source: BOLETIN DE LA ASOCIACION DE GEOGRAFOS ESPANOLES, (63):535-549; 2013 Language: Spanish Document Type: Article KeyWords Plus: HOSPITALITY E-mail Addresses: joseantonio.corral at uvic.cat; jordi.saneugenio at uvic.cat Cited Reference Count: 12 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: ASOCIACION GEOGRAFOS ESPANOLES, PINAR 25, MADRID, 28006, SPAIN ISSN: 0212-9426 Web of Science Categories: Geography Research Areas: Geography IDS Number: 252XV Unique ID: WOS:000327047100019 Cited References: ANTON S., 1996, Estudios Turisticos, P165 HUANG S., 2008, International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration, P267 CORRAL J.A., 2013, P55 Svensson Goeran, 2009, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY MANAGEMENT, V28, P479 Nepal Sanjay K., 2009, TOURISM GEOGRAPHIES, V11, P2 DE LA CALLE M., 2004, Anales de geografia de la Universidad Complutense, P257 DROTT C., 1995, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, P299 FERNANDEZ A., 2010, La investigacion de la geografia del turismo en las comunidades autonomas espanolas. Origenes, desarrollo y perspectivas en el horizonte de la Geografia Madrid, Park Kwangmin, 2011, JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM RESEARCH, V35, P381 Severt Denver E., 2009, JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM RESEARCH, V33, P451 LACOSTA A.J., 2004, Geografia del Turismo en Espana. Aportaciones 1990-1992. Recopilacion de Jornadas y Coloquios del Grupo de Geografia del Turismo, Ocio y Recreacion de la Asociacion de Geografos Espanoles (A.G.E.), VERA F., 1997, Analisis territorial del turismo: una nueva geografia del turismo, ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326825500047 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: A *BIBLIOMETRIC* ANALYSIS ON SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTION OF GEOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM (GIS) IN WEB OF SCIENCE Authors: Mohamad, AN; Masrek, MN; Rasam, ARB Author Full Names: Mohamad, Ahmad Nadzri; Masrek, Mohamad Noorman; Rasam, Abdul Rauf Bin Abdul Book Group Author(s): IEEE Source: 2013 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY (ICOICT), 264-268; 2013 Language: English Document Type: Proceedings Paper Conference Title: International Conference of Information and Communication Technology (ICoICT) Conference Date: MAR 20-22, 2013 Conference Location: Bandung, INDONESIA Conference Sponsors: Inst Teknologi Telkom, IEEE Indonesia Sect, Minist Informat & Commun, PT Telkom Indonesia, PT Telkomsel Author Keywords: Geographical Information System (GIS), Bibliometric Analysis, Web of Knowledge, Scientific Production KeyWords Plus: INDICATORS Abstract: Geographical Information System (GIS) has been used in various disciplines including Environmental Sciences, Forestry, Ecology, Engineering and Information Science. In general, a large number of studies were conducted by using GIS applications. This paper examines publishing patterns of GIS articles indexed by Web of Science in three indexes; Science Citation Index, Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) and Arts & Humanities Citation Index (A&HCI). Bibliometric analysis was then used to investigate the patterns of indexed articles in multiple aspects such as i) country and organisation affiliations, ii) distribution of articles by year iii) research areas, iv) document types, v) languages and vi) authorship. Searching facility and analysis was conducted by using analysis tool provided by Web of Science. This study aids researchers to further understand the publishing status of GIS-based studies from 2002-2011 and enhance GIS applicability in a wide number of areas. Furthermore, it encourages researchers to use Web of Science as a tool to identify emerging interests and potential scholars for academic partnership and consultation. Addresses: [Mohamad, Ahmad Nadzri; Masrek, Mohamad Noorman] Univ Teknol MARA, Fac Informat Management, Selangor, Malaysia. E-mail Addresses: nadzri590 at puncakalam.uitm.edu.my; mnoorman at salam.uitm.edu.my; rauf at salam.uitm.edu.my Cited Reference Count: 11 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: IEEE, 345 E 47TH ST, NEW YORK, NY 10017 USA ISBN: 978-1-4673-4992-5 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Theory & Methods; Engineering, Electrical & Electronic; Telecommunications Research Areas: Computer Science; Engineering; Telecommunications IDS Number: BHW22 Unique ID: WOS:000326825500047 Cited References: Franceschet Massimo, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V83, P243 Harzing A. W., Document categories in the ISI web of knowledge: misunderstanding the social sciences?, Kun-Yang C., 2012, Polish Journal Of Environmental Studies, P1175 Huang C. P., 2011, Journal of the Chinese Medical Association, P117 Wenqi F., 2011, International Conference on Management and Service Science (MASS), P1 Nederhof Anton J., 2011, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V20, P117 ANSELIN L, 1995, GEOGRAPHICAL ANALYSISGISDATA (Geographic Information Systems Data) Specialist Meeting on GIS (Geographic Information Systems) and Spatial Analysis, DEC 01-05, 1993, AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS, V27, P93 Lokman I. M., 2007, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, P2105 Tian Y., Journal of Informetrics, P65 Fahui W., 2006, Quantitative Methods in Applications in GIS, Guisan A, 2000, ECOLOGICAL MODELLING, V135, P147 ======================================================================= ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327257700005 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Bibliometric analysis of Nobelists' awards and landmark papers in physiology or medicine during 1983-2012 Authors: Ye, SQ; Xing, R; Liu, J; Xing, FY Author Full Names: Ye, Siqi; Xing, Rui; Liu, Jing; Xing, Feiyue Source: ANNALS OF MEDICINE, 45 (8):532-538; 10.3109/07853890.2013.850838 DEC 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Award, citation, impact factor, landmark papers, Nobel Prize, test period KeyWords Plus: PRIZE; SCIENCE Abstract: Aim. This study's purpose was to determine if there was a relationship between Nobel Laureates' awards and landmark papers and winning the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine during 1983-2012. Methods. The 66 Nobelists' awards and landmark papers in the period 1983-2012 were analyzed. Results. The results showed that the most Nobelists had won Gairdner, Lasker, Howitz or Wolf Award before they won Nobel Prize, indicating that Gairdner Award may be considered as a Nobel Prize's wind vane. A small number of landmark papers were indeed published in low impact factor journals (10.5% below impact factor 5.0) and some of their citation were low (23.2% below 400 times). There were 61 of 76 landmark papers published in the journals of JCR partition 1, reaching 80%, but 2 of 76 landmark papers were even outside of JCR partition, demonstrating that JCR partition acts as a reciprocal supplement with impact factor and citation times. The test period of Nobel Prize was substantially between 10 to 30 years. There were 5 persons whose landmark papers were cited all above 6000 times to get Nobel Prize within the test period of ten years, suggesting that there is a trend of certain inverse ratio between the citation and the test period of Nobel Prize. Conclusion. These findings provide a new insight into the relationship among Nobel Laureates' awards, landmark papers and Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. Addresses: [Ye, Siqi; Xing, Feiyue] Jinan Univ, Dept Immunobiol, Inst Tissue Transplantat & Immunol, Guangzhou 510632, Guangdong, Peoples R China. [Xing, Rui] Lanzhou Univ, Sch Life Sci, Lanzhou 730000, Peoples R China. [Liu, Jing] Jinan Univ, Sch Med, Dept Stomatol, Guangzhou 510632, Guangdong, Peoples R China. [Xing, Feiyue] Jinan Univ, Key Lab Funct Prot Res Guangdong Higher Educ Inst, Guangzhou 510632, Guangdong, Peoples R China. E-mail Addresses: tfyxing at jnu.edu.cn; tjliu at jnu.edu.cn Funding Acknowledgement: National Natural Science Foundation of China [81172824, 30971465, 30471635]; '211' project grant Funding Text: This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81172824, No. 30971465, and No. 30471635) and '211' project grant. Cited Reference Count: 8 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: INFORMA HEALTHCARE, 52 VANDERBILT AVE, NEW YORK, NY 10017 USA ISSN: 0785-3890 Web of Science Categories: Medicine, General & Internal Research Areas: General & Internal Medicine IDS Number: 255RO Unique ID: WOS:000327257700005 Cited References: STEPHAN PE, 1993, SCIENTOMETRICS, V28, P387 Kademani BS, 2005, SCIENTOMETRICS, V62, P261 Dorta-Gonzalez P., 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V95, P645 Karazija R, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS, V61, P191 Baffes John, 2011, RESEARCH POLICY, V40, P1345 Charlton Bruce G., 2007, MEDICAL HYPOTHESES, V68, P931 GARFIELD E, 1992, THEORETICAL MEDICINE, V13, P117 Gingras Yves, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V82, P401 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327254600030 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: The Publication Ranking Score for pediatric urology: Quantifying thought leadership within the subspecialty Authors: Lloyd, JC; Madden-Fuentes, RJ; Nelson, CP; Kokorowski, PJ; Wiener, JS; Ross, SS; Kutikov, A; Routh, JC Author Full Names: Lloyd, Jessica C.; Madden-Fuentes, Ramiro J.; Nelson, Caleb P.; Kokorowski, Paul J.; Wiener, John S.; Ross, Sherry S.; Kutikov, Alexander; Routh, Jonathan C. Source: JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC UROLOGY, 9 (6):1108-1113; 10.1016/j.jpurol.2013.03.012 B DEC 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Urology, Pediatric hospitals, Program evaluation, Quality of healthcare KeyWords Plus: WORLD-REPORTS RANKINGS; IMPACT FACTOR; HOSPITALS; REPUTATION; QUALITY; NEWS Abstract: Objectives: Clinical care parameters are frequently assessed by national ranking systems. However, these rankings do little to comment on institutions' academic contributions. The Publication Ranking Score (PRS) was developed to allow for objective comparisons of scientific thought-leadership at various pediatric urology institutions. Methods: Faculty lists were compiled for each of the US News & World Report (USNWR) top-50 pediatric urology hospitals. A list of all faculty publications (2006-2011) was then compiled, after adjusting for journal impact factor, and summed to derive a Publication Ranking Score (PRS). PRS rankings were then compared to the USNWR pediatric urology top-50 hospital list. Results: A total of 1811 publications were indexed. PRS rankings resulted in a mean change in rank of 12 positions, compared to USNWR ranks. Of the top-10 USNWR hospitals, only 4 were ranked in the top-10 by the PRS. There was little correlation between the USNWR and PRS ranks for either top-10 (r = 0.42, p = 0.23) or top-50 (r = 0.48, p = 0.0004) hospitals. Conclusions: PRS institutional ranking differs significantly from the USNWR top-50 hospital list in pediatric urology. While not a replacement, we believe the PRS to be a useful adjunct to the USNWR rankings of pediatric urology hospitals. (C) 2013 Journal of Pediatric Urology Company. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Addresses: [Lloyd, Jessica C.; Madden-Fuentes, Ramiro J.; Wiener, John S.; Ross, Sherry S.; Routh, Jonathan C.] Duke Univ, Med Ctr, Div Urol Surg, Durham, NC 27710 USA. [Nelson, Caleb P.] Boston Childrens Hosp, Dept Urol, Boston, MA USA. [Kokorowski, Paul J.] Childrens Hosp Los Angeles, Div Urol, Los Angeles, CA 90027 USA. [Kutikov, Alexander] Fox Chase Canc Ctr, Philadelphia, PA 19111 USA. E-mail Addresses: Jonathan.Routh at duke.edu Cited Reference Count: 16 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: ELSEVIER SCI LTD, THE BOULEVARD, LANGFORD LANE, KIDLINGTON, OXFORD OX5 1GB, OXON, ENGLAND ISSN: 1477-5131 Web of Science Categories: Pediatrics; Urology & Nephrology Research Areas: Pediatrics; Urology & Nephrology IDS Number: 255QJ Unique ID: WOS:000327254600030 Cited References: Larson RJ, 2005, ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE26th Annual Meeting of the Society-of-General-Internal-Medicine, APR 30-MAY 03, 2003, VANCOUVER, CANADA, V165, P645 Sehgal Ashwini R., 2010, ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, V152, P521 The PLoS medicine, 2006, PLoS Medicine, V3, Pe291 Johnson J., 2012, Number of lists ranking colleges proliferateeand some don't make sense, Ingram David G., 2011, JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM, V24, P759 Wirth Manfred P., 2012, EUROPEAN UROLOGY, V61, P440 Wu Jashin J, 2007, Dermatology online journal, V13, P3 Seglen PO, 1997, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V314, P498 Green J, 1997, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V277, P1152 Pope Devin G., 2009, JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS, V28, P1154 Silver N., 2011, Popularity and pedigree matter in the B.C.S, Bush Ruth A., 2011, PEDIATRICS, V128, P1168 Simons Kai, 2008, SCIENCE, V322, P165 Kutikov Alexander, 2012, EUROPEAN UROLOGY, V61, P435 Rosenbaum J., 2007, List-o-mania: or, how I stopped worrying and learned to love American movies, Hill CA, 1997, INQUIRY-THE JOURNAL OF HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION PROVISION AND FINANCING, V34, P80 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327424400012 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Evaluation of biomedical research in Saudi Arabia Authors: Al-Bishri, J Author Full Names: Al-Bishri, Jamal Source: SAUDI MEDICAL JOURNAL, 34 (9):954-959; SEP 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article KeyWords Plus: NEED Abstract: Objectives: To evaluate the quality and quantity of biomedical studies published in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) between 2010 and 2011. Methods: This study was conducted on January 2013 at the Internal Medicine Department, Taif University, Taif, KSA. An online search was conducted on PubMed to collect the articles published from KSA using the country name (Saudi Arabia) as a keyword. The search was limited to studies published in the period of 2 years from January 2010 to December 2011. The year 2012 was not included to give at least one year for citation. The total number of studies during the stated period was compared with those published from other countries in the same period, and adjusted per population size. Impact factor and number of citations were used to assess the quality of the studies. Results: A total of 1905 published articles/studies were from KSA in the said period. Australia had the maximum number of studies (100%) published per million population (1258.571+). The KSA had 72.71 articles per million population, and was ranked 16th among the other countries. Most of the articles (65.3%) were published from Riyadh followed by Jeddah (13.3%), and most of them were from the fields of Community Medicine (15.5%), Pathology (13.7%), Medicine (13.2%), and Surgery (13.1%). King Faisal Specialist Hospital in Riyadh had the highest impact factor with a mean of 2.74 +/- 3.45. Conclusion: The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is lagging behind in biomedical research. While King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre appears to be doing better than other institutions in biomedical research, there is an urgent need for greater investment in biomedical research in the kingdom. Addresses: Al Hada Hosp, Dept Internal Med, At Taif 21944, Saudi Arabia. E-mail Addresses: Jbeshri at gmail.com Cited Reference Count: 18 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SAUDI MED J, ARMED FORCES HOSPITAL, PO BOX 7897,, RIYADH 11159, SAUDI ARABIA ISSN: 0379-5284 Web of Science Categories: Medicine, General & Internal Research Areas: General & Internal Medicine IDS Number: 257YS Unique ID: WOS:000327424400012 Cited References: [Anonymous], PubMed. Medicine, Hyder Adnan A., 2011, HEALTH POLICY AND PLANNING, V26, P73 Benamer Hani T. S., 2009, BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, V9, Malik Tayyaba Gul, 2011, Oman medical journal, V26, P383 Nabel Elizabeth G., 2009, JOURNAL OF CLINICAL INVESTIGATION, V119, P2858 Bajammal Sohail, 2008, BMC MEDICAL EDUCATION, V8, The Research Centre, Research at King Faisal & Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Patel V, 2007, Br J Psychiatry, V190, P777 BaHammam Ahmed S., 2011, ANNALS OF THORACIC MEDICINE, V6, P3 Smith ER, 2006, Can J Cardiol, V22, P787 Yung W. K. Alfred, 2010, NEURO-ONCOLOGY, V12, P893 Bin Abdulrahman Khalid A., 2012, MEDICAL TEACHER, V34, PS1 Al-Jumah M., 2011, Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal, V17, P536 Mazboudi A, 2010, Tunis Med, V88, P579 Alsayed Nouf, 2012, The Journal of the Egyptian Public Health Association, V87, P64 Lowrance William W., 2007, SCIENCE, V317, P600 Bachelet VC, 2011, Medwave, V11, Pe5076 Branch Trevor A., 2013, PLOS ONE, V8, ======================================================================= ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000326944400003 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: *Citation* Classics in Nursing *Journals*: The Top 50 Most Frequently Cited Articles from 1956-2011 (vol 62, pg 344, 2013) Authors: Wong, ELE Author Full Names: Wong, E. L. E. Source: NURSING RESEARCH, 62 (6):382-382; 10.1097/01.NNR.0000437824.21276.07 NOV-DEC 2013 Language: English Document Type: Correction Cited Reference Count: 1 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS, 530 WALNUT ST, PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106-3621 USA ISSN: 0029-6562 Web of Science Categories: Nursing Research Areas: Nursing IDS Number: 251QG Unique ID: WOS:000326944400003 Cited References: Wong Eliza L. Y., 2013, NURSING RESEARCH, V62, P344 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327394700001 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Addressing the *Impact Factors* of Nursing Education *Journals* Authors: Oermann, MH; Shaw-Kokot, J Author Full Names: Oermann, Marilyn H.; Shaw-Kokot, Julia Source: JOURNAL OF NURSING EDUCATION, 52 (9):483-484; 10.3928/01484834-20130822-10 SEP 2013 Language: English Document Type: Editorial Material Addresses: [Oermann, Marilyn H.] Duke Univ, Sch Nursing, Durham, NC 27710 USA. [Shaw-Kokot, Julia] Univ N Carolina, User Serv, Chapel Hill, NC USA. [Shaw-Kokot, Julia] Univ N Carolina, Hlth Sci Lib, Chapel Hill, NC USA. E-mail Addresses: marilyn.oermann at duke.edu Cited Reference Count: 5 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SLACK INC, 6900 GROVE RD, THOROFARE, NJ 08086 USA ISSN: 0148-4834 Web of Science Categories: Nursing Research Areas: Nursing IDS Number: 257OQ Unique ID: WOS:000327394700001 Cited References: Cameron BD, 2005, PORTAL-LIBRARIES AND THE ACADEMY, V5, P105 Oermann Marilyn H., 2010, JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING, V19, P3435 EBSCO Industries Inc, 2012, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Althouse Benjamin M., 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P27 Thomson Reuters, 2013, Journal Citation Reports. 2012 JCR Science Edition, ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327378800001 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: CCA and *citation* indices Authors: Berland, N; Stolowy, H; Piot, C Author Full Names: Berland, Nicolas; Stolowy, Herve; Piot, Charles Source: COMPTABILITE CONTROLE AUDIT, 19 (2):3-11; SEP 2013 Language: French Document Type: Editorial Material Cited Reference Count: 3 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: ASSOC FRANCOPHONE COMPTABILITE-AFC, 40 RUE DES JEUNEURS, PARIS, 75002, FRANCE ISSN: 1262-2788 Web of Science Categories: Business, Finance Research Areas: Business & Economics IDS Number: 257JE Unique ID: WOS:000327378800001 Cited References: Klein Daniel B., 2004, ECON JOURNAL WATCH, V1, P134 Wilhite Allen W., 2012, SCIENCE, V335, P542 Hirsch J.E., 2005, arXiv:physics/0508025v5 [physics.soc-ph], ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327051200015 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Applied *Informetrics* for Digital Libraries: An Overview of Foundations, Problems and Current Approaches Authors: Schaer, P Author Full Names: Schaer, Philipp Source: HISTORICAL SOCIAL RESEARCH-HISTORISCHE SOZIALFORSCHUNG, 38 (3):267-281; SI 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Digital libraries, informetrics, Power Law, Bradford's Law, Lotka's Law, Zipfs Law, information retrieval, co-occurrence analysis KeyWords Plus: INFORMATION-RETRIEVAL; RELEVANCE; SCIENCE; SEARCH; IR Abstract: The foundation of every research project is a comprehensive literature review. The search for scientific literature in information systems is a discipline at the intersection of information retrieval and digital libraries; recent user studies in both fields show two typical weaknesses of the classical IR approach: ranking of retrieved and maybe relevant documents and the language problem during the query formulation phase. At the same time the performance of traditional retrieval systems that rely primarily on textual document and query features have been stagnating for years, as could be observed in IR evaluation campaigns such as TREC or CLEF. Therefore alternative approaches to surpass these two problem fields are needed. Recent developments in the area of applied informetrics show very promising effects by using long-known informetric and bibliometric methods like the analysis of power-law distributions described by Lotka's, Zipf's or Bradford's laws, or the application of co-occurrences analysis for entities like authors, journals or references of scientific literature. This work will concentrate on the description of the open problems and the current approaches to surpass these by using applied informetrics methodologies. Addresses: GESIS Leibniz Inst Social Sci, D-50667 Cologne, Germany. E-mail Addresses: philipp.schaer at gesis.org Cited Reference Count: 34 Times Cited: 1 Publisher: GESIS-LEIBNIZ INST SOIAL SCIENCES, UNTER SACHSENHAUSEN 6-8, KOLN, D-50667, GERMANY ISSN: 0172-6404 Web of Science Categories: History; History Of Social Sciences; Industrial Relations & Labor; Social Sciences, Interdisciplinary Research Areas: History; Social Sciences - Other Topics; Business & Economics IDS Number: 252ZK Unique ID: WOS:000327051200015 Cited References: Armstrong Timothy G., 2009, Proceeding of the 18th ACM Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, 601-10. CIKM '09, Blair DC, 2003, ANNUAL REVIEW OF INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V37, P3 Egghe L, 2005, POWER LAWS IN THE INFORMATION PRODUCTION PROCESS: LOTKAIAN INFORMETRICS, P1 Lykke Marianne, 2010, ADVANCES IN INFORMATION RETRIEVAL, PROCEEDINGS32nd European Conference on Information Retrieval Research, MAR 28-31, 2010, Milton Keynes, ENGLAND, V5993, P627 White Howard D., 2007, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V58, P536 Hobohm Hans-Christoph, 2012, HISTORICAL SOCIAL RESEARCH-HISTORISCHE SOZIALFORSCHUNG, V37, P218 Morris SA, 2004, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICAColloquium on Mapping Knowledge Domains, MAY 09-11, 2003, Irvine, CA, V101, P5291 Borlund P, 2003, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V54, P913 Ingwersen P, 1996, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V52, P3 Ingwersen Peter, 2005, The turn - integration of information seeking and retrieval in context, Fox Edward A., 2012, Theoretical Foundations for Digital Libraries: The 5S Approach, Glanzel Wolfgang, 2003, Bibliometrics as a Research Field, Schaer Philipp, 2013, HISTORICAL SOCIAL RESEARCH-HISTORISCHE SOZIALFORSCHUNG, V38, P282 SCHAMBER L, 1990, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT51ST ANNUAL MEETING OF THE AMERICAN SOC FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, OCT 23-27, 1988, ATLANTA, GA, V26, P755 Siegfried Doreen, 2011, World Wide Wissenschaft - Wie professionell Forschende im Internet arbeiten, Efthimiadis EN, 1996, ANNUAL REVIEW OF INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V31, P121 Ritchie Anna, 2006, Proceedings of the Main Conference on Human Language Technology Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association of Computational Linguistics, 391-98. HLT-NAACL '06, Newman MEJ, 2005, CONTEMPORARY PHYSICS, V46, P323 Aula Anne, 2005, Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on World Wide Web, 583-92. WWW '05, WHITE HD, 1981, ONLINE REVIEW, V5, P47 Metzler Donald, 2011, V27, Strohman Trevor, 2007, Proceedings of the 30th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, 705-6. SIGIR '07, Schamhorst Andrea, 2010, Journal of Dynamics of Socio-Economic Systems, V2, P1 Ingwersen Peter, 2012, Scientometric Indicators and Webometrics and the Polyrepresentation Principle in Information Retrieval, Schaer Philipp, 2012, Information Access Evaluation. Multilinguality, Multimodality, and Visual Analytics, V7488, P124 TAGUESUTCLIFFE J, 1992, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V28, P1 BICHTELER J, 1980, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V31, P278 Schaer Philipp, 2013, Der Nutzen informetrischer Analysen und nicht-textueller Dokumentattribute fur das Information Retrieval in digitalen Bibliotheken, Manning C. D., 2008, Introduction to Information Retrieval, Hjorland B, 2000, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V36, P501 TIJSSEN RJW, 1994, EVALUATION REVIEW, V18, P98 Mutschke Peter, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V89, P349 Havemann Frank, 2009, Einfuhrung in die Bibliometrie, Mayr Philipp, 2013, Proceedings of ISSI 2013, V2, P1493 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327302900278 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: A dynamic statistical model for geospatial data access laws based on cloud computing Authors: Pan, SM; Xu, ZQ; Liu, XJ Author Full Names: Pan Shaoming; Xu Zhengquan; Liu Xiaojun Book Group Author(s): IEEE Source: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2013 8TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON COMPUTER SCIENCE & EDUCATION (ICCSE 2013), 1423-1426; 2013 Language: English Document Type: Proceedings Paper Conference Title: 8th International Conference on Computer Science and Education (ICCSE) Conference Date: APR 26-28, 2013 Conference Location: Colombo, SRI LANKA Conference Sponsors: Inst Elect & Elect Engineers, Natl Res Council Comp Educ Coll & Univ, Inst Elect & Elect Engineers Sri Lanka Sect Conference Host: Sri Lanka Inst Informat Technol Author Keywords: Cloud computing, spatial data, distribution law, dynamic statistics Abstract: The strategy of storage and organization can be adjusted utilizing the access and distribution law of the spatial data, which will significantly improve system performance of spatial data services. The access and distribution law of the spatial data based on Hotmap and *Zipf-like* are statics, and can not reflect its global information real-time. A dynamic statistical method based on collaborative cloud is proposed in this paper to resolve above-mentioned problems. The nodes service capabilities are calculated in our algorithm. The node agents with good service capabilities are chosen preferentially in the group to fuse dynamic statistical information. The experimental results show that the performance of our algorithm can be improved by about 29% compared with the algorithm of random nodes. The algorithm can meet the need of dynamic statistics in large scale cloud mode with high efficiency. Addresses: [Pan Shaoming; Xu Zhengquan; Liu Xiaojun] Wuhan Univ, State Key Lab Informat Engn Surveying Mapping & R, Wuhan 430072, Hubei, Peoples R China. E-mail Addresses: pansm at lmars.whu.edu.cn Cited Reference Count: 11 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: IEEE, 345 E 47TH ST, NEW YORK, NY 10017 USA ISBN: 978-1-4673-4463-0 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications; Computer Science, Theory & Methods; Education, Scientific Disciplines Research Areas: Computer Science; Education & Educational Research IDS Number: BIB64 Unique ID: WOS:000327302900278 Cited References: ???, 2006, ?????????Geography and geo-information science, V22, P22 Zhang M, 2006, Proceedings of IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference (GLOBECOM'06), November 27-December 1, 2006, P1 Wang Hao, 2010, Geomatics and Information Science of Wuhan University, V35, Fisher Danyel, 2007, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VISUALIZATION AND COMPUTER GRAPHICSIEEE Visualization Conference (Vis 2007)/IEEE Information Visualization Conference (InfoVis 2007), OCT 28-NOV 01, 2007, Sacramento, CA, V13, P1184 Liao Lin, 2007, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, V171, P311 Tait M G, 2005, Environment and Urban Systems, V29, P33 MELL P, 2011, The NIST Definition of Cloud Computing, LUO Jun-zhou, 2011, Journal on Communications, V32, P2 Talagala N, 2000, COMPUTER, V33, P22 Yang Sirui, 2006, AUTONOMIC AND TRUSTED COMPUTING, PROCEEDINGS3rd International Conference on Autonomic and Trusted Computing, SEP 03-06, 2006, Wuhan, PEOPLES R CHINA, V4158, P113 Krumm John, 2007, COMPUTER, V40, P105 ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000327051200015 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Applied Informetrics for Digital Libraries: An Overview of Foundations, Problems and Current Approaches Authors: Schaer, P Author Full Names: Schaer, Philipp Source: HISTORICAL SOCIAL RESEARCH-HISTORISCHE SOZIALFORSCHUNG, 38 (3):267-281; SI 2013 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Digital libraries, informetrics, Power Law, Bradford's Law, Lotka's Law, Zipfs Law, information retrieval, co-occurrence analysis KeyWords Plus: INFORMATION-RETRIEVAL; RELEVANCE; SCIENCE; SEARCH; IR Abstract: The foundation of every research project is a comprehensive literature review. The search for scientific literature in information systems is a discipline at the intersection of information retrieval and digital libraries; recent user studies in both fields show two typical weaknesses of the classical IR approach: ranking of retrieved and maybe relevant documents and the language problem during the query formulation phase. At the same time the performance of traditional retrieval systems that rely primarily on textual document and query features have been stagnating for years, as could be observed in IR evaluation campaigns such as TREC or CLEF. Therefore alternative approaches to surpass these two problem fields are needed. Recent developments in the area of applied informetrics show very promising effects by using long-known informetric and bibliometric methods like the analysis of power-law distributions described by Lotka's, *Zipf*'s or Bradford's laws, or the application of co-occurrences analysis for entities like authors, journals or references of scientific literature. This work will concentrate on the description of the open problems and the current approaches to surpass these by using applied informetrics methodologies. Addresses: GESIS Leibniz Inst Social Sci, D-50667 Cologne, Germany. E-mail Addresses: philipp.schaer at gesis.org Cited Reference Count: 34 Times Cited: 1 Publisher: GESIS-LEIBNIZ INST SOIAL SCIENCES, UNTER SACHSENHAUSEN 6-8, KOLN, D-50667, GERMANY ISSN: 0172-6404 Web of Science Categories: History; History Of Social Sciences; Industrial Relations & Labor; Social Sciences, Interdisciplinary Research Areas: History; Social Sciences - Other Topics; Business & Economics IDS Number: 252ZK Unique ID: WOS:000327051200015 Cited References: Armstrong Timothy G., 2009, Proceeding of the 18th ACM Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, 601-10. CIKM '09, Blair DC, 2003, ANNUAL REVIEW OF INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V37, P3 Egghe L, 2005, POWER LAWS IN THE INFORMATION PRODUCTION PROCESS: LOTKAIAN INFORMETRICS, P1 Lykke Marianne, 2010, ADVANCES IN INFORMATION RETRIEVAL, PROCEEDINGS32nd European Conference on Information Retrieval Research, MAR 28-31, 2010, Milton Keynes, ENGLAND, V5993, P627 White Howard D., 2007, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V58, P536 Hobohm Hans-Christoph, 2012, HISTORICAL SOCIAL RESEARCH-HISTORISCHE SOZIALFORSCHUNG, V37, P218 Morris SA, 2004, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICAColloquium on Mapping Knowledge Domains, MAY 09-11, 2003, Irvine, CA, V101, P5291 Borlund P, 2003, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V54, P913 Ingwersen P, 1996, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V52, P3 Ingwersen Peter, 2005, The turn - integration of information seeking and retrieval in context, Fox Edward A., 2012, Theoretical Foundations for Digital Libraries: The 5S Approach, Glanzel Wolfgang, 2003, Bibliometrics as a Research Field, Schaer Philipp, 2013, HISTORICAL SOCIAL RESEARCH-HISTORISCHE SOZIALFORSCHUNG, V38, P282 SCHAMBER L, 1990, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT51ST ANNUAL MEETING OF THE AMERICAN SOC FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, OCT 23-27, 1988, ATLANTA, GA, V26, P755 Siegfried Doreen, 2011, World Wide Wissenschaft - Wie professionell Forschende im Internet arbeiten, Efthimiadis EN, 1996, ANNUAL REVIEW OF INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V31, P121 Ritchie Anna, 2006, Proceedings of the Main Conference on Human Language Technology Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association of Computational Linguistics, 391-98. HLT-NAACL '06, Newman MEJ, 2005, CONTEMPORARY PHYSICS, V46, P323 Aula Anne, 2005, Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on World Wide Web, 583-92. WWW '05, WHITE HD, 1981, ONLINE REVIEW, V5, P47 Metzler Donald, 2011, V27, Strohman Trevor, 2007, Proceedings of the 30th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, 705-6. SIGIR '07, Schamhorst Andrea, 2010, Journal of Dynamics of Socio-Economic Systems, V2, P1 Ingwersen Peter, 2012, Scientometric Indicators and Webometrics and the Polyrepresentation Principle in Information Retrieval, Schaer Philipp, 2012, Information Access Evaluation. Multilinguality, Multimodality, and Visual Analytics, V7488, P124 TAGUESUTCLIFFE J, 1992, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V28, P1 BICHTELER J, 1980, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V31, P278 Schaer Philipp, 2013, Der Nutzen informetrischer Analysen und nicht-textueller Dokumentattribute fur das Information Retrieval in digitalen Bibliotheken, Manning C. D., 2008, Introduction to Information Retrieval, Hjorland B, 2000, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V36, P501 TIJSSEN RJW, 1994, EVALUATION REVIEW, V18, P98 Mutschke Peter, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V89, P349 Havemann Frank, 2009, Einfuhrung in die Bibliometrie, Mayr Philipp, 2013, Proceedings of ISSI 2013, V2, P1493 ======================================================================= ======================================================================= From zehrayanar at GMAIL.COM Wed Dec 25 05:42:16 2013 From: zehrayanar at GMAIL.COM (Zehra TASKIN) Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2013 12:42:16 +0200 Subject: ICKM2014 - 10th International Conference on Knowledge Management Message-ID: ICKM2014 10th International Conference on Knowledge Management November 24-26, 2014, Antalya, Turkey Innovation, Knowledge Discovery & Technology Management (First Call for Papers) Conference web site: http://ickm2014.bilgiyonetimi.net SCOPE International Conference on Knowledge Management (ICKM) provides researchers and practitioners from all over the world a forum for discussion and exchange of ideas concerning theoretical and practical aspects of Knowledge Management. Since the first ICKM was held in Singapore in 2004, subsequent conferences have been held in Charlotte, North Carolina, U.S.A. (2005); Greenwich, London, U.K. (2006); Vienna, Austria (2007); Columbus, Ohio, U.S.A. (2008); Hong Kong (2009). Pittsburgh, U.S.A (2010), South Africa (2012) and Montreal, Canada (2013). Hosted by the Department of Information Management of Hacettepe University in Turkey, the 10th ICKM ( http://ickm2014.bilgiyonetimi.net/) will be held in conjunction with the 5th International Symposium on Information Management in a Changing World ( http://imcw2014.bilgiyonetimi.net/) at the Club Hotel Sera ( http://www.clubhotelsera.com.tr/) in Antalya, Turkey, from November 24-26, 2014. MAIN THEME The main theme of the ICKM2014 is "Innovation, Knowledge Discovery & Technology Management". It aims to bring together researchers, practitioners, document and records managers, information and chief knowledge officers, data mining and knowledge discovery specialists, computer engineers, information professionals, librarians and archivists to discuss the issues pertaining to innovation, knowledge discovery, data and text mining techniques, and the management of related information and communication technologies (ICTs). ICKM2014 encourages submission of high-quality research papers, case studies, country reports, posters, workshop proposals, short communications and oral presentations in areas that include but are not limited to the following: MAIN TRACKS Track 1: Innovation and the Knowledge Economy Track 2: Knowledge Management Tools and Technologies Track 3: Competitive Intelligence Track 4: Collaboration, Knowledge Creation and Sharing Track 5: Knowledge Management Strategies & Implementations Track 6: Knowledge Management Education IMPORTANT DATES AND DEADLINES April 16, 2014: Deadline for the submission of abstracts. May 16, 2014: Notification of acceptance of abstracts June 1, 2014: Submission of abstracts in final form June 2, 2014: Registration starts. September 1, 2014: Submission of full papers (if desired) are expected. Notification of acceptance of full papers will be provided to authors via email as soon as possible after a double-blind peer review process. Selected papers will be published in special issues of journals. November 24-26, 2014: Conference starts. Please download and adhere to the STYLE GUIDE applicable to all ICKM paper submissions ( http://ickm2014.bilgiyonetimi.net/documents/ickm2014_template.doc). All suggestions and comments are welcome. Please send us your ideas about possible invited speakers at ickm2014 at gmail.com. Looking forward to your contributions to and participation in the Symposium. Ya?ar Tonta and Suliman Hawamdeh, General Co-chairs Hacettepe University Department of Information Management 06800 Beytepe, Ankara, Turkey Phone: +90 312 297 82 00 Fax: +90 312 299 20 14 E-mail: yasartonta at gmail.com University of North Texas College of Information Denton, TX 76203-5017, USA E-mail: suliman.hawamdeh at unt.edu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gciampag at INDIANA.EDU Mon Dec 30 13:21:04 2013 From: gciampag at INDIANA.EDU (Giovanni Luca Ciampaglia) Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2013 19:21:04 +0100 Subject: ACM Web Science Conference (WebSci'14), June 23-26, 2014 Message-ID: *** Apologies for multiple postings *** CALL FOR PAPERS & CALL FOR WORKSHOPS AND TUTORIAL PROPOSALS ACM Web Science Conference (WebSci'14), June 23-26, 2014 Bloomington, Indiana, USA websci14.org / @WebSciConf / #WebSci14 Deadline for papers: Feb. 23rd 2014 Deadline for workshop & tutorial proposals: Jan. 17th 2014 Web Science is the emergent science of the people, organizations, applications, and of policies that shape and are shaped by the Web, the largest informational artifact constructed by humans in history. Web Science embraces the study of the Web as a vast universal information network of people and communities. As such, Web Science includes the study of social networks whose work, expression, and play take place on the Web. The social sciences and computational sciences meet in Web Science and complement one another: Studying human behavior and social interaction contributes to our understanding of the Web, while Web data is transforming how social science is conducted. The Web presents us with a great opportunity as well as an obligation: If we are to ensure the Web benefits humanity we must do our best to understand it. Call for Papers The Web Science conference is inherently interdisciplinary, as it attempts to integrate computer and information sciences, communication, linguistics, sociology, psychology, economics, law, political science, philosophy, digital humanities, and other disciplines in pursuit of an understanding of the Web. This conference is unique in the manner in which it brings these disciplines together in creative and critical dialogue, and we invite papers from all the above disciplines, and in particular those that cross traditional disciplinary boundaries. Following the success of WebSci'09 in Athens, WebSci'10 in Raleigh, WebSci'11 in Koblenz, WebSci '12 in Evanston, and WebSci'13 in Paris, for the 2014 conference we are seeking papers and posters that describe original research, analysis, and practice in the field of Web Science, as well as work that discusses novel and thought-provoking ideas and works-in-progress. Possible topics for submissions include, but are not limited to, the following: * Analysis of human behavior using social media, mobile devices, and online communities * Methodological challenges of analyzing Web-based * large-scale social interaction * Data-mining and network analysis of the Web and human communities on the Web * Detailed studies of micro-level processes and interactions * on the Web * Collective intelligence, collaborative production, and social computing * Theories and methods for computational social science on the Web * Studies of public health and health-related behavior on the Web * The architecture and philosophy of the Web * The intersection of design and human interaction on the Web * Economics and social innovation on the Web * Governance, democracy, intellectual property, and the commons * Personal data, trust, and privacy * Web and social media research ethics * Studies of Linked Data, the Cloud, and digital eco-systems * Big data and the study of the Web * Web access, literacy, and development * Knowledge, education, and scholarship on and through the Web * People-driven Web technologies, including crowd-sourcing, open data, and new interfaces * Digital humanities * Arts & culture on the Web or engaging audiences using Web resources * Web archiving techniques and scholarly uses of Web archives * New research questions and thought-provoking ideas A separate Call for Workshop and Tutorial Proposals is on the conference website at: http://www.websci14.org/#call-for-workshop-and-tutorial-proposals Submission Web Science is necessarily a very selective single track conference with a rigorous review process. To accommodate the distinct traditions of its many disciplines, we provide three different submission formats: full papers, short papers, and posters. For all types of submissions, inclusion in the ACM DL proceedings will be by default, but not mandatory (opt-out via EasyChair). All accepted research papers (full and short papers) will be presented during the single-track conference. All accepted posters will be given a spot in the single-track lightning talk session, and room to present their papers during a dedicated poster session. Full research papers (5 to 10 pages, ACM double column, 20 mins presentation including Q&A) Full research papers should present new results and original work that has not been previously published. Research papers should present substantial theoretical, empirical, methodological, or policy-oriented contributions to research and/or practice. Short research papers (up to 5 pages, ACM double column, 15 mins presentation including Q&A) Short research papers should present new results and original work that has not been previously published. Research papers can present preliminary theoretical, empirical, methodological, or policy-oriented contributions to research and/or practice. Posters (up to 2 pages, ACM double column, lightning talk + poster presentation) Extended abstracts for posters, which should be in English, can be up to 2 pages. Submission instructions Full and short paper and poster submissions should be formatted according to the official ACM SIG proceedings template (WebSci archive format at http://www.acm.org/sigs/publications/proceedings-templates). Please submit papers using EasyChair at https://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=websci2014. Other creative submission formats (flexible formats) Other types of creative submissions are also encouraged, and the exact format and style of presentation are open. Examples might include artistic performances or installations, interactive exhibits, demonstrations, or other creative formats. For these submissions, the proposers should make clear both what they propose to do, and any special requirements they would need to successfully do it (in terms of space, time, technology, etc.) Review The Web Science program committee consists of a program committee that covers all relevant areas of Web Science. Each submission will be refereed by three PC members and one short meta review written by a Co-PC chair, to cover both the research background of each submission as well as the necessary interdisciplinary aspects. (Optional) Archival Proceedings in the ACM Digital Library All accepted papers and posters will by default appear in the Web Science 2014 Conference Proceedings and can also be made available through the ACM Digital Library, in the same length and format of the submission unless indicated otherwise (those wishing not to be indexed and archived can "opt out" of the proceedings). Call for Workshops and Tutorial Proposals The Web Science conference will start with tutorials and workshops that will promote in-depth training and discussions with the goal of understanding how people, organizations, applications, and policies shape and are shaped by the Web. In agreement with the spirit of the conference, the tutorials and workshops are intended to create opportunities for interdisciplinary discussion around themes and methods that are central to the study of the Web. The list of themes includes, but is not restricted to, 1. Methods for data mining and network research; 2. The study of social dynamics (i.e. political campaigns, censorship) using Web data; 3. The relationship between technical design and individual behaviour (i.e. the impact of by-default design on privacy); 4. The future of the Web in an era of increasing mobile applications; 5. The incentives and limits of regulation; 6. Participatory systems and crowdsourcing; 7. The dynamics of information creation (supply) and consumption (demand) and its relation to real world events. We will give priority to proposals that approach their topic from the perspective of various disciplines, spanning the divide between the social and computer sciences. Tutorials and workshops can be designed as half or full day events. Workshops can have a mixture of panel presentations and invited speakers, but presentations should reflect the diversity of approaches that characterize the multidisciplinary nature of Web Science. For more information about chairs, submission, review, deadlines, etc, please see the full call at http://websci14.org/#call-for-workshop-and-tutorial-proposals or contact websci2014ws at easychair.org. Deadlines Full & Short Papers: * 23 February 2014: Submissions of full and short papers * 13 April 2014: Notification of acceptance for papers * 11 May 2014: Camera-ready version of papers and posters due Late Breaking Posters: * 23 March 2014: Submissions of posters * 13 April 2014: Notification of acceptance for posters * 11 May 2014: Camera-ready version of posters due Workshops and tutorial proposals: * January 17th 2014: Proposal Submissions Authors take note: The official publication date is the date the proceedings are made available in the ACM Digital Library. This date may be up to two weeks prior to the first day of the conference. The official publication date affects the deadline for any patent filings related to published work. (If proceedings are published in the ACM Digital Library after the conference is over, the official publication date is the first day of the conference.) Conference calendar and rough program * 23 June 2014: workshops, opening reception and keynote * 24 June 2014: keynote(s), technical program, poster reception * 25 June 2014: keynote(s), technical program, social event * 26 June 2014: keynote, technical program, closing General chairs * Fil Menczer, Indiana University * Jim Hendler, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute * Bill Dutton, Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford Program chairs * Markus Strohmaier, University of Koblenz and GESIS (Computing) * Ciro Cattuto, ISI Foundation (Physics) * Eric T. Meyer, Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford (Social Sciences) Program Commiteee * Yong-Yeol Ahn, Indiana University * Luca Maria Aiello, Yahoo! Research * William Allen, University of Oxford * Sitaram Asur, HP Labs * Alain Barrat, CNRS * Fabricio Benevenuto, Federal University of Minas Gerais * Mark Bernstein, Eastgate Systems, Inc * Paolo Boldi, Universita degli Studi di Milano * Niels Brugger, Aarhus Universitet * Licia Capra, University College London * Carlos Castillo, Qatar Computing Research Institute * Lu Chen, Wright State University * Cristobal Cobo, Oxford Internet Institute * David Crandall, Indiana University * Pasquale De Meo, VU University, Amsterdam * David De Roure, Oxford e-Research Centre * Pnina Fichman, Indiana University * Alessandro Flammini, Indiana University * Matteo Gagliolo, Universite libre de Bruxelles * Laetitia Gauvin, ISI Foundation, Turin * Daniel Gayo Avello, University of Oviedo * Scott Golder, Cornell University * Bruno Goncalves, Aix-Marseille Universite * Andrew Gordon, University of Southern California * Scott Hale, Oxford Internet Institute * Noriko Hara, Indiana University * Bernhard Haslhofer, University of Vienna * Andreas Hotho, University of Wuerzburg * Geert-Jan Houben, TU Delft * Jeremy Hunsinger, Wilfrid Laurier University * Ajita John, Avaya Labs * Robert Jaschke, L3S Research Center * Haewoon Kwak, Telefonica Research * Renaud Lambiotte, University of Namur * Matthieu Latapy, CNRS * Silvio Lattanzi, Google * Vili Lehdonvirta, Oxford Internet Institute * Sune Lehmann, Technical University of Denmark * Kristina Lerman, University of Southern California * David Liben-Nowell, Carleton College * Yu-Ru Lin, University of Pittsburgh * Huan Liu, Arizona State University * Jared Lorince, Indiana University * Mathias Lux, Klagenfurt University * Massimo Marchiori, University of Padova and UTILABS * Yutaka Matsuo, University of Tokyo * Jaimie Murdock, Indiana University * Mirco Musolesi, University of Birmingham * Eni Mustafaraj, Wellesley College * Wolfgang Nejdl, L3S and University of Hannover * Andre Panisson, ISI Foundation, Turin * Hanwoo Park, Yeungnam University * Fernando Pedone, University of Lugano * Leto Peel, University of Colorado, Boulder * Orion Penner, IMT Lucca * Nicola Perra, Northeastern University * Rob Procter, University of Warwick * Cornelius Puschmann, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society * Daniele Quercia, Yahoo! Labs * Carlos P. Roca, Universitat Rovira i Virgili * Richard Rogers, University of Amsterdam * Daniel Romero, Northwestern University * Matthew Rowe, Lancaster University * Giancarlo Ruffo, Universita di Torino * Derek Ruths, McGill University * Rossano Schifanella, Universita di Torino * Ralph Schroeder, Oxford Internet Institute * Kalpana Shankar, University College Dublin * Xiaolin Shi, Microsoft * Elena Simperl, University of Southampton * Philipp Singer, Knowledge Management Institute * Marc Smith, Connected Action Consulting Group * Steffen Staab, University of Koblenz-Landau * Burkhard Stiller, University of Zurich * Lei Tang, @WalmartLabs * Loren Terveen, University of Minnesota * Sebastiano Vigna, Universita degli Studi di Milano * Claudia Wagner, GESIS-Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences * Jillian Wallis, UC Los Angeles * Stan Wasserman, Indiana University * Ingmar Weber, Qatar Computing Research Institute * Matthew Weber, Rutgers University * Lilian Weng, Indiana University * Christopher Wienberg, University of Southern California * Ben Zhao, UC Santa Barbara * Arkaitz Zubiaga, Dublin Institute of Technology