From tonta at HACETTEPE.EDU.TR Fri Aug 1 01:27:36 2014 From: tonta at HACETTEPE.EDU.TR (yasar tonta) Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2014 08:27:36 +0300 Subject: early bird registration for IMCW2014 & ICKM2014 extended to August 11, 2014 Message-ID: Dear Colleagues: The 5th International Symposium on Information Management in a Changing World (http://imcw2014.bilgiyonetimi.net/) and the 10th International Conference on Knowledge Management (http://ickm2014.bilgiyonetimi.net/ ) will take place in Antalya, Turkey, from November 24-26, 2014, and their preliminary programs are available online. Both events are co-located ( http://www.miracleotel.com/) and we have a number of distinguished keynote and invited speakers as well as contributed papers, workshops and panels, among others. Participants who will register for one may attend the sessions of the other as well. Due to a number of requests from would-be participants who are on summer vacation, the early bird registration period for both events has been extended till August 11, 2014. More information about the registration fees is available at http://viyatour.com/imcw2014/ and http://viyatour.com/ickm2014/ . Looking forward to meeting you in Antalya, Turkey, in late November of this year. Yasar Tonta General Co-chair, IMCW2014 & ICKM2014 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anupdas2072 at GMAIL.COM Mon Aug 4 03:58:43 2014 From: anupdas2072 at GMAIL.COM (anup kumar das) Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2014 13:28:43 +0530 Subject: A Recent Paper "Genesis of Altmetrics or Article-level Metrics for Measuring Efficacy of Scholarly Communications" Message-ID: Genesis of Altmetrics or Article-level Metrics for Measuring Efficacy of Scholarly Communications: Current Perspectives *Anup Kumar Das , Sanjaya Mishra * *http://arxiv.org/abs/1408.0090 * (Submitted on 1 Aug 2014) *Abstract*: The Article-level metrics or altmetrics becomes a new trendsetter in recent times for measuring impact of scientific publications and their social outreach to intended audiences. The popular social networks such as Facebook, Twitter and Linkedin and social bookmarks such as Mendeley and CiteULike are nowadays widely used for communicating research to larger transnational audiences. In 2012, the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) got signed by the scientific and researchers communities across the world. This Declaration has given preference to the article-level metrics (ALM) or altmetrics over traditional but faulty journal impact factor (JIF)-based assessment of career scientists. JIF does not consider impact or influence beyond citations count, as this count reflected only through Thomson Reuters Web of Science database. Also JIF provides indicator related to a journal, but not related to a published paper. Thus, altmetrics now becomes an alternative metrics for performance assessment of individual scientists and their contributed scholarly publications. This paper provides a glimpse of genesis of altmetrics in measuring efficacy of scholarly communications. This paper also highlights available altmetric tools and social platforms linking altmetric tools, which are widely used in deriving altmetric scores of scholarly publications. Comments:Pre-Print Version [submitted to Journal of Scientometric Research, 2014] -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ *Dr. Anup Kumar Das* New Delhi, India www.anupkumardas.blogspot.in ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pmd8 at CORNELL.EDU Tue Aug 5 09:25:37 2014 From: pmd8 at CORNELL.EDU (Philip Davis) Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2014 09:25:37 -0400 Subject: Is Open Access a Cause or an Effect? Message-ID: Of interest to those designing and interpreting citation studies Is Open Access a Cause or an Effect? "Why can't researchers agree on whether Open Access is the cause of more citations or merely associated with better performing papers? The answer is in the methods." http://wp.me/pcvbl-9Uo From amsciforum at GMAIL.COM Tue Aug 5 09:26:24 2014 From: amsciforum at GMAIL.COM (Stevan Harnad) Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2014 09:26:24 -0400 Subject: DOE: The Importance of Requiring Institutional Repository Deposit Immediately Upon Acceptance for Publication Message-ID: *THE DOE OA POLICY* A peer-reviewed journal article is either *accessible* to all its potential users or it is *not accessible* to all its potential users ? only to those at subscribing institutions. Open Access (OA) is intended to make articles accessible (online) to all their potential users, not just to subscribers, so all potential users can read, use, apply and build upon the findings. OA comes in two forms : *Gratis OA* means an article is accessible online to all its potential users. *Libre OA* means an article is accessible online to all its potential users *and* all users also have certain re-use rights, such as text-mining by machine, and re-publication. For individual researchers and for the general public the most important and urgent form of OA is Gratis OA. The reason Gratis OA is so important is that otherwise the research is inaccessible except to subscribers: OA maximizes research uptake, usage, applications, impact and progress. The reason Gratis OA is so urgent is that lost research access means lost research impact and progress. The downloads and citations of papers made OA later never catch up with those of papers made OA immediately: Gentil-Beccot, A., Mele, S., & Brooks, T. C. (2010). Citing and reading behaviours in high-energy physics : *Scientometrics*, 84(2), 345-355. *The date when a peer-reviewed paper is ready to be made OA is the date when the final, peer-reviewed draft is accepted for pubication.* Sometimes there can be delays of months between the date of acceptance and the date of publication of the pubisher?s version of record (VOR). And some (a minority ) of publishers have imposed embargoes of up to 12 months from the date of publication before authors can make their articles OA. The delay from acceptance to publication, and the delay from publication till the end of any OA embargo all add up tp lost research access, uptake, usage, applications and progress. DOE and OSTI have been directed by OSTP to adopt a policy that ensures that OA is provided to federally funded research ?*by 12 months after the date of publication at the very latest*. This is *not* a mandate to adopt a policy that ensures that OA is provided "at the very latest possible date." Yet that is what DOE has done ? no doubt under the influence of the publishing industry lobby . The interests of research and researchers -- and hence of the public that funds the research -- are that the research should be made OA as soon as possible. The interests of (some of) the publishing industry are that it should be made OA as late as possible . The DOA has adopted a policy that serves the interests of the publishing industry rather than those of research, researchers and the tax-paying public. The simplest remedy for this is *not* necessarily that the permissible OA embargo length needs to be reduced (though that would be extremely welcome and beneficial too!). Even within the constraints of a permissible OA embargo of 12 months at the very latest, there is a simple way to make the DOE policy much more powerful and effective, guaranteeing much more and earlier access. All that has to be done is to make immediate deposit of the author?s final, peer-reviewed draft, in the author?s institutional repository, mandatory immediately upon acceptance. Not just the metadata: the full final draft. If the author wishes to comply with a publisher OA embargo, the deposit need not be made OA immediately. Institutional repositories have an automated copy-request Button with which a user can request a single copy for research purposes, and the author can comply with the request, with just one click each. This is not OA, but it is almost-OA , and it is all that is needed to maximize research access, usage and progress during any permissible OA embargo. And besides maximizing access during any permissible OA embargo, requiring immediate institutional deposit also mobilizes institutions to monitor and ensure timely compliance with the funding agency?s requirement. The metadata for the deposit can be exported from each institutional repository to the DOE PAGES portal immediately, and then the portal, too (like google and google scholar), can immediately begin referring users back to the Button at the institution so the author can provide almost-OA with a single click until the end of any embargo. There is no need whatsoever to wait either for the publisher?s VOR, or for the end of the publisher?s embargo, or for Libre OA re-use rights: those can come when they come. But immediate institutional deposit needs to be mandated immediately. Otherwise the DOE is needlessly squandering months and months of potential research uptake, usage and progress for federally funded research. Please harmonize the DOE OA policy with the corresponding EU OA policy, as well as the HEFCE OA policy in the UK, the FRS OA policy in Belgium, and a growing number of institutional OA policies the world over. *Stevan Harnad* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dwojick at CRAIGELLACHIE.US Tue Aug 5 13:48:09 2014 From: dwojick at CRAIGELLACHIE.US (David Wojick) Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2014 13:48:09 -0400 Subject: US Energy Department's new public access plan In-Reply-To: Message-ID: An interesting analysis and discussion of the Energy Department's new public access plan: http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2014/08/04/us-department-of-energy-announces-public-access-plan/ DOE estimates that about 30,000 journal articles a year will be made accessible under this plan, once it gets going in a year or so. This will provide a lot of material for bibliometric analysis. The actual number is unclear as we do not know how many articles originate from DOE's applied research programs. Relating these to the Office of Science's basic research programs will be useful in itself. David David Wojick http://insidepublicaccess.com/ From eric.archambault at SCIENCE-METRIX.COM Tue Aug 5 15:00:37 2014 From: eric.archambault at SCIENCE-METRIX.COM (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=C9ric_Archambault?=) Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2014 19:00:37 +0000 Subject: Is Open Access a Cause or an Effect? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Phil Randomized controlled trial done under bad, limited, or reductionist testing conditions is bad metrology, and bad metrology is bad science. Personally, I prefer simpler experimental setups when they can do in place of complex controlled apparatus with unspecified or uncontrolled assumptions, letting the complexity of interaction in the complex science system speak for itself, and carefully counting the results. We recently finished work for the European Commission where we looked at the citations received by one million papers. The effect is unambiguous - citations received by green OA (call this the cause if you want) is clearly above anything else, papers published in gold OA are gaining grounds, papers appearing in non-OA forms are being shown to be the least cited ones, on average, in several academic discipline. The cause is clear - the more widely one paper is free to roam on the web and be picked up by interested readers, the more it is cited, everything being equal. Freedom to download, removal of usage rights, self-archival, and the associated widespread diffusion of scientific knowledge is the way to maximum impact. This is easy to understand from a logical point of view, and demonstrated by large scale, no-nonsense measurement. The series of report will be published in a few weeks. ?ric Eric Archambault, Ph.D. President and CEO | Pr?sident-directeur g?n?ral Science-Metrix| T. 1.514.495.6505 x.111|eric.archambault at science-metrix.com -----Original Message----- From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Philip Davis Sent: August-05-14 9:26 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: [SIGMETRICS] Is Open Access a Cause or an Effect? Of interest to those designing and interpreting citation studies Is Open Access a Cause or an Effect? "Why can't researchers agree on whether Open Access is the cause of more citations or merely associated with better performing papers? The answer is in the methods." http://wp.me/pcvbl-9Uo From amsciforum at GMAIL.COM Tue Aug 5 17:07:36 2014 From: amsciforum at GMAIL.COM (Stevan Harnad) Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2014 17:07:36 -0400 Subject: How might an institution monitor immediate deposit? Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 11:03 AM, wrote: > Dear Professor Harnad > How may institutions monitor their authors' deposits immediately on > acceptance since isn't the date of acceptance normally known only to the > author and the publisher? Some journals publish each article's date of > initial submission and date of acceptance, but this good practice is not as > common as it should be in the journals I know. > Regards Glad you asked! (And I've anonymized this so I could post my reply too.) The solution is extremely simple: After submission, peer-review, revision, re-refereeing and re-submission, the author always receives an acceptance letter indicating that the final draft has now been accepted and no more revision or re-refereeing is required. That date-stamped letter should be deposited in the institutional repository (in closed access) alongside the full-text of the final, accepted draft (whether in closed or open access). The institution's responsibility is to monitor and ensure that its authors deposit their final drafts at or around the date of acceptance in order to comply with the conditions of the funder. (Institutions are always extremely eager and resourceful in making sure their researchers fulfill the conditions of their funders.) (Probably just the requirement to have the dated acceptance letter ready for verification in comparing date of acceptance with date of deposit would be sufficient to get researchers to do the right thing even without having to deposit the acceptance letter. The date of acceptance is also the natural point in their workflow for depositing the final draft: they still have it, and they know it's been accepted.) On no account should the publisher be relied upon to provide the data on date of acceptance (just as they should not be relied upon to comply with the requirement to provide open access, which is a requirement on the fundee, not on the publisher, who has a conflict of interest, and an interest in delaying OA as long as possible!) Hope that helps, Stevan Harnad -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anupdas2072 at GMAIL.COM Wed Aug 6 00:59:18 2014 From: anupdas2072 at GMAIL.COM (anup kumar das) Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2014 10:29:18 +0530 Subject: A Paper "Genesis of Altmetrics or Article-level Metrics for Measuring Efficacy of Scholarly Communications" for your comments Message-ID: "Genesis of Altmetrics or Article-level Metrics for Measuring Efficacy of Scholarly Communications: Current Perspectives" by Anup Kumar Das, Sanjaya Mishra http://arxiv.org/abs/1408.0090 Abstract: The Article-level metrics or altmetrics becomes a new trendsetter in recent times for measuring impact of scientific publications and their social outreach to intended audiences. The popular social networks such as Facebook, Twitter and Linkedin and social bookmarks such as Mendeley and CiteULike are nowadays widely used for communicating research to larger transnational audiences. In 2012, the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) got signed by the scientific and researchers communities across the world. This Declaration has given preference to the article-level metrics (ALM) or altmetrics over traditional but faulty journal impact factor (JIF)-based assessment of career scientists. JIF does not consider impact or influence beyond citations count, as this count reflected only through Thomson Reuters Web of Science database. Also JIF provides indicator related to a journal, but not related to a published paper. Thus, altmetrics now becomes an alternative metrics for performance assessment of individual scientists and their contributed scholarly publications. This paper provides a glimpse of genesis of altmetrics in measuring efficacy of scholarly communications. This paper also highlights available altmetric tools and social platforms linking altmetric tools, which are widely used in deriving altmetric scores of scholarly publications. Download Full-text PDF: http://arxiv.org/abs/1408.0090 This is a Pre-Print Version [submitted to Journal of Scientometric Research, 2014]. Please provide your valuable comments/ feedback on this forthcoming paper. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dr. Anup Kumar Das New Delhi, India http://anupkumardas.blogspot.in ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From daniel at EVALUATION.UZH.CH Wed Aug 6 09:34:05 2014 From: daniel at EVALUATION.UZH.CH (Hans-Dieter Daniel) Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2014 15:34:05 +0200 Subject: Open positions Message-ID: Open positions:?For further information please consult the links below: PostDoc position Scientific assistant position Prof. Dr. Hans-Dieter Daniel ETH Zurich Switzerland -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amsciforum at GMAIL.COM Wed Aug 6 11:08:54 2014 From: amsciforum at GMAIL.COM (Stevan Harnad) Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2014 11:08:54 -0400 Subject: How might an institution monitor immediate deposit? Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Haak, Laurel wrote: One more option: by the end of the year, ORCID will be enabling the option > for publishers (or via CrossRef) to write updates to ORCID records for > accepted manuscripts that include an authenticated ORCID identifier. The > ORCID registry maintains information on date of post and source of post. > This means repositories can query the ORCID registry to get information on > newly published items. > I think this would be a Trojan Horse if it were relied upon as a substitute for (rather than just a supplement to) the direct institutional verification system I proposed below. On no account should either the fulfillment or the timing of compliance with funder or institutional OA mandates be entrusted to publishers, because of the profound conflict of interest. It is in the interests of research, researchers, their institutions, their funders and the public whose taxes fund the research that the research should be deposited and made OA as soon as possible. It is in the interests of (some) publishers that the research should be deposited and made OA as late as possible. (That is why (some) publishers try to embargo OA. And that is why CHORUS , which tries to keep publishers in control of both OA-provision and its timing is likewise a Trojan Horse.) Not only are publishers not obligated to provide the acceptance date to ORCID or anyone other than the author, but by the time they posted the acceptance date in ORCID (if they did so at all) the article would already have been published! And the whole point of the requirement to deposit at acceptance is *to make sure deposit is actually done at acceptance*, not just to find out when it should have been done, long after the fact! The solution is very clear and simple: Authors deposit their own final drafts in their own institutional repositories, immediately upon acceptance for publication. The acceptance letter itself is either co-deposited with the draft, to confirm the date, or the date of acceptance is entered as part of the draft's deposit metadata, and the acceptance letter is retained in the author's records, for audit as compliance is monitored. The deposit date metadatum and the acceptance date metadatum can be automatically compared by software to ensure timely deposit. ORCID data (where available) can be used retrospectively, if desired, to compare with the institution's own repository metadata, as a supplement. Stevan Harnad > Laurel L. Haak, PhD > Executive Director, ORCID > l.haak at orcid.org > Tel: +1-301-922-9062 > http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5109-3700 > http://orcid.org > > > On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 2:05 PM, Stevan Harnad > wrote: > >> On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 11:03 AM, wrote: >> >>> Dear Professor Harnad >>> >>> How may institutions monitor their authors' deposits immediately on >>> acceptance since isn't the date of acceptance normally known only to the >>> author and the publisher? Some journals publish each article's date of >>> initial submission and date of acceptance, but this good practice is not as >>> common as it should be in the journals I know. >>> >>> Regards >>> >> >> Glad you asked! (And I've anonymized this so I could post my reply too.) >> >> The solution >> is >> extremely simple: After submission, peer-review, revision, re-refereeing >> and re-submission, the author always receives an acceptance letter >> indicating that the final draft has now been accepted and no more revision >> or re-refereeing is required. >> >> That date-stamped letter should be deposited in the institutional >> repository (in closed access) alongside the full-text of the final, >> accepted draft (whether in closed or open access). The institution's >> responsibility is to monitor and ensure that its authors deposit their >> final drafts at or around the date of acceptance in order to comply with >> the conditions of the funder. (Institutions are always extremely eager and >> resourceful in making sure their researchers fulfill the conditions of >> their funders.) >> >> (Probably just the requirement to have the dated acceptance letter ready >> for verification in comparing date of acceptance with date of deposit would >> be sufficient to get researchers to do the right thing even without having >> to deposit the acceptance letter. The date of acceptance is also the >> natural point in their workflow for depositing the final draft: they still >> have it, and they know it's been accepted.) >> >> On no account should the publisher be relied upon to provide the data on >> date of acceptance (just as they should not be relied upon to comply with >> the requirement to provide open access, which is a requirement on the >> fundee, not on the publisher, who has a conflict of interest, and an >> interest in delaying OA as long as possible!) >> >> Hope that helps, >> >> Stevan Harnad >> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Thu Aug 7 13:15:40 2014 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2014 17:15:40 +0000 Subject: Papers of possible 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:000338616100020 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Empirical analysis on the connection between power-law distributions and allometries for urban indicators Authors: Alves, LGA; Ribeiro, HV; Lenzi, EK; Mendes, RS Author Full Names: Alves, L. G. A.; Ribeiro, H. V.; Lenzi, E. K.; Mendes, R. S. Source: PHYSICA A-STATISTICAL MECHANICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS, 409 175-182; 10.1016/j.physa.2014.04.046 SEP 1 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Urban indicators, Power laws, Allometry KeyWords Plus: SCALING LAWS; ZIPFS LAW; CITIES; DYNAMICS; GROWTH Abstract: We report on the existing connection between power-law distributions and allometries. As it was first reported in Gomez-Lievano et al. (2012) for the relationship between homicides and population, when these urban indicators present asymptotic power-law distributions, they can also display specific allometries among themselves. Here, we present an extensive characterization of this connection when considering all possible pairs of relationships from twelve urban indicators of Brazilian cities (such as child labor, illiteracy, income, sanitation and unemployment). Our analysis reveals that all our urban indicators are asymptotically distributed as power laws and that the proposed connection also holds for our data when the allometric relationship displays enough correlations. We have also found that not all allometric relationships are independent and that they can be understood as a consequence of the allometric relationship between the urban indicator and the population size. We further show that the residuals fluctuations surrounding the allometries are characterized by an almost constant variance and log-normal distributions. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Addresses: [Alves, L. G. A.; Ribeiro, H. V.; Lenzi, E. K.; Mendes, R. S.] Univ Estadual Maringa, Dept Fis, BR-87020900 Maringa, PR, Brazil. [Ribeiro, H. V.] Univ Tecnol Fed Parana, Dept Fis, BR-86812460 Apucarana, PR, Brazil. [Alves, L. G. A.; Ribeiro, H. V.; Lenzi, E. K.; Mendes, R. S.] CNPq, Natl Inst Sci & Technol Complex Syst, BR-22290180 Rio De Janeiro, RJ, Brazil. E-mail Addresses: gustavoandradealves at gmail.com; hvr at dfi.uem.br Funding Acknowledgement: CNPq (Brazilian agency); CAPES (Brazilian agency); Fundacao Araucaria (Brazilian agency); Fundacao Araucaria [113/2013] Funding Text: This work has been supported by the CNPq, CAPES and Fundacao Araucaria (Brazilian agencies). HVR is especially grateful to Fundacao Araucaria for financial support under grant number 113/2013. Cited Reference Count: 29 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, PO BOX 211, 1000 AE AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0378-4371 eISSN: 1873-2119 Web of Science Categories: Physics, Multidisciplinary Research Areas: Physics IDS Number: AK7NX Unique ID: WOS:000338616100020 Cited References: O'Neale Dion R. J., 2012, PLOS ONE, V7, Marsili M, 1998, PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS, V80, P2741 Malevergne Y., 2006, Extreme Financial Risks: from Dependence to Risk Management, Bettencourt Luis M. A., 2013, SCIENCE, V340, P1438 Crane P, 2005, SCIENCE, V308, P1225 Axtell RL, 2001, SCIENCE, V293, P1818 Bettencourt Luis M. A., 2010, PLOS ONE, V5, Eeckhout J, 2004, AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, V94, P1429 Galam S, 2012, SOCIOPHYSICS: A PHYSICIST'S MODELING OF PSYCHO-POLITCAL PHENOMENA, P1 Melo H.P.M., 2014, arXiv: 1402.2510., Newman MEJ, 2005, CONTEMPORARY PHYSICS, V46, P323 Arbesman Samuel, 2009, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V79, Gomez-Lievano Andres, 2012, PLOS ONE, V7, Clauset Aaron, 2009, SIAM REVIEW, V51, P661 Conte R., 2012, EUROPEAN PHYSICAL JOURNAL-SPECIAL TOPICS, V214, P325 Vespignani Alessandro, 2012, NATURE PHYSICS, V8, P32 Angel S., 2005, The Dynamics of Global Urban Expansion, Mantovani M. C., 2013, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V88, Alves Luiz G. A., 2013, PHYSICA A-STATISTICAL MECHANICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS, V392, P2672 Alves Luiz G. A., 2013, PLOS ONE, V8, Boccaletti S., 2006, PHYSICS REPORTS-REVIEW SECTION OF PHYSICS LETTERS, V424, P175 Bettencourt Luis M. A., 2007, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V104, P7301 Mantegna R.N., 2007, Introduction to Econophysics: Correlations and Complexity in Finance, Batty Michael, 2008, SCIENCE, V319, P769 Yokoyama T., 2013, Appl. Math., V4, P1371 Mantovani M. C., 2011, EPL, V96, Miller Jr R.G., 1991, Simultaneous Statistical Inference, Laherrere J, 1998, EUROPEAN PHYSICAL JOURNAL B, V2, P525 Bettencourt Luis, 2010, NATURE, V467, P912 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338599700002 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: The jump in network ecology research between 1990 and 1991 is a Web of Science artefact Authors: Pautasso, M Author Full Names: Pautasso, Marco Source: ECOLOGICAL MODELLING, 286 11-12; 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2014.04.020 AUG 24 2014 Language: English Document Type: Letter Author Keywords: Databases, Keyword search, Publication growth, Publish or perish, Scientometrics, Systematic reviews KeyWords Plus: GROWTH Abstract: Borrett et.al. (2014) report a jump in network ecology publications between 1990 and 1991 but fail to find a cause for it. This jump in publication output is not a mystery, but a Web of Science artefact, due to the restriction of this database search to titles until 1990, whilst also abstracts and keywords are systematically searched in Web of Science starting from 1991. Indeed there is no such leap in publication numbers between 1990 and 1991 in Google Scholar. A sudden increase in publication numbers between the years 1990 and 1991 is instead found in Web of Science when searching for a variety of keywords. Until Web of Science allows researchers to consistently search for keywords within abstracts also before 1991, bibliometric research on publication growth rates using Web of Science should avoid comparing the number of publications retrieved before and after 1991. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Addresses: [Pautasso, Marco] ETH, Inst Integrat Biol, Zurich, Switzerland. [Pautasso, Marco] European Food Safety Author, Anim & Plant Hlth Unit, Parma, Italy. E-mail Addresses: marpauta at gmail.com Cited Reference Count: 16 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, PO BOX 211, 1000 AE AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0304-3800 eISSN: 1872-7026 Web of Science Categories: Ecology Research Areas: Environmental Sciences & Ecology IDS Number: AK7HQ Unique ID: WOS:000338599700002 Cited References: Pautasso Marco, 2012, SUSTAINABILITY, V4, P3234 Leuzinger Sebastian, 2013, OECOLOGIA, V171, P639 Fricke Ralph, 2013, BMC INFECTIOUS DISEASES, V13, Arora Sanjay K., 2013, JOURNAL OF NANOPARTICLE RESEARCH, V16, Anderson GJ, 2002, TAXON, V51, P637 Drescher M., 2013, ECOSPHERE, V4, Nobis M, 2004, OIKOS, V106, P411 Pautasso Marco, 2013, FUNGAL ECOLOGY, V6, P129 Borrett S.R., 2014, Ecol. Model., Heneberg Petr, 2011, EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY AND TRAUMATOLOGY, V21, P401 Ho Yuh-Shan, 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V96, P929 Fu Hui-zhen, 2010, WASTE MANAGEMENT, V30, P2410 Han M.Y., 2014, Ecol. Ind., Wang Haijun, 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V95, P35 Murphy Linda S, 2003, BMC complementary and alternative medicine, V3, P3 Manzano-Agugliaro F., 2013, RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS, V18, P134 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338649800025 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Citation databases omit local journals Authors: Alperin, JP Author Full Names: Alperin, Juan Pablo Source: NATURE, 511 (7508):155-155; JUL 10 2014 Language: English Document Type: Letter Addresses: Stanford Univ, Stanford, CA 94305 USA. E-mail Addresses: juan at alperin.ca Cited Reference Count: 1 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP, MACMILLAN BUILDING, 4 CRINAN ST, LONDON N1 9XW, ENGLAND ISSN: 0028-0836 eISSN: 1476-4687 Web of Science Categories: Multidisciplinary Sciences Research Areas: Science & Technology - Other Topics IDS Number: AK8AP Unique ID: WOS:000338649800025 Cited References: 2014, NATURE, V510, P202 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338911900012 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: A comparison of the impact factor and the SCImago Journal Rank index in respiratory system journals Authors: Garcia-Pachon, E; Arencibia-Jorge, R Author Full Names: Garcia-Pachon, Eduardo; Arencibia-Jorge, Ricardo Source: ARCHIVOS DE BRONCONEUMOLOGIA, 50 (7):308-309; 10.1016/j.arbres.2013.10.006 JUL 2014 Language: Spanish Document Type: Letter Addresses: [Garcia-Pachon, Eduardo] Hosp Gen Univ, Secc Neumol, Alicante, Spain. [Arencibia-Jorge, Ricardo] Ctr Nacl Invest Cient, Havana, Cuba. E-mail Addresses: egpachon at gmail.com Cited Reference Count: 4 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: EDICIONES DOYMA S A, TRAV DE GRACIA 17-21, 08021 BARCELONA, SPAIN ISSN: 0300-2896 eISSN: 1579-2129 Web of Science Categories: Respiratory System Research Areas: Respiratory System IDS Number: AL1UN Unique ID: WOS:000338911900012 Cited References: Garfield E, 2006, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V295, P90 Garcia-Pachon Eduardo, 2014, MEDICINA CLINICA, V142, P226 Falagas Matthew E., 2008, FASEB JOURNAL, V22, P2623 Bornmann Lutz, 2012, RHEUMATOLOGY INTERNATIONAL, V32, P1861 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338662600015 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Global Research on Smoking and Pregnancy-A Scientometric and Gender Analysis Authors: Mund, M; Kloft, B; Bundschuh, M; Klingelhoefer, D; Groneberg, DA; Gerber, A Author Full Names: Mund, Mathias; Kloft, Beatrix; Bundschuh, Matthias; Klingelhoefer, Doris; Groneberg, David A.; Gerber, Alexander Source: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH, 11 (6):5792-5806; 10.3390/ijerph110605792 JUN 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: bibliometry, cigarette, citation, gender studies, pregnancy, scientometry, smoking KeyWords Plus: CESSATION; JOURNALS; SCIENCE; WOMEN; GAP Abstract: The exposure to tobacco smoke during pregnancy is considered to be amongst the most harmful avoidable risk factors. In this scientometric and gender study scientific data on smoking and pregnancy was analyzed using a variety of objective scientometric methods like the number of scientific contributions, the number of citations and the modified h-index in combination with gender-specific investigations. Covering a time period from 1900 to 2012, publishing activities of 27,955 authors, institutions and countries, reception within the international scientific community and its reactions were analyzed and interpreted. Out of 10,043 publications the highest number of scientific works were published in the USA (35.5%), followed by the UK (9.9%) and Canada (5.3%). These nations also achieve the highest modified h-indices of 128, 79 and 62 and the highest citation rates of 41.4%, 8.6% and 5.3%, respectively. Out of 12,596 scientists 6,935 are female (55.1%), however they account for no more than 49.7% of publications (12,470) and 42.8% of citations (172,733). The highest percentage of female experts about smoking and pregnancy is found in Australasia (60.7%), while the lowest is found in Asia (41.9%). The findings of the study indicate an increase in gender equality as well as in quantity and quality of international scientific research about smoking and pregnancy in the future. Addresses: [Mund, Mathias; Bundschuh, Matthias; Klingelhoefer, Doris; Groneberg, David A.; Gerber, Alexander] Goethe Univ Frankfurt, Inst Occupat Med Social Med & Environm Med, D-60590 Frankfurt, Germany. [Kloft, Beatrix] Goethe Univ Frankfurt, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, D-60590 Frankfurt, Germany. E-mail Addresses: M-coder at hotmail.com; Beakloft at gmx.de; Bundschuh at med.uni-frankfurt.de; klingelhoefer at med.uni-frankfurt.de; arbsozmed at uni-frankfurt.de; gerber at med.uni-frankfurt.de Cited Reference Count: 28 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: MDPI AG, POSTFACH, CH-4005 BASEL, SWITZERLAND ISSN: 1660-4601 Web of Science Categories: Environmental Sciences Research Areas: Environmental Sciences & Ecology IDS Number: AK8FL Unique ID: WOS:000338662600015 Cited References: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Agency, Mission, Bickerstaff Margaret, 2012, AUSTRALIAN & NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNAECOLOGY, V52, P54 Gibis Bernhard, 2012, DEUTSCHES ARZTEBLATT INTERNATIONAL, V109, P327 Lowe HJ, 1996, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL INFORMATICS ASSOCIATION, V3, P1 Amering Michaela, 2011, ACADEMIC MEDICINE, V86, P946 MERTON RK, 1968, SCIENCE, V159, P56 Higgins Stephen T., 2012, PREVENTIVE MEDICINE, V55, PS33 Uibel S., 2010, Clostridium Botulinum und Seine Toxine-Szientometrische Analyse zur Relevanz als Bakterium, Therapeutikum und Biowaffe, Dettmer S., 2006, Karriereplanung fur Arztinnen, Thaele V., 2011, INTERNIST, V52, P1185 El-Mohandes Ayman A E, 2011, Maternal and child health journal, V15 Suppl 1, PS96 Central Intelligence Agency, The World Factbook: Kosovo, Gofin Yoel, 2012, ISRAEL MEDICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL, V14, P275 Jokic M., 2006, Qualitat und Quantitat Wissenschaftlicher Veroffentlichungen, Zakaib G. D., 2011, Nature, P470 Riese K., 2007, Kriterien zur Ressourcensteuerung an Hochschulen, Haustein K.-O., 2008, Tabakabhangigkeit-Gesundheitliche Schaden durch das Rauchen, Pleger N., 2011, Bakterielle Meningitis: Eine Szientometrische Analyse, Dudenhausen J. W., 2009, Rauchen in der Schwangerschaft-Haufigkeit, Folgen und Pravention, Moyer Melinda Wenner, 2012, SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, V306, P16 Metaxa Victoria, 2013, CRITICAL CARE, V17, [Anonymous], 2009, Report on the Global Tobacco Endemic, Chertok Ilana R. Azulay, 2011, MATERNAL AND CHILD HEALTH JOURNAL, V15, P249 Simmons Vani Nath, 2011, JOURNAL OF HEALTH COMMUNICATION, V16, P90 Schrager Sarina, 2011, FAMILY MEDICINE, V43, P155 Hentila M., 2006, Von Heute an fur Alle! Hundert Jahre Frauenwahlrecht, Ceci Stephen J., 2011, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V108, P3157 Hyland K, 2003, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V54, P251 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338613700012 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Tipping points in science: A catastrophe model of scientific change Authors: Cunningham, SW; Kwakkel, JH Author Full Names: Cunningham, S. W.; Kwakkel, J. H. Source: JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT, 32 185-205; SI 10.1016/j.jengtecman.2014.01.002 APR-JUN 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Scientometrics, Diffusion modeling, Scientific growth, Logistic, Catastrophe KeyWords Plus: FORECASTING EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES; DYNAMIC CAPABILITIES; KNOWLEDGE; GROWTH; POPULATION; INNOVATION; EVOLUTION Abstract: In this paper we discuss the capabilities for scientific knowledge to demonstrate explosive growth in short periods of time. In one notable example the field of engineering and technology management grew more rapidly in the 4 years after 1980 than it was expected to grow for the next 40 years. We provide 22 examples drawn widely from science, demonstrating that this phenomena is pervasive throughout science. We propose a new model, based on the idea of folds from mathematical catastrophe theory, a phenomenon that is more popularly known as tipping points. This model is then fit using non-linear regression in the presence of Poisson noise. While the tipping point does not occur in all fields of science, in those cases where it does occur the resultant model overwhelmingly supports the idea of catastrophic growth within scientific knowledge. We describe the differential equations underlying the fold catastrophe and relate these equations to a process of communication and interaction. We relate this dynamic to other word of mouth models such as the Bass diffusion model. We further discuss why scientific, and to a lesser extent news, articles are subject to this behavior while the same phenomenon is unlikely to occur when solely measuring the sales of a physical product. We provide evidence of the phenomenon in one brief sociological sketch of scientific activity. Finally, we discuss the relevance of the model in terms of innovation forecasting. In particular, we evaluate the possibility for ex ante anticipation of the bifurcation point. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Addresses: [Cunningham, S. W.; Kwakkel, J. H.] Delft Univ Technol, Fac Technol Policy & Management, NL-2600 GA Delft, Netherlands. E-mail Addresses: s.cunningham at tudelft.nl; j.h.kwakkel at tudelft.nl Cited Reference Count: 48 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, PO BOX 211, 1000 AE AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0923-4748 eISSN: 1879-1719 Web of Science Categories: Business; Engineering, Industrial; Management Research Areas: Business & Economics; Engineering IDS Number: AK7MZ Unique ID: WOS:000338613700012 Cited References: de Solla Price D., 1961, Science Since Babylon, Gladwell M., 2002, The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference, BASS FM, 1969, MANAGEMENT SCIENCE SERIES A-THEORY, V15, P215 Rip A., 1984, Scientometrics, V6, P265 Arnold V.I., 1994, Dynamical Systems V, Encyclopaedia of Mathematical Sciences, Van Den Besselaar Peter, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS10th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, JUL, 2005, Stockholm, SWEDEN, V68, P377 Zollo M, 2002, ORGANIZATION SCIENCE, V13, P339 Hubbell S.P., 2001, The Unified Neutral Theory of Biodiversity and Biogeography, Boyack K. W., 2007, Mapping the evolution and structure of chemistry research Proceedings of ISSI 2007: 11th International Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, V1, P112 Fuhr D, 2004, JOURNAL OF UNIVERSAL COMPUTER SCIENCE3rd International Conference on Knowledge Management (I-Know 03), JUL 02-04, 2003, Graz, AUSTRIA, V10, P176 Perone C. S., 2009, ACM SIGEVOlution, V4, P12 Pearl R, 1920, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V6, P275 Garfield E, 2004, JOURNAL OF INFORMATION SCIENCEColloquium on Mapping Knowledge Domains, MAY 09-11, 2003, Irvine, CA, V30, P119 de Solla Price D., 1963, Little Science, Big Science, ZITT M, 1991, SCIENTOMETRICS, V22, P229 PRICE DJD, 1983, CURRENT CONTENTS/SOCIAL & BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES, P18 Guckenheimer John, 2005, MOSCOW MATHEMATICAL JOURNAL, V5, P91 Cunningham Scott W., 2011, TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING AND SOCIAL CHANGE, V78, P346 Arnold V I, 1984, Catastrophe Theory, Porter A. L., 1991, Forecasting and Management of Technology, Teece DJ, 1997, STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V18, P509 Noyons E. C. M., 1988, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, V49, P61 Berenson M. L., 1998, The Normal Approximation to the Binomial and Poisson Distributions, Business Statistics, Bensman SJ, 2005, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V56, P189 Schmoch Ulrich, 2007, RESEARCH POLICY, V36, P1000 van Rossum G., 1995, Python Reference Manual, Verhulst P. F., 1838, Corr. Math. Phys., V10, P113 VON FOERSTER HEINZ, 1960, SCIENCE, V132, P1291 Miranda L. C. M., 2010, TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING AND SOCIAL CHANGE, V77, P699 MERTON RK, 1968, SCIENCE, V159, P56 PRICE DJD, 1976, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V27, P292 Han Chung-Souk, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V84, P391 Hunter John D., 2007, COMPUTING IN SCIENCE & ENGINEERING, V9, P90 Lariviere Vincent, 2008, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V59, P288 Zucker LG, 2002, MANAGEMENT SCIENCEConference on University Entrepreneurship and Technology Transfer, DEC, 2000, ATLANTA, GEORGIA, V48, P138 Roper A.T., 2011, Forecasting and Management of Technology, Reid EOF, 1997, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V33, P91 AKAIKE H, 1974, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, VAC19, P716 Mendez Vicenc, 2011, MATHEMATICAL BIOSCIENCES, V232, P78 Daim Tugrul U., 2006, TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING AND SOCIAL CHANGE, V73, P981 Bengisu Murat, 2006, TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING AND SOCIAL CHANGE, V73, P835 Bettencourt Luis M. A., 2007, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V104, P7301 Maleszewska M., 2013, Nature, V500, P113 Hicks DM, 1996, SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY & HUMAN VALUES, V21, P379 Petersen Alexander M., 2012, SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, V2, Malerba F, 2002, RESEARCH POLICY, V31, P247 FISHER JC, 1971, TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING AND SOCIAL CHANGE, V3, P75 Mitchell M., 2009, Complexity, A Guided Tour, ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338613700009 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Detecting research fronts using different types of weighted citation networks Authors: Fujita, K; Kajikawa, Y; Mori, J; Sakata, I Author Full Names: Fujita, Katsuhide; Kajikawa, Yuya; Mori, Junichiro; Sakata, Ichiro Source: JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT, 32 129-146; SI 10.1016/j.jengtecman.2013.07.002 APR-JUN 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Research front, Citation network analysis, Bibliometrics, Decision support KeyWords Plus: SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE; SCIENCE; COCITATION; RELATEDNESS; DOCUMENTS; MAP Abstract: In this paper, we investigate the performance of different types of weighted citation networks for detecting emerging research fronts by a comparative study. Three citation patterns including direct citation, co-citation and bibliographic coupling, have been tested in three research domains including gallium nitride, complex networks, and nano-carbon. These three patterns of citation networks are constructed for each research domain, and the papers in those domains are divided into clusters to detect the research front. Additionally, we apply some measures to weighted citations like difference in publication years between citing and cited papers and similarities of keywords between them, which are expected to be able to effectively to detect emerging research fronts. To investigate the performance of different types of weighted citation networks for detecting emerging research fields, we evaluate the performance of each approach by using the following measures of extracted research fronts: visibility, speed, and topological and textual relevance. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Addresses: [Fujita, Katsuhide] Tokyo Univ Agr & Technol, Fac Engn, Koganei, Tokyo 1848588, Japan. [Kajikawa, Yuya] Tokyo Inst Technol, Grad Sch Innovat Management, Minato Ku, Tokyo 1080023, Japan. [Mori, Junichiro] Univ Tokyo, Platinum Soc, Bunkyo Ku, Tokyo 1130033, Japan. [Sakata, Ichiro] Univ Tokyo, Sch Engn, Bunkyo Ku, Tokyo 1138656, Japan. E-mail Addresses: katfuji at cc.tuat.ac.jp Cited Reference Count: 33 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, PO BOX 211, 1000 AE AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0923-4748 eISSN: 1879-1719 Web of Science Categories: Business; Engineering, Industrial; Management Research Areas: Business & Economics; Engineering IDS Number: AK7MZ Unique ID: WOS:000338613700009 Cited References: Newman MEJ, 2004, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V69, Chen CM, 1999, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V35, P401 Jaccard P., 1912, New Phytol., V11, P37 Chen C., 2003, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, V53, P678 SMALL H, 1974, SCIENCE STUDIES, V4, P17 Small H, 1999, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V50, P799 Hoperoft J., 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, V101, P5249 Kostoff RN, 1997, JOURNAL OF INFORMATION SCIENCE, V23, P301 Barabasi AL, 1999, SCIENCE, V286, P509 Small Henry, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS10th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, JUL, 2005, Stockholm, SWEDEN, V68, P595 Boyack Kevin W., 2010, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V61, P2389 Jarneving Bo, 2007, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V1, P287 IIJIMA S, 1991, NATURE, V354, P56 Leydesdorff Loet, 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P348 Chen CM, 2006, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V57, P359 SMALL H, 1973, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V24, P265 Shibata Naoki, 2008, TECHNOVATION, V28, P758 NAKAMURA S, 1994, APPLIED PHYSICS LETTERS, V64, P1687 Losiewicz P, 2000, JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS, V15, P99 Shibata Naoki, 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P571 NAKAMURA S, 1992, JAPANESE JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSICS PART 1-REGULAR PAPERS SHORT NOTES & REVIEW PAPERS, V31, P2883 NAKAMURA S, 1991, JAPANESE JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSICS PART 2-LETTERS, V30, PL1705 Kostoff RN, 2001, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V52, P1148 Shibata Naoki, 2011, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V62, P1360 Jain A, 2005, PATTERN RECOGNITION, V38, P2270 Klavans Richard, 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P455 Davidson GS, 1998, JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS, V11, P259 Klavans R, 2006, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V57, P251 KESSLER MM, 1963, AMERICAN DOCUMENTATION, V14, P10 Boyack KW, 2005, SCIENTOMETRICS, V64, P351 BRAAM RR, 1991, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V42, P233 Watts DJ, 1998, NATURE, V393, P440 Leydesdorff L, 2004, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V60, P371 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338613700011 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Finding linkage between technology and social issue: A Literature Based Discovery approach Authors: Ittipanuvat, V; Fujita, K; Sakata, I; Kajikawa, Y Author Full Names: Ittipanuvat, Vitavin; Fujita, Katsuhide; Sakata, Ichiro; Kajikawa, Yuya Source: JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT, 32 160-184; SI 10.1016/j.jengtecman.2013.05.006 APR-JUN 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Literature Based Discovery, Text mining, Link mining, Citation analysis, Innovation KeyWords Plus: LAPAROSCOPIC RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY; TOTAL HIP-REPLACEMENT; CITATION ANALYSIS; FISH-OIL; MEDICAL LITERATURES; COCITATION ANALYSIS; KNEE-REPLACEMENT; PATENT ANALYSIS; ROBOT; SCIENCE Abstract: This paper investigates Literature Based Discovery (LBD) approach to reveal linkages between technology and social issue to elucidate plausible contribution of science and technology for solving social issues. Robotics and gerontology were selected as an example in our analysis. The result shows various technological options of robotics contributing to healthcare and well-being of elderly people, mainly in surgery, rehabilitation, and companionship. In addition, we comparatively evaluated effectiveness of semantic similarity measures to extract these linkages from bibliographic database. Our methodology can be utilized as a decision support tool for managers and policy makers to extract and design promising research targets. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Addresses: [Ittipanuvat, Vitavin] Univ Tokyo, Grad Sch Engn, Dept Technol Management Innovat, Bunkyo Ku, Tokyo 1138656, Japan. [Ittipanuvat, Vitavin; Kajikawa, Yuya] Univ Tokyo, Innovat Policy Res Ctr, Bunkyo Ku, Tokyo 1138656, Japan. [Fujita, Katsuhide] Tokyo Univ Agr & Technol, Fac Engn, Koganei, Tokyo 1848588, Japan. [Sakata, Ichiro] Univ Tokyo, Todai Policy Alternat Res Inst, Bunkyo Ku, Tokyo 1130033, Japan. [Kajikawa, Yuya] Tokyo Inst Technol, Grad Sch Innovat Management, Minato Ku, Tokyo 1080023, Japan. E-mail Addresses: kajikawa at mot.titech.ac.jp Cited Reference Count: 93 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, PO BOX 211, 1000 AE AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0923-4748 eISSN: 1879-1719 Web of Science Categories: Business; Engineering, Industrial; Management Research Areas: Business & Economics; Engineering IDS Number: AK7MZ Unique ID: WOS:000338613700011 Cited References: Bellotto Nicola, 2010, AUTONOMOUS ROBOTS, V28, P425 Mitchell JM, 2006, REHABILITATION COUNSELING BULLETIN, V49, P157 Barnason Susan, 2006, HEART & LUNG, V35, P225 SWANSON DR, 1986, PERSPECTIVES IN BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE, V30, P7 Johnson Kurt L., 2010, PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, V21, P267 Sakata I., 2010, Proceedings of Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology 2010 Conference, Bangkok, Boyack KW, 2002, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V53, P764 Smith Adrian, 2010, RESEARCH POLICY, V39, P435 Plinkert PK, 2001, HNO, V49, P514 Small H, 1999, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V50, P799 McMurray A, 2002, JOURNAL OF ADVANCED NURSING, V40, P663 Wilson TD, 1997, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V33, P551 Ganiz M. C., 2005, Technical report, Lehigh University, LU-CSE-05-027, Smalheiser NR, 1996, NEUROLOGY, V47, P809 Eriksson J., 2005, Proceedings of the IEEE 9th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics, Chicago, Hughes T. P, 1994, Does Technology Drive History? The Dilemma of Technological Determinism, Shibata N., 2011, Foresight, V13, Melson Gail F., 2009, JOURNAL OF SOCIAL ISSUES, V65, P545 Adai AT, 2004, JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR BIOLOGY, V340, P179 Gordon MD, 1996, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V47, P116 SWANSON DR, 1987, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V38, P228 Martelli M, 2000, ANNALS OF BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING, V28, P1146 Borner K, 2003, ANNUAL REVIEW OF INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V37, P179 Lee Yong Scong, 2007, YONSEI MEDICAL JOURNAL, V48, P341 Shibata Naoki, 2008, TECHNOVATION, V28, P758 Williams R, 1996, RESEARCH POLICY, V25, P865 Hatzinger Martin, 2006, JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, V20, P848 Sakata Ichiro, 2013, TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING AND SOCIAL CHANGE, V80, P1085 Smalheiser NR, 1998, COMPUTER METHODS AND PROGRAMS IN BIOMEDICINE, V57, P149 Klavans Richard, 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P455 Robinson L., 2007, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GERIATRIC PSYCHIATRY, V22, P9 Swanson DR, 1997, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, V91, P183 Alcacer Juan, 2006, REVIEW OF ECONOMICS AND STATISTICS, V88, P774 Porter Alan L., 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS, V81, P719 Joseph JV, 2005, BJU INTERNATIONAL, V96, P39 Shibata Naoki, 2011, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V62, P1360 Mynatt E., 1999, Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Cooperative Buildings, Pittsburgh, Wada K, 2004, PROCEEDINGS OF THE IEEE, V92, P1780 VALDESPEREZ RE, 1994, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, V65, P247 Qin J, 1997, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V48, P893 Jorm AF, 1997, MEDICAL JOURNAL OF AUSTRALIA, V166, P376 Charlifue S, 2004, NEUROREHABILITATION, V19, P91 Wang Jue, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V87, P563 Cory KA, 1997, COMPUTERS AND THE HUMANITIES, V31, P1 Almeida P, 1996, STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V17, P155 Kajikawa Yuya, 2007, SUSTAINABILITY SCIENCE, V2, P221 Chen CM, 2002, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V53, P678 Weeber M, 2005, BRIEFINGS IN BIOINFORMATICS, V6, P277 Gordon M. D., 2002, ACM Transactions on Internet Technology, V2, P261 Gordon MD, 1998, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V49, P674 Llorente MD, 2005, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GERIATRIC PSYCHIATRY, V13, P195 Lo Szu-Chia, 2007, SCIENTOMETRICS, V70, P183 Lupsakko T, 2002, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GERIATRIC PSYCHIATRY, V17, P808 SWANSON DR, 1990, PERSPECTIVES IN BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE, V33, P157 Camarinha-Matos L. M., 2001, Kostoff Ronald N., 2008, TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING AND SOCIAL CHANGE, V75, P165 Mynatt E., 2001, Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Seattle, Shoval Noam, 2010, JOURNAL OF TRANSPORT GEOGRAPHY, V18, P603 Harwin William S., 2006, PROCEEDINGS OF THE IEEE, V94, P1717 Sausville J., 2010, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PRACTICE, V64, P1740 Thelwall Mike, 2008, JOURNAL OF INFORMATION SCIENCE, V34, P605 Borner M, 1997, UNFALLCHIRURG, V100, P640 Schaffernicht E, 2005, KI2005: ADVANCES IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, PROCEEDINGS28th Annual German Conference on Artificial Intelligence, SEP 11-14, 2005, Koblenz, GERMANY, V3698, P320 Arnold E, 2004, RESEARCH EVALUATIONEVA Conference on Nordic Evaluators, SEP, 2001, Haholmen, NORWAY, V13, P3 Figl Michael, 2010, COMPUTERIZED MEDICAL IMAGING AND GRAPHICS, V34, P61 Weeber M, 2001, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V52, P548 Shibata Naoki, 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P571 Estey Eric P., 2009, CUAJ-CANADIAN UROLOGICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL, V3, P488 Davidson GS, 1998, JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS, V11, P259 NARIN F, 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, P147 Banks Marian R., 2008, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL DIRECTORS ASSOCIATION, V9, P173 Kirkim Gunay, 2007, MEDITERRANEAN JOURNAL OF OTOLOGY28th National Meeting of the Turkish-Otolaryngology-and-Head-and-Neck-Surgery-Society, SEP 22-26, 2005, Antalya, TURKEY, V3, P126 Webster Kate E., 2006, JOURNAL OF AGING AND PHYSICAL ACTIVITY, V14, P181 SWANSON DR, 1989, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V40, P432 D'Attellis N, 2002, JOURNAL OF CARDIOTHORACIC AND VASCULAR ANESTHESIA, V16, P397 Small Henry, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS10th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, JUL, 2005, Stockholm, SWEDEN, V68, P595 Shibata Naoki, 2010, TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING AND SOCIAL CHANGE, V77, P1147 Aoyagi Daisuke, 2007, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON NEURAL SYSTEMS AND REHABILITATION ENGINEERING10th IEEE International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics, JUN 13-15, 2007, Noordwijk, NETHERLANDS, V15, P387 Federspil PA, 2004, BIOMEDIZINISCHE TECHNIK54th Annual Meeting of the German-Society-of-Neurosurgery, APR, 2003, Saarbrucken, GERMANY, V49, P78 Osareh F, 1996, LIBRI, V46, P149 Frantzi K., 2000, International Journal on Digital Libraries, V3, Pirraglia PA, 1999, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GERIATRIC PSYCHIATRY, V14, P668 Klavans R, 2006, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V57, P251 Osareh F, 1996, LIBRI, V46, P217 Boyack KW, 2005, SCIENTOMETRICS, V64, P351 Weber BA, 2000, GERIATRIC NURSING, V21, P250 Newman MEJ, 2004, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V69, Francois Dorothee, 2009, INTERACTION STUDIES, V10, P324 Truesdale Matthew D., 2010, JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY27th World Congress of Endourology, OCT 06-10, 2009, Munich, GERMANY, V24, P1055 Daim Tugrul U., 2006, TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING AND SOCIAL CHANGE, V73, P981 FREEMAN C, 1979, FUTURES, V11, P206 SALTON G, 1975, COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM, V18, P613 SWANSON DR, 1988, PERSPECTIVES IN BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE, V31, P526 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000336944000505 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: The intellectual structure analysis of improvisation studies based on a journal co-citation analysis Authors: Gao, PB; Wu, WW; Yu, B Author Full Names: Gao, Pengbin; Wu, Weiwei; Yu, Bo Edited by: Sung WP; Kao JCM; Chen R Source: FRONTIERS OF MANUFACTURING SCIENCE AND MEASURING TECHNOLOGY III, PTS 1-3, 401 2315-2318; 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.401-403.2315 2013 Book Series: Applied Mechanics and Materials Language: English Document Type: Proceedings Paper Conference Title: 3rd International Conference on Frontiers of Manufacturing Science and Measuring Technology (ICFMM 2013) Conference Date: JUL 30-31, 2013 Conference Location: LiJiang, PEOPLES R CHINA Conference Sponsors: Control Engn & Informat Sci Res Assoc, Int Frontiers Sci & Technol Res Assoc, Trans Tech Publicat, Chin Yi Univ Technol Author Keywords: improvisation, intellectual structure, journal co-citation analysis, multivariate analysis KeyWords Plus: ORGANIZATIONAL IMPROVISATION Abstract: The research of improvisation has been become an emerging management area in recent years, and the purpose of this study is to explore the intellectual structure of this research domain. A journal co-citation analysis was performed using the cited articles in the improvisation field included by Web of Knowledge database from 1997 to 2012. The journal set used was the 30 most productive journals in the field of improvisation, and multivariate statistical techniques were used to deal with the co-citation frequency matrix and correlation matrix. The results of current study show that the knowledge base of improvisation research involves multi-disciplinary with broad relations with other specialties: management, organization, marketing, innovation, information management, sociology and psychology. Addresses: [Gao, Pengbin; Wu, Weiwei; Yu, Bo] Harbin Inst Technol, Sch Management, Harbin 150001, Peoples R China. E-mail Addresses: gaopengbinhit at 163.com; wuweiwei at hit.edu.cn; yub at hit.edu.cn Cited Reference Count: 6 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: TRANS TECH PUBLICATIONS LTD, LAUBLSRUTISTR 24, CH-8717 STAFA-ZURICH, SWITZERLAND ISSN: 1660-9336 ISBN: 978-3-03785-846-2 Web of Science Categories: Engineering, Mechanical; Materials Science, Multidisciplinary; Mechanics Research Areas: Engineering; Materials Science; Mechanics IDS Number: BA5QN Unique ID: WOS:000336944000505 Cited References: Liu Z, 2005, SCIENTOMETRICS, V62, P385 Miner AS, 2001, ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCE QUARTERLY, V46, P304 Moorman C, 1998, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT REVIEW, V23, P698 Moorman C, 1998, JOURNAL OF MARKETING, V62, P1 MCCAIN KW, 1991, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V42, P290 Baker T, 2003, RESEARCH POLICYTechnology Entrepreneurship Research Policy Conference, MAY, 2000, COLLEGE PK, MARYLAND, V32, P255 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000337173000003 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Capturing and managing scholarly information Authors: Ovadia, S Author Full Names: Ovadia, Steven Book Author(s): Ovadia, S (Ovadia, S) Book Author Full Names: Ovadia, S Source: LIBRARIAN'S GUIDE TO ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN THE CLOUD, 33-58; 2013 Book Series: Chandos Information Professional Series Language: English Document Type: Article; Book Chapter Author Keywords: bibliographic management, BibTeX, citation management, citations, CiteULike, EndNote, Mendeley, Papers, RefWorks, Zotero Abstract: Bibliographic management tools allow users to save and organize citations (and sometimes the full-text of articles), while also providing the option to export citations in different citation formats. Cloud-based tools are no different, but provide the added advantage of persistent access to this information across computers and devices. This chapter will discuss pure cloud-based tools, such as CiteULike, RefWorks, and the organizational tools within subscription databases. Client-based tools that can be synced against the cloud, such as Zotero, Mendeley, EndNote, and Papers will also be discussed, as will BibTeX, a markup-driven method to manage citations. When choosing a service, users should focus on cost, the operating systems of their computers and mobile devices, their commonly used citation formats, and the interface of the tools. Luckily, it is usually not difficult to export citations out of one bibliographic management tool and into another, so users can easily experiment with multiple tools. Addresses: CUNY, LaGuardia Community Coll, New York, NY 10012 USA. E-mail Addresses: sovadia at lagcc.cuny.edu Cited Reference Count: 0 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: CHANDOS PUBL, 80 HIGH ST, SAWSTON, CAMBRIDGE CB22 3HJ, ENGLAND ISBN: 978-1-780633-81-7; 978-1-843347-15-6 Book DOI: 10.1533/9781780633817 Web of Science Categories: Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: BA6KY Unique ID: WOS:000337173000003 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338718300005 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Worldwide performance and trends in nonpoint source pollution modeling research from 1994 to 2013: A review based on bibliometrics Authors: Li, SS; Zhuang, YH; Zhang, L; Du, Y; Liu, HB Author Full Names: Li, Sisi; Zhuang, Yanhua; Zhang, Liang; Du, Yun; Liu, Hongbin Source: JOURNAL OF SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION, 69 (4):121A-126A; 10.2489/jswc.69.4.121A JUL-AUG 2014 Language: English Document Type: Review KeyWords Plus: DIFFUSE POLLUTION; WATER-QUALITY; FRESH-WATER; EUTROPHICATION; NITROGEN; AGNPS; LAND; AREA Addresses: [Li, Sisi; Zhuang, Yanhua; Zhang, Liang; Du, Yun] Chinese Acad Sci, Inst Geodesy & Geophys, Key Lab Environm & Disaster Monitoring & Evaluat, Wuhan, Hubei, Peoples R China. [Liu, Hongbin] Chinese Acad Agr Sci, Inst Agr Resources & Reg Planning, Key Lab Nonpoint Source Pollut Control, Beijing 100193, Peoples R China. Funding Acknowledgement: National Natural Science Foundation of China [41001333]; Key Laboratory of Nonpoint Source Pollution Control, Ministry of Agriculture [20130102]; National Key Technology R&D Program of China [2012BAC06B03] Funding Text: The authors thank the support by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 41001333), Key Laboratory of Nonpoint Source Pollution Control, Ministry of Agriculture (20130102), and the National Key Technology R&D Program of China (2012BAC06B03). Cited Reference Count: 23 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SOIL WATER CONSERVATION SOC, 945 SW ANKENY RD, ANKENY, IA 50023-9723 USA ISSN: 0022-4561 eISSN: 1941-3300 Web of Science Categories: Ecology; Soil Science; Water Resources Research Areas: Environmental Sciences & Ecology; Agriculture; Water Resources IDS Number: AK8ZW Unique ID: WOS:000338718300005 Cited References: Pretty JN, 2003, ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, V37, P201 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Alexander RB, 2002, BIOGEOCHEMISTRY, V57, P295 Heathwaite AL, 2003, ENVIRONMENTAL MODELLING & SOFTWAREConference on Modelling of Hydrologic Systems (MODSIM 2001), DEC 10-13, 2001, CANNBERRA, AUSTRALIA, V18, P753 YOUNG RA, 1989, JOURNAL OF SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION, V44, P168 Chen CM, 2006, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V57, P359 Johnes PJ, 1997, HYDROLOGICAL PROCESSES, V11, P269 Shen Zhenyao, 2012, SEPARATION AND PURIFICATION TECHNOLOGY6th International Conference on Sustainable Water Environment, JUL 29-31, 2010, Newark, DE, V84, P104 SRINIVASAN R, 1994, WATER RESOURCES BULLETIN, V30, P453 Ma Xiao, 2011, SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT, V412, P154 Liu Xingjian, 2011, BIODIVERSITY AND CONSERVATION, V20, P807 Bingner R., 2001, AnnAGNPS technical processes: Documentation version 2, Borah DK, 2003, TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASAEASAE International Meeting, JUL 28-31, 2002, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, V46, P1553 Smith VH, 2003, ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH, V10, P126 Arnold JG, 1998, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN WATER RESOURCES ASSOCIATION, V34, P73 Bouraoui F, 1996, JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING-ASCE, V122, P493 Williams J. R., 1995, Computer models of watershed hydrology., P909 Rewerts C.C., 1991, Paper 91-2621, PRITCHAR.A, 1969, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V25, P348 MITCHELL JK, 1993, WATER RESOURCES BULLETIN, V29, P833 Novotny V, 1999, WATER SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGYInternational Conference and Workshop on Integrated Management of Water Quality at CSIM, MAY 11-16, 1997, TEOLO, ITALY, V39, P1 Davis JR, 2006, HYDROBIOLOGIA, V559, P23 Zhuang Yanhua, 2012, 2012 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MEDICAL PHYSICS AND BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING (ICMPBE2012)International Conference on Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering (ICMPBE), 2012, Qingdao, PEOPLES R CHINA, V33, P138 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338645400004 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Impact of peer review on reports of randomised trials published in open peer review journals: retrospective before and after study Authors: Hopewell, S; Collins, GS; Boutron, I; Yu, LM; Cook, J; Shanyinde, M; Wharton, R; Shamseer, L; Altman, DG Author Full Names: Hopewell, Sally; Collins, Gary S.; Boutron, Isabelle; Yu, Ly-Mee; Cook, Jonathan; Shanyinde, Milensu; Wharton, Rose; Shamseer, Larissa; Altman, Douglas G. Source: BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 349 10.1136/bmj.g4145 JUL 1 2014 Language: English Document Type: Review KeyWords Plus: QUALITY; MANUSCRIPTS; ARTICLES; IMPROVE Abstract: Objective To investigate the effectiveness of open peer review as a mechanism to improve the reporting of randomised trials published in biomedical journals. Design Retrospective before and after study. Setting BioMed Central series medical journals. Sample 93 primary reports of randomised trials published in BMC-series medical journals in 2012. Main outcome measures Changes to the reporting of methodological aspects of randomised trials in manuscripts after peer review, based on the CONSORT checklist, corresponding peer reviewer reports, the type of changes requested, and the extent to which authors adhered to these requests. Results Of the 93 trial reports, 38% (n=35) did not describe the method of random sequence generation, 54% (n=50) concealment of allocation sequence, 50% (n=46) whether the study was blinded, 34% (n=32) the sample size calculation, 35% (n=33) specification of primary and secondary outcomes, 55% (n=51) results for the primary outcome, and 90% (n=84) details of the trial protocol. The number of changes between manuscript versions was relatively small; most involved adding new information or altering existing information. Most changes requested by peer reviewers had a positive impact on the reporting of the final manuscript-for example, adding or clarifying randomisation and blinding (n=27), sample size (n=15), primary and secondary outcomes (n=16), results for primary or secondary outcomes (n=14), and toning down conclusions to reflect the results (n=27). Some changes requested by peer reviewers, however, had a negative impact, such as adding additional unplanned analyses (n=15). Conclusion Peer reviewers fail to detect important deficiencies in reporting of the methods and results of randomised trials. The number of these changes requested by peer reviewers was relatively small. Although most had a positive impact, some were inappropriate and could have a negative impact on reporting in the final publication. Addresses: [Hopewell, Sally; Collins, Gary S.; Yu, Ly-Mee; Cook, Jonathan; Shanyinde, Milensu; Wharton, Rose; Altman, Douglas G.] Univ Oxford, Ctr Stat Med, Oxford OX3 7LD, England. [Hopewell, Sally; Boutron, Isabelle] Univ Paris 05, Ctr Epidemiol Clin, INSERM U1153, Paris, France. [Cook, Jonathan] Univ Oxford, Nuffield Dept Orthopaed Rheumatol & Musculoskelet, Oxford OX3 7LD, England. [Shamseer, Larissa] Ottawa Hosp Res Inst, Ottawa, ON, Canada. E-mail Addresses: sally.hopewell at csm.ox.ac.uk Cited Reference Count: 21 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP, BRITISH MED ASSOC HOUSE, TAVISTOCK SQUARE, LONDON WC1H 9JR, ENGLAND ISSN: 1756-1833 Article Number: g4145 Web of Science Categories: Medicine, General & Internal Research Areas: General & Internal Medicine IDS Number: AK7YY Unique ID: WOS:000338645400004 Cited References: Schroter Sara, 2008, JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF MEDICINE, V101, P507 Boutron Isabelle, 2010, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V303, P2058 Smith RA, 1999, TEACHING OF PSYCHOLOGY, V26, P4 Cobo Erik, 2007, PLOS ONE, V2, Alam M., 2011, BRITISH JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY, V165, P563 Cobo E., 2011, BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V343, RENNIE D, 1992, CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS, V13, P443 [Anonymous], 2014, Schroter S, 2004, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V328, P673 Kravitz Richard L., 2010, PLOS ONE, V5, Turner Lucy, 2012, Systematic reviews, V1, P60 Cho MK, 1998, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION3rd International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication, SEP, 1997, PRAGUE, CZECH REPUBLIC, V280, P243 Sun Xin, 2012, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V344, Dickersin Kay, 2007, BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, V7, Arnau C, 2003, MEDICINA CLINICA, V121, P690 Hames I, 2007, Peer review and manuscript management in scientific journals: guidelines for good practice, Moher D., 2010, British Medical Journal, V23, P340 International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, 2008, Uniform requirement for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals, Black N, 1998, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION3rd International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication, SEP, 1997, PRAGUE, CZECH REPUBLIC, V280, P231 Hopewell Sally, 2010, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V340, Jefferson T, 2007, Cochrane Database Syst Rev, V2, ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338953500002 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Worldwide research productivity in the field of electronic cigarette: a bibliometric analysis Authors: Zyoud, SH; Al-Jabi, SW; Sweileh, WM Author Full Names: Zyoud, Sa'ed H.; Al-Jabi, Samah W.; Sweileh, Waleed M. Source: BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, 14 10.1186/1471-2458-14-667 JUN 30 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Bibliometric, Electronic cigarette, E-Cigarette, Scopus KeyWords Plus: NICOTINE DELIVERY-SYSTEMS; EASTERN ARAB COUNTRIES; DEVICE E-CIGARETTE; WEB-OF-SCIENCE; PERIOD 2003-2012; SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS; GOOGLE-SCHOLAR; TOBACCO USE; SCOPUS; SMOKING Abstract: Background: Electronic cigarette (EC) is an emerging phenomenon that is becoming increasingly popular with smokers worldwide. There is a lack of data concerning the evaluation of research productivity in the field of EC originating from the world. The main objectives of this study were to analyse worldwide research output in EC field, and to examine the authorship pattern and the citations retrieved from the Scopus database. Methods: Data were searched for documents with specific words regarding EC as "keywords" in the title. Scientific output was evaluated based on the methodology developed and used in other bibliometric studies by investigation: (a) total and trends of contributions in EC research during all previous years up to the date of data analysis (June 13, 2014); (b) authorship patterns and research productivity; (c) countries contribution; and (d) citations received by the publications. Results: Three hundred and fifty-six documents were retrieved comprising 31.5% original journal articles, 16% letters to the editor, 7.9% review articles, and 44.6% documents that were classified as other types of publications, such as notes or editorials or opinions. The retrieved documents were published in 162 peer-reviewed journals. All retrieved documents were published from 27 countries. the largest number of publications in the field of EC was from the United States of America (USA); (33.7%), followed by the United Kingdom (UK); (11.5%), and Italy (8.1%). The total number of citations at the time of data analysis was 2.277, with an average of 6.4 citations per document and median (interquartile range) of 0.0 (0.0-5.0). The h-index of the retrieved documents was 27. The most productive institutions were Food and Drug Administration, USA (4.2% of total publications) followed by Universita degli Studi di Catania, Italy (3.9%), University of California, San Francisco, USA (3.7%). Conclusions: This bibliometric study is a testament to the progress in EC research from the world over the last few years. More effort is needed to bridge the gap in EC-based research and to promote better evaluation of EC, risks, health effects, or control services worldwide. Addresses: [Zyoud, Sa'ed H.] An Najah Natl Univ, Poison Control & Drug Informat Ctr, Coll Med & Hlth Sci, Nablus, Israel. [Zyoud, Sa'ed H.; Al-Jabi, Samah W.] An Najah Natl Univ, Dept Clin & Community Pharm, Coll Med & Hlth Sci, Nablus, Israel. [Zyoud, Sa'ed H.] Univ Sains Malaysia, Natl Poison Ctr, WHO Collaborating Ctr Drug Informat, George Town, Malaysia. [Sweileh, Waleed M.] An Najah Natl Univ, Dept Pharmacol & Toxicol, Coll Med & Hlth Sci, Nablus, Israel. E-mail Addresses: saedzyoud at yahoo.com Cited Reference Count: 54 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: BIOMED CENTRAL LTD, 236 GRAYS INN RD, FLOOR 6, LONDON WC1X 8HL, ENGLAND ISSN: 1471-2458 Article Number: 667 Web of Science Categories: Public, Environmental & Occupational Health Research Areas: Public, Environmental & Occupational Health IDS Number: AL2KC Unique ID: WOS:000338953500002 Cited References: Polosa Riccardo, 2011, BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, V11, Tadmouri GO, 2004, SAUDI MEDICAL JOURNAL, V25, P7 Polosa Riccardo, 2013, LANCET ONCOLOGY, V14, PE582 Oncology TL, 2013, Lancet Oncol, V14, P1027 Bullen C., 2010, TOBACCO CONTROL, V19, P98 Miro Oscar, 2009, TOXICOLOGY LETTERS, V189, P1 Zyoud Sa'ed H., 2014, TOBACCO INDUCED DISEASES, V12, Ignacio de Granda-Orive Jose, 2011, ARCHIVOS DE BRONCONEUMOLOGIA, V47, P213 Wagener Theodore L., 2012, ADDICTION, V107, P1545 Falagas Matthew E., 2006, ACTA TROPICA, V99, P155 Webster N. R., 2011, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, V107, P306 Falagas Matthew E., 2008, FASEB JOURNAL, V22, P338 Zyoud Sa'ed H., 2014, HARM REDUCTION JOURNAL, V11, Capasso Lorenzo, 2014, LANCET, V383, P1883 Ayers John W., 2011, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PREVENTIVE MEDICINE, V40, P448 Kira Anette, 2011, NICOTINE & TOBACCO RESEARCH, V13, P474 De Battisti Francesca, 2013, STATISTICAL METHODS AND APPLICATIONS, V22, P269 Etter Jean-Francois, 2011, ADDICTION, V106, P2017 Siegel Michael B., 2011, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PREVENTIVE MEDICINE, V40, P472 Smith Derek R., 2010, ARCHIVES OF ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH, V65, P173 Luo C, 2013, Lect Notes Comput Sci, V8040, P1 Stidham Ryan W., 2012, GASTROENTEROLOGY, V143, P520 Meho Lokman I., 2008, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V59, P1711 Caponnetto Pasquale, 2012, EXPERT REVIEW OF RESPIRATORY MEDICINE, V6, P63 Eissenberg Thomas, 2010, TOBACCO CONTROL, V19, P87 World Health Organization, 2011, WHO report on the global tobacco epidemic, 2011: warning about the dangers of tobacco, Mayer Bernd, 2014, ARCHIVES OF TOXICOLOGY, V88, P5 Essential Science Indicators, 2012, Top 20 countries in ALL FIELDS, 2001-August 31, 2011, Warner Kenneth E., 2014, TOBACCO CONTROL, V23, P231 Cahn Zachary, 2011, Journal of public health policy, V32, P16 Farsalinos Konstantinos E., 2014, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DRUG POLICY, V25, P340 Cohen Joanna E., 2010, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PREVENTIVE MEDICINE, V39, P352 Sweileh Waleed M, 2014, BMC research notes, V7, P258 Nykiforuk Candace I. J., 2010, HEALTH POLICY, V97, P1 Etter Jean-Francois, 2011, TOBACCO CONTROL, V20, P243 Pauly John, 2007, TOBACCO CONTROL, V16, P357 Farsalinos KE, 2014, Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety, V5, P67 Vansickel Andrea R., 2010, CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY BIOMARKERS & PREVENTION, V19, P1945 Zyoud Sa'ed H., 2014, HEALTH RESEARCH POLICY AND SYSTEMS, V12, Trtchounian Anna, 2010, NICOTINE & TOBACCO RESEARCH, V12, P905 Royle Pamela, 2013, Systematic reviews, V2, P74 Wallin JA, 2005, BASIC & CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY & TOXICOLOGY, V97, P261 Harrell PT, Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, Devos P., 2011, CLINICS AND RESEARCH IN HEPATOLOGY AND GASTROENTEROLOGY, V35, P336 Huggett Sarah, 2013, ATHEROSCLEROSIS, V230, P275 Kulkarni Abhaya V., 2009, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V302, P1092 Garcia-Lopez JA, 1999, EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, V15, P23 Weightman Alison L., 2011, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V342, World Health Organization, 2013, Questions and answers on electronic cigarettes or electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS), Henningfield J. E., 2010, TOBACCO CONTROL, V19, P89 Zyoud SH, 2003, Hum Exp Toxicol, Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Etter Jean-Francois, 2010, BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, V10, Hunter Paul R., 2009, LANCET, V373, P630 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338950800001 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Bibliometric analysis of regional Latin America's scientific output in Public Health through SCImago Journal & Country Rank Authors: Zacca-Gonzalez, G; Chinchilla-Rodriguez, Z; Vargas-Quesada, B; de Moya-Anegon, F Author Full Names: Zacca-Gonzalez, Grisel; Chinchilla-Rodriguez, Zaida; Vargas-Quesada, Benjamin; de Moya-Anegon, Felix Source: BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, 14 10.1186/1471-2458-14-632 JUN 21 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article KeyWords Plus: SCIENCE; COLLABORATION; EPIDEMIOLOGY; FIELDS; BRAZIL; CHINA Abstract: Background: In the greater framework of the essential functions of Public Health, our focus is on a systematic, objective, external evaluation of Latin American scientific output, to compare its publications in the area of Public Health with those of other major geographic zones. We aim to describe the regional distribution of output in Public Health, and the level of visibility and specialization, for Latin America; it can then be characterized and compared in the international context. Methods: The primary source of information was the Scopus database, using the category "Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health", in the period 1996-2011. Data were obtained through the portal of SCImago Journal and Country Rank. Using a set of qualitative (citation-based), quantitative (document recount) and collaborative (authors from more than one country) indicators, we derived complementary data. The methodology serves as an analytical tool for researchers and scientific policy-makers. Results: The contribution of Latin America to the arsenal of world science lies more or less midway on the international scale in terms of its output and visibility. Revealed as its greatest strengths are the high level of specialization in Public Health and the sustained growth of output. The main limitations identified were a relative decrease in collaboration and low visibility. Conclusions: Collaboration is a key factor behind the development of scientific activity in Latin America. Although this finding can be useful for formulating research policy in Latin American countries, it also underlines the need for further research into patterns of scientific communication in this region, to arrive at more specific recommendations. Addresses: [Zacca-Gonzalez, Grisel] Natl Med Sci Informat Ctr Infomed, Dept Teaching & Res, Havana 1400, Cuba. [Chinchilla-Rodriguez, Zaida; de Moya-Anegon, Felix] CSIC, Inst Publ Goods & Policies, Madrid 28037, Spain. [Vargas-Quesada, Benjamin] Univ Granada, Dept Informat & Commun, E-18071 Granada, Spain. [Chinchilla-Rodriguez, Zaida; Vargas-Quesada, Benjamin; de Moya-Anegon, Felix] SCImago Res Grp, Madrid, Spain. E-mail Addresses: zaida.chinchilla at csic.es Funding Acknowledgement: Unit of Information Resources for Research (URICI) Funding Text: We acknowledge support of the publication fee by the CSIC Open Access Publication Support Initiative through its Unit of Information Resources for Research (URICI). Cited Reference Count: 33 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: BIOMED CENTRAL LTD, 236 GRAYS INN RD, FLOOR 6, LONDON WC1X 8HL, ENGLAND ISSN: 1471-2458 Article Number: 632 Web of Science Categories: Public, Environmental & Occupational Health Research Areas: Public, Environmental & Occupational Health IDS Number: AL2JB Unique ID: WOS:000338950800001 Cited References: Glanzel W, 2000, SCIENTOMETRICS4th Nordic Workshop in Bibliometrics, AUG 27-28, 1999, COPENHAGEN, DENMARK, V48, P121 The Royal Society, 2011, Knowledge, Networks and Nations: Global Scientific Collaboration in the 21st Century, Leydesdorff Loet, 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS, V78, P23 Karamourzov Renat, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V91, P1 Miguel S., 2011, Revista Interamericana de Bibliotecologia, V34, Barreto Sandhi M., 2012, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, V41, P557 Organizacion Panamericana de la Salud, 2007, Capacidodes en solud publica er America Latina y el Caribe: evaluacion y fortolecimiento, Pan American Health Organization, 2009, 9th Directing Council 61st Session of the Regional Committee, 28 September-2 October, 2009, Leydesdorff Loet, 2012, PROFESIONAL DE LA INFORMACION, V21, P43 Soteriades Elpidoforos S., 2006, BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, V6, Grupo SCImago, 2007, El Profesional de la Informacion, V16, P645 UNESCO, 2010, UNESCO Science Report 2010, Sancho R, 2006, INTERCIENCIA, V31, P284 Chichen Z, 2013, BMC Med Inform Decis Mak, V13, P52 McCarthy Mark, 2007, EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH14th European Public Health Research Conference, NOV, 2006, Montreux, SWITZERLAND, V17, P2 Zhou P, 2006, RESEARCH POLICY, V35, P83 Navarro Albert, 2008, SCIENTOMETRICS, V76, P291 Chinchilla-Rodriguez Zaida, 2012, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V63, P2223 Rahman M, 2003, PUBLIC HEALTH, V117, P274 Packer A, 2007, Elsevier News, V3, P5 Arencibia-Jorge R, 2012, Revista Cubana de Salud Publica, V38, Council on Health Research for Development, 2006, Supporting Health Research System Development in Latin America. Results of Latin America Regional Think Tank, Clarke A, 2007, Eur J Public Health, V17, P44 Moya-Anegon F, 2010, Indicadores Bibliometricos de la Actividad Cientifica Espanola 2008, Falagas Matthew E., 2006, CANADIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL, V175, P1389 Moya-Anegon F, 2007, Scientometrics, V73, P53 Meneghini Rogerio, 2010, INTERCIENCIA, V35, P510 Glanzel W, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V67, P67 Organizacion Panamericana de la Salud, 2002, La Salud Publica en las Americas. Nuevos Conceptos, Analisis del Desempeno y Bases para la Accion, Chinchilla-Rodriguez Zaida, 2010, INFORMATION VISUALIZATION, V9, P277 Chinchilla-Rodriguez Z, 2007, La Investigacion Cientifica Espanola (1995-2002): una Aproximacion Metrica, Lancho-Barrantes B, 2011, J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol, V63, P481 Arencibia-Jorge Ricardo, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V83, P723 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338662600015 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Global Research on Smoking and Pregnancy-A Scientometric and Gender Analysis Authors: Mund, M; Kloft, B; Bundschuh, M; Klingelhoefer, D; Groneberg, DA; Gerber, A Author Full Names: Mund, Mathias; Kloft, Beatrix; Bundschuh, Matthias; Klingelhoefer, Doris; Groneberg, David A.; Gerber, Alexander Source: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH, 11 (6):5792-5806; 10.3390/ijerph110605792 JUN 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: bibliometry, cigarette, citation, gender studies, pregnancy, scientometry, smoking KeyWords Plus: CESSATION; JOURNALS; SCIENCE; WOMEN; GAP Abstract: The exposure to tobacco smoke during pregnancy is considered to be amongst the most harmful avoidable risk factors. In this scientometric and gender study scientific data on smoking and pregnancy was analyzed using a variety of objective scientometric methods like the number of scientific contributions, the number of citations and the modified h-index in combination with gender-specific investigations. Covering a time period from 1900 to 2012, publishing activities of 27,955 authors, institutions and countries, reception within the international scientific community and its reactions were analyzed and interpreted. Out of 10,043 publications the highest number of scientific works were published in the USA (35.5%), followed by the UK (9.9%) and Canada (5.3%). These nations also achieve the highest modified h-indices of 128, 79 and 62 and the highest citation rates of 41.4%, 8.6% and 5.3%, respectively. Out of 12,596 scientists 6,935 are female (55.1%), however they account for no more than 49.7% of publications (12,470) and 42.8% of citations (172,733). The highest percentage of female experts about smoking and pregnancy is found in Australasia (60.7%), while the lowest is found in Asia (41.9%). The findings of the study indicate an increase in gender equality as well as in quantity and quality of international scientific research about smoking and pregnancy in the future. Addresses: [Mund, Mathias; Bundschuh, Matthias; Klingelhoefer, Doris; Groneberg, David A.; Gerber, Alexander] Goethe Univ Frankfurt, Inst Occupat Med Social Med & Environm Med, D-60590 Frankfurt, Germany. [Kloft, Beatrix] Goethe Univ Frankfurt, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, D-60590 Frankfurt, Germany. E-mail Addresses: M-coder at hotmail.com; Beakloft at gmx.de; Bundschuh at med.uni-frankfurt.de; klingelhoefer at med.uni-frankfurt.de; arbsozmed at uni-frankfurt.de; gerber at med.uni-frankfurt.de Cited Reference Count: 28 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: MDPI AG, POSTFACH, CH-4005 BASEL, SWITZERLAND ISSN: 1660-4601 Web of Science Categories: Environmental Sciences Research Areas: Environmental Sciences & Ecology IDS Number: AK8FL Unique ID: WOS:000338662600015 Cited References: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Agency, Mission, Bickerstaff Margaret, 2012, AUSTRALIAN & NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNAECOLOGY, V52, P54 Gibis Bernhard, 2012, DEUTSCHES ARZTEBLATT INTERNATIONAL, V109, P327 Lowe HJ, 1996, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL INFORMATICS ASSOCIATION, V3, P1 Amering Michaela, 2011, ACADEMIC MEDICINE, V86, P946 MERTON RK, 1968, SCIENCE, V159, P56 Higgins Stephen T., 2012, PREVENTIVE MEDICINE, V55, PS33 Uibel S., 2010, Clostridium Botulinum und Seine Toxine-Szientometrische Analyse zur Relevanz als Bakterium, Therapeutikum und Biowaffe, Dettmer S., 2006, Karriereplanung fur Arztinnen, Thaele V., 2011, INTERNIST, V52, P1185 El-Mohandes Ayman A E, 2011, Maternal and child health journal, V15 Suppl 1, PS96 Central Intelligence Agency, The World Factbook: Kosovo, Gofin Yoel, 2012, ISRAEL MEDICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL, V14, P275 Jokic M., 2006, Qualitat und Quantitat Wissenschaftlicher Veroffentlichungen, Zakaib G. D., 2011, Nature, P470 Riese K., 2007, Kriterien zur Ressourcensteuerung an Hochschulen, Haustein K.-O., 2008, Tabakabhangigkeit-Gesundheitliche Schaden durch das Rauchen, Pleger N., 2011, Bakterielle Meningitis: Eine Szientometrische Analyse, Dudenhausen J. W., 2009, Rauchen in der Schwangerschaft-Haufigkeit, Folgen und Pravention, Moyer Melinda Wenner, 2012, SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, V306, P16 Metaxa Victoria, 2013, CRITICAL CARE, V17, [Anonymous], 2009, Report on the Global Tobacco Endemic, Chertok Ilana R. Azulay, 2011, MATERNAL AND CHILD HEALTH JOURNAL, V15, P249 Simmons Vani Nath, 2011, JOURNAL OF HEALTH COMMUNICATION, V16, P90 Schrager Sarina, 2011, FAMILY MEDICINE, V43, P155 Hentila M., 2006, Von Heute an fur Alle! Hundert Jahre Frauenwahlrecht, Ceci Stephen J., 2011, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V108, P3157 Hyland K, 2003, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V54, P251 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338613700009 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Detecting research fronts using different types of weighted citation networks Authors: Fujita, K; Kajikawa, Y; Mori, J; Sakata, I Author Full Names: Fujita, Katsuhide; Kajikawa, Yuya; Mori, Junichiro; Sakata, Ichiro Source: JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT, 32 129-146; SI 10.1016/j.jengtecman.2013.07.002 APR-JUN 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Research front, Citation network analysis, Bibliometrics, Decision support KeyWords Plus: SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE; SCIENCE; COCITATION; RELATEDNESS; DOCUMENTS; MAP Abstract: In this paper, we investigate the performance of different types of weighted citation networks for detecting emerging research fronts by a comparative study. Three citation patterns including direct citation, co-citation and bibliographic coupling, have been tested in three research domains including gallium nitride, complex networks, and nano-carbon. These three patterns of citation networks are constructed for each research domain, and the papers in those domains are divided into clusters to detect the research front. Additionally, we apply some measures to weighted citations like difference in publication years between citing and cited papers and similarities of keywords between them, which are expected to be able to effectively to detect emerging research fronts. To investigate the performance of different types of weighted citation networks for detecting emerging research fields, we evaluate the performance of each approach by using the following measures of extracted research fronts: visibility, speed, and topological and textual relevance. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Addresses: [Fujita, Katsuhide] Tokyo Univ Agr & Technol, Fac Engn, Koganei, Tokyo 1848588, Japan. [Kajikawa, Yuya] Tokyo Inst Technol, Grad Sch Innovat Management, Minato Ku, Tokyo 1080023, Japan. [Mori, Junichiro] Univ Tokyo, Platinum Soc, Bunkyo Ku, Tokyo 1130033, Japan. [Sakata, Ichiro] Univ Tokyo, Sch Engn, Bunkyo Ku, Tokyo 1138656, Japan. E-mail Addresses: katfuji at cc.tuat.ac.jp Cited Reference Count: 33 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, PO BOX 211, 1000 AE AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0923-4748 eISSN: 1879-1719 Web of Science Categories: Business; Engineering, Industrial; Management Research Areas: Business & Economics; Engineering IDS Number: AK7MZ Unique ID: WOS:000338613700009 Cited References: Newman MEJ, 2004, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V69, Chen CM, 1999, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V35, P401 Jaccard P., 1912, New Phytol., V11, P37 Chen C., 2003, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, V53, P678 SMALL H, 1974, SCIENCE STUDIES, V4, P17 Small H, 1999, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V50, P799 Hoperoft J., 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, V101, P5249 Kostoff RN, 1997, JOURNAL OF INFORMATION SCIENCE, V23, P301 Barabasi AL, 1999, SCIENCE, V286, P509 Small Henry, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS10th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, JUL, 2005, Stockholm, SWEDEN, V68, P595 Boyack Kevin W., 2010, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V61, P2389 Jarneving Bo, 2007, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V1, P287 IIJIMA S, 1991, NATURE, V354, P56 Leydesdorff Loet, 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P348 Chen CM, 2006, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V57, P359 SMALL H, 1973, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V24, P265 Shibata Naoki, 2008, TECHNOVATION, V28, P758 NAKAMURA S, 1994, APPLIED PHYSICS LETTERS, V64, P1687 Losiewicz P, 2000, JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS, V15, P99 Shibata Naoki, 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P571 NAKAMURA S, 1992, JAPANESE JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSICS PART 1-REGULAR PAPERS SHORT NOTES & REVIEW PAPERS, V31, P2883 NAKAMURA S, 1991, JAPANESE JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSICS PART 2-LETTERS, V30, PL1705 Kostoff RN, 2001, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V52, P1148 Shibata Naoki, 2011, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V62, P1360 Jain A, 2005, PATTERN RECOGNITION, V38, P2270 Klavans Richard, 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P455 Davidson GS, 1998, JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS, V11, P259 Klavans R, 2006, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V57, P251 KESSLER MM, 1963, AMERICAN DOCUMENTATION, V14, P10 Boyack KW, 2005, SCIENTOMETRICS, V64, P351 BRAAM RR, 1991, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V42, P233 Watts DJ, 1998, NATURE, V393, P440 Leydesdorff L, 2004, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V60, P371 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000336944000505 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: The intellectual structure analysis of improvisation studies based on a journal co-citation analysis Authors: Gao, PB; Wu, WW; Yu, B Author Full Names: Gao, Pengbin; Wu, Weiwei; Yu, Bo Edited by: Sung WP; Kao JCM; Chen R Source: FRONTIERS OF MANUFACTURING SCIENCE AND MEASURING TECHNOLOGY III, PTS 1-3, 401 2315-2318; 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.401-403.2315 2013 Book Series: Applied Mechanics and Materials Language: English Document Type: Proceedings Paper Conference Title: 3rd International Conference on Frontiers of Manufacturing Science and Measuring Technology (ICFMM 2013) Conference Date: JUL 30-31, 2013 Conference Location: LiJiang, PEOPLES R CHINA Conference Sponsors: Control Engn & Informat Sci Res Assoc, Int Frontiers Sci & Technol Res Assoc, Trans Tech Publicat, Chin Yi Univ Technol Author Keywords: improvisation, intellectual structure, journal co-citation analysis, multivariate analysis KeyWords Plus: ORGANIZATIONAL IMPROVISATION Abstract: The research of improvisation has been become an emerging management area in recent years, and the purpose of this study is to explore the intellectual structure of this research domain. A journal co-citation analysis was performed using the cited articles in the improvisation field included by Web of Knowledge database from 1997 to 2012. The journal set used was the 30 most productive journals in the field of improvisation, and multivariate statistical techniques were used to deal with the co-citation frequency matrix and correlation matrix. The results of current study show that the knowledge base of improvisation research involves multi-disciplinary with broad relations with other specialties: management, organization, marketing, innovation, information management, sociology and psychology. Addresses: [Gao, Pengbin; Wu, Weiwei; Yu, Bo] Harbin Inst Technol, Sch Management, Harbin 150001, Peoples R China. E-mail Addresses: gaopengbinhit at 163.com; wuweiwei at hit.edu.cn; yub at hit.edu.cn Cited Reference Count: 6 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: TRANS TECH PUBLICATIONS LTD, LAUBLSRUTISTR 24, CH-8717 STAFA-ZURICH, SWITZERLAND ISSN: 1660-9336 ISBN: 978-3-03785-846-2 Web of Science Categories: Engineering, Mechanical; Materials Science, Multidisciplinary; Mechanics Research Areas: Engineering; Materials Science; Mechanics IDS Number: BA5QN Unique ID: WOS:000336944000505 Cited References: Liu Z, 2005, SCIENTOMETRICS, V62, P385 Miner AS, 2001, ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCE QUARTERLY, V46, P304 Moorman C, 1998, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT REVIEW, V23, P698 Moorman C, 1998, JOURNAL OF MARKETING, V62, P1 MCCAIN KW, 1991, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V42, P290 Baker T, 2003, RESEARCH POLICYTechnology Entrepreneurship Research Policy Conference, MAY, 2000, COLLEGE PK, MARYLAND, V32, P255 =================================================================== =================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338806700001 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: The Impact of the *Impact Factor* Authors: Buriak, JM Author Full Names: Buriak, Jillian M. Source: CHEMISTRY OF MATERIALS, 26 (13):3871-3872; 10.1021/cm502204r JUL 8 2014 Language: English Document Type: Editorial Material Cited Reference Count: 4 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: AMER CHEMICAL SOC, 1155 16TH ST, NW, WASHINGTON, DC 20036 USA ISSN: 0897-4756 eISSN: 1520-5002 Web of Science Categories: Chemistry, Physical; Materials Science, Multidisciplinary Research Areas: Chemistry; Materials Science IDS Number: AL0GZ Unique ID: WOS:000338806700001 Cited References: Nie Hui, 2014, CHEMISTRY OF MATERIALS, V26, P3104 Nikoobakht B, 2003, CHEMISTRY OF MATERIALS, V15, P1957 Van Noorden R, 2013, Nature News, Wang Dashun, 2013, SCIENCE, V342, P127 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338911900012 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: A comparison of the *impact factor* and the SCImago Journal Rank *index* in respiratory system journals Authors: Garcia-Pachon, E; Arencibia-Jorge, R Author Full Names: Garcia-Pachon, Eduardo; Arencibia-Jorge, Ricardo Source: ARCHIVOS DE BRONCONEUMOLOGIA, 50 (7):308-309; 10.1016/j.arbres.2013.10.006 JUL 2014 Language: Spanish Document Type: Letter Addresses: [Garcia-Pachon, Eduardo] Hosp Gen Univ, Secc Neumol, Alicante, Spain. [Arencibia-Jorge, Ricardo] Ctr Nacl Invest Cient, Havana, Cuba. E-mail Addresses: egpachon at gmail.com Cited Reference Count: 4 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: EDICIONES DOYMA S A, TRAV DE GRACIA 17-21, 08021 BARCELONA, SPAIN ISSN: 0300-2896 eISSN: 1579-2129 Web of Science Categories: Respiratory System Research Areas: Respiratory System IDS Number: AL1UN Unique ID: WOS:000338911900012 Cited References: Garfield E, 2006, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V295, P90 Garcia-Pachon Eduardo, 2014, MEDICINA CLINICA, V142, P226 Falagas Matthew E., 2008, FASEB JOURNAL, V22, P2623 Bornmann Lutz, 2012, RHEUMATOLOGY INTERNATIONAL, V32, P1861 =================================================================== -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Thu Aug 7 13:53:35 2014 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2014 17:53:35 +0000 Subject: FW: Web of Science Alert - Bensman, SJ Message-ID: Cited Article: Bensman, SJ. Mean Citation Rate per Article in Mathematics Journals: Differences From the Scientific Model Alert Expires: 20 SEP 2014 Number of Citing Articles: 1 new records this week (1 in this e-mail) Organization ID: 11ff9f68afb6b8b5b8eda218d7c83a65 ======================================================================= . ======================================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338756400007 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Defining and Measuring Research Impact in the Humanities, Social Sciences and Creative Arts in the Digital Age Authors: Kenyon, T Author Full Names: Kenyon, Tina Source: KNOWLEDGE ORGANIZATION, 41 (3):249-257; 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: research, impact, measures, citation, disciplines, researchers Abstract: There are powerful reasons for and against researchers taking the lead in formulating research impact measures for disciplines in the humanities, social sciences and creative arts (HSSCA). On balance, the reasons in favour are stronger, not least because such measures are otherwise apt to be formulated badly by those with little expertise. This invites us to inquire about the sorts of measures would best apply to HSSCA disciplines (among others), and whether some of the more popular impact measures, such as citation indices, really are reasonable indicators of impact or quality in these domains. It also raises questions about how burgeoning modes of research, knowledge mobilization, and impact tracking in the digital domain play into HSSCA research measures. On reflection, empirically adequate and arithmetically meaningful HSSCA impact measures will be pluralistic, non-reductive, and highly context-dependent; they are unlikely to lend themselves to the current pseudoscience of single-dimensional ordinal rankings between research institutions. Nevertheless they may support comparisons of interesting sorts, and enable assessments for accountability and planning purposes. Addresses: Univ Waterloo, Dept Philosophy, Waterloo, ON N2L 3G1, Canada. E-mail Addresses: tkenyon at uwaterloo.ca Cited Reference Count: 16 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: ERGON-VERLAG, GROMBUHLSTR 7, 97080 WURZBURG, GERMANY ISSN: 0943-7444 Web of Science Categories: Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: AK9OM Unique ID: WOS:000338756400007 Cited References: Greenwald Anthony G., 2006, CALIFORNIA LAW REVIEW, V94, P945 Simkin M. V., 2003, Complex systems, V14, P269 Layard R., 2012, The guardian, Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, 2011, Quality indicators for research in the humanities, Collini Stefan, 2012, What are universities for?, Expert Group on Assessment of University-Based Research, 2010, Assessing Europe's university-based research, Bornmann Lutz, 2014, SCIENTOMETRICS, V98, P211 van Vught Frans, 2011, Design and testing the feasibility of a multidimensional global university ranking: final report, Bensman Stephen J., 2010, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V61, P1440 Uhlmann EL, 2005, PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, V16, P474 Todd Peter A., 2008, Ethics in science and environmental politics, V8, P13 Van Leeuwen Thed N., 2007, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V16, P93 Mryglod O., 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V97, P767 Holbrook J. Britt, 2013, NATURE, V497, P439 [Anonymous], 2011, Maximizing the impacts of your research: a handbook for social scientists: consultation draft 3, American Society for Cell Biology, 2013, San Francisco declaration on research assessment, ======================================================================= *Order Full Text* All Customers -------------- Please contact your library administrator, or person(s) responsible for document delivery, to find out more about your organization.s policy for obtaining the full text of the above articles. If your organization does not have a current document delivery provider, you can order the document from our document delivery service TS Doc. To order a copy of the article(s) you wish to receive, please go to www.contentscm.com and enter the citation information for each document. A price quote for each item will be given and you will need a credit card to complete your order request. TS Doc Customers -------------- TS Doc customers can purchase the full text of an article using their TS Doc account. Go to www.contentscm.com and login using your TS Doc logon ID and password. Copy & paste the citation into the parser (Order by Citation) or enter the citation information above on the web order form (Order by Form.) A quote will be given for each item and your company will be invoiced as specified in your TS Doc agreement. If you would like to supply contact information for TS Doc, here is the updated info: Product name: TS Doc Customer Service: customerservice at infotrieve.com or (800) 603-4367 ======================================================================= *Support Contact Information* If you have any questions, please open a support ticket at http://ip-science.thomsonreuters.com/techsupport/. Telephone numbers for your local support team are also available here. ======================================================================= From G.Halevi at ELSEVIER.COM Thu Aug 7 14:02:23 2014 From: G.Halevi at ELSEVIER.COM (Halevi, Gali (ELS-NYC)) Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2014 18:02:23 +0000 Subject: Elsevier is opening the Metrics Development Program Message-ID: Dear all With the proliferation and increasing availability of primary data, research can be evaluated to a depth and extent previously unknown. This expanding horizon, though exciting, can be challenging to those involved in the process, including evaluators, administrators, researchers and others. To advance research in this area, Elsevier has launched the Metrics Development Program. This program provides collaborative infrastructure and funding for the development of innovative approaches to scientific metrics and indicators. Individuals or research groups conducting primary research or developing software tools and algorithms aimed at capturing different levels of scientific evaluation metrics are welcome to submit a proposal. Disciplinary, program, institution or individual level indicators could include: Bibliometric indicators of research impact * Altmetrics * Emerging research topics indicators * Indicators of regional or disciplinary scientific strengths * Patents or technological indicators * Multidimensional evaluative indicators combining different data types Terms of data sets and funding availability will be determined on an individual basis per accepted proposal. For more information about submissions and proposals, visit the program website. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. Regards, Gali Gali Halevi MLS, PhD Senior Research Analyst & Program Director Elsevier, Inc. 360 Park Avenue South, 8th Floor New York, NY 10010 USA Tel/FAX: +1 (631) 470 9519 Cell: +1 (646) 248 9464 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Peter.Mutschke at GESIS.ORG Tue Aug 12 10:33:46 2014 From: Peter.Mutschke at GESIS.ORG (Mutschke, Peter) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 14:33:46 +0000 Subject: Second Call for Participation: Workshop on Knowledge Maps and Information Retrieval (KMIR) at DL 2014 Message-ID: CALL FOR PARTICIPATION Knowledge Maps and Information Retrieval (KMIR) Workshop at Digital Libraries 2014 11th September 2014, London, UK Workshop page: http://www.gesis.org/en/events/conferences/kmir2014/ Conference page: http://www.dl2014.org We are pleased to announce the upcoming halfday workshop on Knowledge Maps and Information Retrieval (KMIR), to be held as part of the International Conference on Digital Libraries 2014 - ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL 2014) and International Conference on Theory and Practice of Digital Libraries (TPDL 2014), London, 8th-12th September 2014 (http://www.dl2014.org/). Abstract: Knowledge maps are promising tools for visualizing the structure of large-scale information spaces, but still far away from being applicable for searching. The workshop aims at bringing together experts in IR and knowledge mapping in order to discuss the potential of interactive knowledge maps for information seeking purposes. We now have a very good program together for the KMIR workshop. Consult the workshop page (see above) for the preliminary program. If you will attend the workshop, don't forget to register for workshops at die DL2014 registration page. In addition, please notify me (CC to my secretary julia.achenbach at gesi.org) about your attendance. Kind regards, Peter Mutschke -- Acting Head of Department Dep. Knowledge Technologies for the Social Sciences GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences Unter Sachsenhausen 6-8 D-50667 K?ln Tel.: +49(0)221 / 47694 -500 Mail: peter.mutschke at gesis.org www.gesis.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From krpowel at EMORY.EDU Tue Aug 12 12:28:29 2014 From: krpowel at EMORY.EDU (Powell, Kimberly Robin) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 16:28:29 +0000 Subject: Sig/Met Student Paper Contest Deadline Extension! Message-ID: Please Note Deadline Extension! Student Papers must now be received by Monday, September 1, 2014. Please feel free to re-distribute. 2014 ASIS&T SIG/MET Student Paper Contest Are you tired of preparing papers which immediately migrate into your professors' files and have not been seen ever since? Recover your papers and give them a life and a great opportunity for yourself. Send your most promising papers to the 2014 ASIST SIG/MET Student paper contest where you have the chance to present your work in front of an interested audience, discuss it with established researchers, and win the ASIS&T SIG/MET Best Student Paper Award. This is the fourth annual student paper contest for SIG/MET, the Special Interest Group for the measurement of information production and use (http://www.asis.org/SIG/met.html)of the Association for Information Science & Technology (ASIS&T). The contest is designed to recognize promising student research relating to the measurement of information, publication, and research and gives students a forum to meet the leaders of the field. Purpose SIG/MET seeks to encourage the development and networking opportunities of all those interested in the measurement of information. It is holding this contest to foster student growth and promote the generation of new ideas and research in metric-related topics, including bibliometrics, scientometrics, informetrics, altmetrics and other related domains. Eligibility The first author of the paper entered into this contest must be a full-time student at the time of submission, irrespective of ASIS&T or SIG/MET membership. Only solo or first authored student manuscripts will be accepted, in order to ensure that the student made significant contributions to the work. SIG/MET reserves the right to request proof of enrollment as part of the submission and evaluation process. Submissions should not have been published work, although they may be submitted to a journal at the time of submission to the contest. Theme Papers should discuss theories, methods, policies, case studies, etc. on aspects of the measurement of information production and use. Topics could include, but are not limited to, the following core areas: * Metric-Related Theory * Methods and new techniques * Citation and co-citation analysis * Indicators * Webometrics * Information visualization * Research policy * Productivity * Journals, databases and electronic publications * Collaboration/Co-authorship * Patent analysis * Knowledge and topic diffusion * Altmetrics Selection Papers will be reviewed by SIG/MET officers and advisors to the SIG/MET workshop. At least one winner will be chosen. In the past, we have also given commendation to other particularly outstanding papers. Selection criteria include those that would be considered in traditional peer review: that is, the quality of the research, the presentation of the results, and the originality of the research question. Prizes The winner will be awarded a one-year individual membership to ASIS&T and a cash prize, sponsored by Elsevier. If of sufficient merit and pending available funds, two winners may be announced: one for the best first-authored paper and one for the best sole-authored paper. Authors of highly rated papers will be invited to submit a short biographical piece to be featured on the SIG/MET website. In addition, these authors may be invited to present their research under their own expense at the SIG/MET pre-conference workshop at the 2014 Annual ASIS&T Meeting. Format Submissions can be of any length and format, but should ideally reflect typical standards of a journal article (i.e., approximately 6,000 words and in an appropriate citation style for the social sciences). Submission & Deadline Authors are invited to submit manuscripts by midnight EST on Monday September 1, 2014, to the following website: https://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=sigmetspc2014 The students will be notified about the results by September 1, 2014. For inquiries and further information please contact Kim Powell (krpowel at emory.edu). SIGMET, a Special Interest Group for the measurement of information production and use of the Association for Information Science & Technology. It is designed to foster student research in metric-related topics: bibliometrics, scientometrics, atlmetrics, etc. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SIGMET_StudentContest2014.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 187672 bytes Desc: SIGMET_StudentContest2014.pdf URL: From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Fri Aug 15 14:19:52 2014 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2014 18:19:52 +0000 Subject: Papers of possible 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:000339066500002 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Citation-Based Plagiarism Detection: Practicability on a Large-Scale *Scientific* Corpus Authors: Gipp, B; Meuschke, N; Breitinger, C Author Full Names: Gipp, Bela; Meuschke, Norman; Breitinger, Corinna Source: JOURNAL OF THE ASSOCIATION FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 65 (8):1527-1540; 10.1002/asi.23228 AUG 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Abstract: The automated detection of plagiarism is an information retrieval task of increasing importance as the volume of readily accessible information on the web expands. A major shortcoming of current automated plagiarism detection approaches is their dependence on high character-based similarity. As a result, heavily disguised plagiarism forms, such as paraphrases, translated plagiarism, or structural and idea plagiarism, remain undetected. A recently proposed language-independent approach to plagiarism detection, Citation-based Plagiarism Detection (CbPD), allows the detection of semantic similarity even in the absence of text overlap by analyzing the citation placement in a document's full text to determine similarity. This article evaluates the performance of CbPD in detecting plagiarism with various degrees of disguise in a collection of 185,000 biomedical articles. We benchmark CbPD against two character-based detection approaches using a ground truth approximated in a user study. Our evaluation shows that the citation-based approach achieves superior ranking performance for heavily disguised plagiarism forms. Additionally, we demonstrate CbPD to be computationally more efficient than character-based approaches. Finally, upon combining the citation-based with the traditional character-based document similarity visualization methods in a hybrid detection prototype, we observe a reduction in the required user effort for document verification. Addresses: [Gipp, Bela; Meuschke, Norman] Univ Calif Berkeley, Dept Stat, Berkeley, CA 94720 USA. [Breitinger, Corinna] Univ Calif Berkeley, SciPlore Res Grp, Berkeley, CA 94720 USA. E-mail Addresses: gipp at berkeley.edu; meuschke at berkeley.edu; breitinger at berkeley.edu Cited Reference Count: 26 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: WILEY-BLACKWELL, 111 RIVER ST, HOBOKEN 07030-5774, NJ USA ISSN: 2330-1635 eISSN: 2330-1643 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Information Systems; Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Computer Science; Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: AL3XY Unique ID: WOS:000339066500002 Cited References: Zhan S., 2008, Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Innovative Computing Information and Control, New York, U. S. A., Kakkonen Tuomo, 2010, JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL COMPUTING RESEARCH, V42, P135 Gipp B., 2011, Proceedings of the 11th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL'11), Potthast M., 2012, CLEF (Online Working Notes/Labs/Workshop), Rome, Grman J., 2011, Proceedings of the Note-book Papers of CLEF 2011 LABs and Workshops, Amsterdam, Bao J., 2007, Technical Report 461, Stein B., 2007, Proceedings of the the 30th Annual Conference of the German Classification Society (GfKl), Buckley Chris, 2007, INFORMATION RETRIEVAL, V10, P491 Weber-Wulff D., 2010, Portal Plagiat-Softwaretest 2010, Gipp B., 2013, Citation-based Plagiarism Detection: Applying Citation Pattern Analysis to Identify Currently Non-Machine-Detectable Disguised Plagiarism in Scientific Publications, Stein Benno, 2011, LANGUAGE RESOURCES AND EVALUATION, V45, P63 Grozea C., 2009, Uncovering Plagiarism, Authorship and Social Software MisuseProceedings of the the 3rd PAN Workshop, Weber-Wulff D., 2010, Proceedings of the 4th International Plagiarism Conference, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK, Potthast M., 2011, CLEF (Notebook Papers/Labs/Workshop), Amsterdam, GuttenPlag Wiki, 2011, Konstitutionelle Entwicklungsstufen in den USA und der EU, Weber-Wulff D., 2013, Test of plagiarism software, zu Guttenberg K.-T, 2009, Verfassung und Verfassungsvertrag: Konstitutionelle Entwicklungsstufen in den USA und der EU, Goan Terrance, 2006, INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY INFORMATICS, PROCEEDINGSIEEE InternationalConference on Intelligence and Security Informatics (ISI 2006), MAY 23-24, 2006, San Diego, CA, V3975, P692 Sun Z., 2010, PLoS ONE, V5, Gipp B., 2013, Proceedings of the 36th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research & Development on Information Retrieval, Gipp B., 2011, Proceedings of the 11th ACM Symposium on Document Engineering (DocEng'11), Chen Yalin, 2012, NEUROSCIENCE LETTERS, V510, P62 GARFIELD E, 1955, SCIENCE, V122, P108 Potthast M., 2013, CLEF 2013 Evaluation Labs and Workshop, Valencia, Spain, Lachlan P., 2012, The Sherlock plagiarism detector, Potthast Martin, 2011, LANGUAGE RESOURCES AND EVALUATION, V45, P45 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339067500007 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Anatomy of Scholarly Collaboration in Engineering Education: A Big-Data Bibliometric Analysis Authors: Xian, HJ; Madhavan, K Author Full Names: Xian, Hanjun; Madhavan, Krishna Source: JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, 103 (3):486-514; 10.1002/jee.20052 JUL 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: bibliometrics, scholarly collaboration, small-world network KeyWords Plus: AUTHOR COCITATION ANALYSIS; CITATION ANALYSIS; NETWORKS; SCIENCE; IMPACT; FIELD; INSTITUTE; DYNAMICS; JOURNALS; BEHAVIOR Abstract: Background Engineering education has become a large community with an increasing number of scholars and publications. As the number of publications has grown, it has become increasingly difficult to understand the epistemic nature and diffusion characteristics of knowledge generated by this community. Techniques to study community topology require nontrivial computational workflows. Purpose/Hypothesis The present study characterizes the topology of scholarly collaboration and important factors affecting this topology in engineering education research. Design/Methods A bibliometric analysis was conducted of 24,172 papers in engineering education research journals and conference proceedings for the years 2000-2011. A total of 29,116 unique authors are present. Social network analyses were used to characterize the network topology of overall scientific collaboration. Analyses based on grouping scholars by disciplinary backgrounds, research areas, and geographical locations were performed. Results The results show that the engineering education research community is in its early stage of forming a small-world network that relies primarily on 5% of scholars to build capacity. Typical small-world networks provide some very clear characterizations about the state, stability, and growth of the community. Deviations from this ideal model suggest the need for rethinking collaboration in engineering education. Scholars with interdisciplinary backgrounds play a critical role in bridging isolated research teams. Conclusions Compared with other disciplines and the ideal small-world network model, the topology of collaboration in engineering education shows significant barriers to the fast diffusion of innovations. This study demonstrates the value of big-data bibliometrics in understanding scholarly collaboration within a research community. Addresses: [Xian, Hanjun] Microsoft, Bellevue, WA 98004 USA. [Madhavan, Krishna] Purdue Univ, Sch Engn Educ, W Lafayette, IN 47907 USA. E-mail Addresses: hxian at microsoft.com; cm at purdue.edu Funding Acknowledgement: National Science Foundation [NSF TUES-1123108] Funding Text: This work was supported partially through National Science Foundation grant NSF TUES-1123108. Cited Reference Count: 76 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: AMER SOC ENGINEERING EDUCATION, 1818 N ST, N W, STE 600, WASHINGTON, DC 20036 USA ISSN: 1069-4730 eISSN: 2168-9830 Web of Science Categories: Education & Educational Research; Education, Scientific Disciplines; Engineering, Multidisciplinary Research Areas: Education & Educational Research; Engineering IDS Number: AL3YG Unique ID: WOS:000339067500007 Cited References: Peters I., 2009, Folksonomies: Indexing and retrieval in the Web 2.0 Studies in information science., GARFIELD E, 1972, SCIENCE, V178, P471 Polanyi M, 2000, MINERVA, V38, P1 Fronczak A, 2004, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V70, Small H, 1999, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V50, P799 Wankat PC, 2004, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V93, P13 Bozeman B, 2004, RESEARCH POLICY, V33, P599 Sims JL, 2003, CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL OPHTHALMOLOGY, V31, P14 Wasserman S., 1994, Advances in social network analysis: Research in the social and behavioral sciences, Adams Robin S., 2008, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V97, P239 Newman MEJ, 1999, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V60, P7332 SMITH LC, 1981, LIBRARY TRENDS, V30, P83 Albert R, 1999, NATURE, V401, P130 Tuire P., 2001, Higher Education, V42, P493 Levenshtein V. I., 1966, Soviet Physics Doklady, V10, P707 Barabasi A.-L., 2005, P69 Jesiek B. K., 2008, Proceedings of the 2008 SEFI Annual Conferences, Aalborg, Denmark, Barrat A, 2004, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V101, P3747 Powell WW, 2005, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY, V110, P1132 Felder Richard M., 2010, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V99, P121 Wankat Phillip C., 2011, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION, V54, P521 CRONIN B, 1994, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V50, P165 Streveler Ruth A., 2006, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V95, P103 COHEN PR, 1987, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V23, P255 Rogers E., 2003, Diffusion of innovations, Turney P.D., 2000, Information Retrieval, V2, SMITH M, 1958, AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGIST, V13, P596 Newman MEJ, 2001, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V98, P404 Felder RM, 2005, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V94, P7 CIP, 2000, Classification of Instructional Programs: 2000 Edition, Borgman CL, 2002, ANNUAL REVIEW OF INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V36, P3 Lohmann JR, 2005, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V94, P1 Salton G., 1983, Introduction to Modern Information Retrieval, Madhavan K., 2010, The FIE story-1991 to 2009, Beddoes K., 2009, Proceedings of the 39th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, San Antonio, TX, Roth Camille, 2010, SOCIAL NETWORKS, V32, P16 Mei Q., 2007, SIGKDD 2007, San Jose, CA., Booth W., 2008, The craft of research, Fincher Sally A., 2009, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V98, P109 He YL, 2002, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V38, P491 Jamieson L., 2009, Proceedings of 2009 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Austin, TX, Jesiek B. K., 2009, Proceedings of the 2009 SEFI Annual Conferences, Rotterdam, the Netherlands, Simpson T. W., 2010, ASME 2010 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Montreal, Canada, Kuhn T. S., 1962, The structure of scientific revolutions, Birnholtz Jeremy P., 2007, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V58, P2226 Roth C., 2007, UK Social Network Conference, London, Ramage D., 2009, Proceedings of the 2009 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Singapore, Campbell David, 2010, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EVALUATION, V31, P66 Borrego Maura, 2007, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V96, P5 Watts DJ, 1998, NATURE, V393, P440 ELMACIOGLU E, 2005, ACM SIGMOD RECORD, V34, P33 Streveler R. A., 2005, Proceedings of 2005 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Portland, OR, Wankat P. C., 1999, Journal of Engineering Education, V88, P37 Bornmann L., 2008, Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, V8, P93 Gmur M, 2003, SCIENTOMETRICS, V57, P27 Lafferty J., 2006, Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Machine Learning, Pittsburgh, PA, Laudel G, 2002, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V11, P3 HACOHENKERNER Y, 2005, COMPUTATIONAL LINGUI, V3406, P657 White D.R., 2004, Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory, V10, Madhavan K., 2012, Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, San Antonio, TX, March J. G., 2004, Management and Organization Review, V1, P5 Campbell D. T., 1969, Interdisciplinary relationships in the social sciences, P328 Steering Committee of the National Engineering Education Research Colloquies, 2006, Journal of Engineering Education, V95, P259 Acedo FJ, 2005, INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS REVIEW, V14, P619 Borrego Maura, 2010, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V99, P185 Madhavan K., 2010, Proceedings of 2010 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Louisville, KY, Medelyan O., 2009, Proceedings of the 2009 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Singapore, Johri A., 2011, Proceedings of the 41st ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Rapid City, SD, 2011, SOCIAL NETWORK DATA ANALYTICS, P1 Wei X., 2006, Proceedings of the 29th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information, Seattle, WA, Tsui Anne S., 2007, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, V33, P426 Rahm E, 2005, SIGMOD RECORD, V34, P48 Blei DM, 2003, JOURNAL OF MACHINE LEARNING RESEARCH18th International Conference on Machine Learning, JUN 28-JUL 01, 2001, WILLIAMSTOWN, MASSACHUSETTS, V3, P993 Harary F., 1994, Graph theory, Schubert A., 2005, P257 Osorio N. L., 2005, Proceedings of 2005 ASEE IL/IN Sectional Conference, DeKalb, IL, ======================================================================== * *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338985100007 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Assessing the Quality of Database Search Strategies Utilized by Meta-analyses That Evaluate Infectious Disease Drug Therapy Authors: Marler, JL; Curry, KY; Suda, KJ Author Full Names: Marler, Jacob L.; Curry, Kiana Y.; Suda, Katie J. Source: THERAPEUTIC INNOVATION & REGULATORY SCIENCE, 48 (3):336-340; 10.1177/2168479013516774 MAY 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: meta-analysis, anti-infective, study design, literature search, literature evaluation KeyWords Plus: RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED-TRIALS; ANTIMICROBIAL STEWARDSHIP; CLINICAL-TRIALS; GUIDELINES; APPRAISAL; SOCIETY; GROWTH Abstract: Meta-analyses are increasingly influencing clinical practice, but significant methodological flaws have been reported. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the quality of search strategies utilized by anti-infective meta-analyses. The Embase database was searched for meta-analyses evaluating anti-infective drug therapy; 103 of 268 identified citations met inclusion criteria and were evaluated. A total of 80.6% of meta-analyses used search terms, and an average of 4.3 databases (Medline, 98.1%; Cochrane, 93.2%; Embase, 76.7%) were searched to identify relevant articles for inclusion. The majority of meta-analyses used a quality assessment tool (84.5%) and reported positive results (59.2%). The average *impact factor* of journals publishing meta-analyses was 5.7 +/- 3.4. The number of resources searched was associated with the *impact factor* (P = .0013). The majority of anti-infective meta-analyses used rigorous search strategies to identify all relevant studies for evaluation. This finding is inconsistent with reports in other therapeutic areas that have questioned the quality of meta-analyses, and it may increase confidence in anti-infective meta-analyses. Addresses: [Marler, Jacob L.; Suda, Katie J.] Univ Tennessee, Ctr Hlth Sci, Dept Clin Pharm, Memphis, TN 38163 USA. [Curry, Kiana Y.] Med Commun Inc, Memphis, TN USA. E-mail Addresses: katiesuda at gmail.com Funding Acknowledgement: Intel Corp Funding Text: The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: K.J.S. has received funding from Intel Corp; K.Y.C. is an employee of Med Communications Inc. Cited Reference Count: 22 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC, 2455 TELLER RD, THOUSAND OAKS, CA 91320 USA ISSN: 2168-4790 eISSN: 2168-4804 Web of Science Categories: Medical Informatics; Pharmacology & Pharmacy Research Areas: Medical Informatics; Pharmacology & Pharmacy IDS Number: AL2WA Unique ID: WOS:000338985100007 Cited References: American Thoracic Society Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2005, Am J Respir Crit Care Med, V171, P388 Lee WL, 2001, EVALUATION & THE HEALTH PROFESSIONS, V24, P327 Jadad AR, 1996, CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS, V17, P1 [Anonymous], 2012, Bereza Basil G., 2008, ANNALS OF PHARMACOTHERAPY, V42, P1402 Egger M, 1997, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V315, P1533 Balk EM, 2002, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V287, P2973 Jadad AR, 1996, JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, V49, P235 Moher D, 1999, LANCET, V354, P1896 World Health Organization, The top 10 causes of death, Mandell Lionel A., 2007, CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES, V44, PS27 Dellit Timothy H., 2007, CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES, V44, P159 Armstrong DL, Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science, Dixon E, 2005, ANNALS OF SURGERY, V241, P450 Juni P, 1999, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V282, P1054 Higgins J., 2011, Delaney Anthony, 2007, CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, V35, P589 Flather MD, 1997, CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS8th International Symposium on Long-Term Clinical Trials, SEP 28-29, 1995, TORONTO, CANADA, V18, P568 BAUSELL RB, 1995, EVALUATION & THE HEALTH PROFESSIONS, V18, P238 Suda Katie J., 2013, JOURNAL OF ANTIMICROBIAL CHEMOTHERAPY, V68, P715 Pile James C., 2011, JOURNAL OF HOSPITAL MEDICINE, V6, PS1 Embase, Biomedical answers, ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338875900011 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Causes for the Persistence of *Impact Factor* Mania (vol 5, e00064, 2014) Authors: Casadevall, A; Fang, FC Author Full Names: Casadevall, Arturo; Fang, Ferric C. Source: MBIO, 5 (3):10.1128/mBio.01342-14 MAY-JUN 2014 Language: English Document Type: Correction ABSTRACT: Numerous essays have addressed the misuse of the journal impact factor for judging the value of science, but the practice continues, primarily as a result of the actions of scientists themselves. This seemingly irrational behavior is referred to as "impact factor mania." Although the literature on the impact factor is extensive, little has been written on the underlying causes of impact factor mania. In this perspective, we consider the reasons for the persistence of impact factor mania and its pernicious effects on science. We conclude that impact factor mania persists because it confers significant benefits to individual scientists and journals. Impact factor mania is a variation of the economic theory known as the "tragedy of the commons," in which scientists act rationally in their own self-interests despite the detrimental consequences of their actions on the overall scientific enterprise. Various measures to reduce the influence of the impact factor are considered. IMPORTANCE Science and scientists are currently afflicted by an epidemic of mania manifested by associating the value of research with the journal where the work is published rather than the content of the work itself. The mania is causing profound distortions in the way science is done that are deleterious to the overall scientific enterprise. In this essay, we consider the forces responsible for the persistence of the mania and conclude that it is maintained because it disproportionately benefits elements of the scientific enterprise, including certain well-established scientists, journals, and administrative interests. Our essay suggests steps that can be taken to deal with this debilitating and destructive epidemic. Addresses: [Casadevall, Arturo] Albert Einstein Coll Med, Dept Microbiol & Immunol, Bronx, NY 10467 USA. [Casadevall, Arturo] Albert Einstein Coll Med, Dept Med, Bronx, NY 10467 USA. [Fang, Ferric C.] Univ Washington, Sch Med, Dept Lab Med, Seattle, WA 98195 USA. [Fang, Ferric C.] Univ Washington, Sch Med, Dept Microbiol, Seattle, WA 98195 USA. E-mail Addresses: arturo.casadevall at einstein.yu.edu Cited Reference Count: 1 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY, 1752 N ST NW, WASHINGTON, DC 20036-2904 USA ISSN: 2150-7511 Article Number: e01342-14 Web of Science Categories: Microbiology Research Areas: Microbiology IDS Number: AL1HH Unique ID: WOS:000338875900011 Cited References: Casadevall Arturo, 2014, MBIO, V5, ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339033000018 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: RAM the PI-BETA, C3PO-what the H-STAR happened *to* my promotion application? Or: The pros and cons of bibliometric evaluations of researchers Authors: Calver, MC Author Full Names: Calver, Michael C. Edited by: Lunney D; Hutchings P; Recher HF Source: GRUMPY SCIENTISTS: THE ECOLOGICAL CONSCIENCE OF A NATION, 106-121; 10.7882/FS.2013.019 2013 Language: English Document Type: Proceedings Paper Conference Title: Annual Forum on Grumpy Scientists: the Ecological Conscience of a Nation Conference Date: NOV 03, 2012 Conference Location: Sydney, AUSTRALIA Conference Sponsors: Royal Zoolog Soc New S Wales Conference Host: Council Royal Zoolog Soc Author Keywords: Journal Impact Factor, Hirsch index, citation, bibliometrics KeyWords Plus: RESEARCH ASSESSMENT EXERCISES; WEB-OF-SCIENCE; IMPACT-FACTOR; GOOGLE-SCHOLAR; CONSERVATION-BIOLOGY; CITATION ANALYSIS; JOURNAL RANKINGS; INDEX; PUBLICATION; SCIENTISTS Abstract: Bibliometrics - methods to quantitatively analyse the quality and impact of scientific or technical literature are now a central part of the management of modern science. Through them, research managers seek to encourage quality and productivity and use scarce research funds effectively. Researchers are ranked on a range of quantitative assessments to measure the quality of their work, and the results influence employment prospects, grants, tenure and promotions. Unfortunately, researchers anxious to maximise their prospects may concentrate on good scores, not good science. This could change what they research, what they publish and where they publish. Natural history, baseline research and research of regional (but not international) significance could be marginalised despite the clear benefits of such research for monitoring, hypothesis generation and local management.These difficulties are compounded by inappropriate applications of common bibliometric statistics, such as the persistence of the discredited views that the quality of a paper may be judged by the journal in which it appears or that a simple citation count alone indicates the merit of a paper or a researcher.This paper takes a role-playing approach, centred on a fictitious interview as part of a promotion application, to explore some of the uses and misuses of bibliometrics and how researchers can present their case honestly, while defending against abuses and championing unfashionable but valuable areas of research. Addresses: Murdoch Univ, Sch Vet & Life Sci, Murdoch, WA 6150, Australia. E-mail Addresses: m.calver at murdoch.edu.au Cited Reference Count: 95 Times Cited: 3 Publisher: ROYAL ZOOLOGICAL SOC NEW SOUTH WALES, TARONGA ZOO MOS, MOSMAN NSW, 2088, AUSTRALIA ISBN: 978-0-9874309-0-8 Web of Science Categories: Ecology; Zoology Research Areas: Environmental Sciences & Ecology; Zoology IDS Number: BA8YU Unique ID: WOS:000339033000018 Cited References: Sampson Kaylene A., 2010, HIGHER EDUCATION RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT, V29, P275 Reuters Thomson, 2011, Completing the research picture, Oswald Andrew J., 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V84, P99 Calver Michael C., 2010, CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, V24, P872 Lawrence P. A, 2009, PLoS Biology, V7, Walters W. H., 2011, Portal, V11, P972 Jacso P, 2005, CURRENT SCIENCE, V89, P1537 Garfield E., 2005, International Congress on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication Chicago, September 16, 2005, Butler L, 2007, Science and Public Policy, V34, P565 Underwood AJ, 1997, Experiments in ecology: their logical design and interpretation using analysis of variance, Ford Hugh A., 2011, Pacific Conservation Biology, V17, P303 MacRoberts MH, 1996, SCIENTOMETRICS, V36, P435 Harzing A. W. K., 2008, Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, V8, P61 OECD, 2010, Performance-based Funding for Public Research in Tertiary Education Institutions: Workshop Proceedings, Bensman Stephen J., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P263 Brown Hannah, 2007, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V334, P561 Calver M. C., 2013, Pacific Conservation Biology, V19, Short Jeff, 2004, Australian Zoologist, V32, P605 Chang C. L., 2012, V1, P2 Calver Michael C., 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V95, P243 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Aksnes Dag W., 2009, RESEARCH POLICY, V38, P895 Corsi Marcella, 2010, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND SOCIOLOGY, V69, P1495 Shearer B. L., 1981, Australasian Plant Pathology, V10, P2 Krell F. T., 2012, European Science Editing, V38, P3 Jacso P., 2008, Library Journal, V134, P26 ZAHAVI A, 1975, JOURNAL OF THEORETICAL BIOLOGY, V53, P205 Amancio D. R., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V91, P827 Padial Andre Andrian, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V85, P1 Jacso Peter, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P325 Jacso Peter, 2008, LIBRARY TRENDS, V56, P784 Bollen Johan, 2009, PLOS ONE, V4, Adler Nancy J., 2009, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT LEARNING & EDUCATION, V8, P72 Garcia-Perez Miguel A., 2010, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V61, P2070 Watson Roger, 2007, JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING, V16, P1 Lawrence PA, 2002, NATURE, V415, P835 MacRoberts M. H., 2010, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V61, P1 Abbott I, 1998, FOREST ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT, V109, P175 Ouimet Mathieu, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V88, P91 Vanclay Jerome K., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P211 Kennedy D, 2003, SCIENCE, V301, P733 Box S., 2010, OECD Performance-based Funding for Public Research in Tertiary Education Institutions: Workshop Proceedings, Lane Julia, 2010, NATURE, V464, P488 Meffe Gary K., 2006, CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, V20, P931 Jain P., 2011, Library Review, V60, Bryant K, 2012, Science under siege, P140 Bloch S, 2001, AUSTRALIAN AND NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY, V35, P563 Harrison AL, 2006, CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, V20, P652 Colledge L, 2010, Serials, V23, P215 Parker John N., 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V94, P469 Li Jiang, 2010, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V4, P554 Buela-Casal Gualberto, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P281 Calver Michael C., 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS, V81, P611 Shewan LG, 2006, MEDICAL JOURNAL OF AUSTRALIA, V184, P463 Witten K., 2010, Kotuitui, V5, P3 Sangwal Keshra, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P643 Butler Linda, 2011, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V5, P693 Adler R., 2008, Citation statistics: A report from the International Mathematical Union (IMU) in cooperation with the International Council of Industrial and Applied Mathematics (ICIAM) and the Institute of Mathematical Statistics (IMS), Gagolewski Marek, 2011, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V5, P678 Steele Colin, 2006, LEARNED PUBLISHING, V19, P277 Schiemenz H, 1969, Faunistische Abhandlungen Staatliches Museum fur Tierkunde in Dresden, V6, P201 Roa Tom, 2009, JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF NEW ZEALAND, V39, P233 Northcott Deryl, 2010, AUSTRALIAN ACCOUNTING REVIEW, V20, P38 Kohn A., 1993, Punished by rewards: the trouble with gold stars, incentive plans, A's, praise and other bribes, Ashkanasy Neal M., 2007, JOURNAL OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR, V28, P643 Primack Richard B., 2009, BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, V142, P1559 White Howard D., 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P1083 Marsh H., 2012, Australian Universities' Review, V54, P83 Buela-Casal Gualberto, 2007, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND HEALTH PSYCHOLOGY, V7, P899 Torres-Salinas Daniel, 2009, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V3, P9 NHMRC, 2007, Australian code for the responsible conduct of research, Lane Julia, 2011, SCIENCE, V331, P678 Erskine A. J., 1994, Editorial. Picoides, V7, P2 Calver M. C., 2012, AUSTRALASIAN PLANT PATHOLOGY, V41, P179 Lawrence PA, 2003, NATURE, V422, P259 Calver M. C., 2008, Pacific Conservation Biology, V14, P285 De Sutter Bjorn, 2012, COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM, V55, P69 Gowrishankar J, 1999, NATURE, V401, P321 Elsevier, 2011, SciVerse Scopus: content coverage guide., Calver Michael, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V85, P387 Rafols Ismael, 2012, RESEARCH POLICY, V41, P1262 Jacso Peter, 2009, ONLINE INFORMATION REVIEW, V33, P1189 Shortridge GC, 1909, PROCEEDINGS OF THE ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF LONDON, V1909, P803 Schuch Sebastian, 2012, BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, V149, P75 HARGENS LL, 1990, SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH, V19, P205 Abramo Giovanni, 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V95, P311 Schuch S, 2012, Pacific Conservation Biology, V18, P223 Seglen PO, 1997, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V314, P498 [Anonymous], 2006, Proceedings CEDI 2005 Symposium, Hodge David R., 2011, JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION, V47, P579 Lawrence P. A., 2007, Current Biology, V17, Holden G, 2005, SOCIAL WORK IN HEALTH CARE, V41, P67 D'Angelo Ciriaco Andrea, 2011, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V62, P257 Andersen Hanne, 2009, NTM, V17, P1 Falagas Matthew E., 2008, ARCHIVUM IMMUNOLOGIAE ET THERAPIAE EXPERIMENTALIS, V56, P223 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339067500007 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Anatomy of Scholarly Collaboration in Engineering Education: A Big-Data Bibliometric Analysis Authors: Xian, HJ; Madhavan, K Author Full Names: Xian, Hanjun; Madhavan, Krishna Source: JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, 103 (3):486-514; 10.1002/jee.20052 JUL 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: bibliometrics, scholarly collaboration, small-world network KeyWords Plus: AUTHOR COCITATION ANALYSIS; CITATION ANALYSIS; NETWORKS; SCIENCE; IMPACT; FIELD; INSTITUTE; DYNAMICS; JOURNALS; BEHAVIOR Abstract: Background Engineering education has become a large community with an increasing number of scholars and publications. As the number of publications has grown, it has become increasingly difficult to understand the epistemic nature and diffusion characteristics of knowledge generated by this community. Techniques to study community topology require nontrivial computational workflows. Purpose/Hypothesis The present study characterizes the topology of scholarly collaboration and important factors affecting this topology in engineering education research. Design/Methods A bibliometric analysis was conducted of 24,172 papers in engineering education research journals and conference proceedings for the years 2000-2011. A total of 29,116 unique authors are present. Social network analyses were used to characterize the network topology of overall scientific collaboration. Analyses based on grouping scholars by disciplinary backgrounds, research areas, and geographical locations were performed. Results The results show that the engineering education research community is in its early stage of forming a small-world network that relies primarily on 5% of scholars to build capacity. Typical small-world networks provide some very clear characterizations about the state, stability, and growth of the community. Deviations from this ideal model suggest the need for rethinking collaboration in engineering education. Scholars with interdisciplinary backgrounds play a critical role in bridging isolated research teams. Conclusions Compared with other disciplines and the ideal small-world network model, the topology of collaboration in engineering education shows significant barriers to the fast diffusion of innovations. This study demonstrates the value of big-data bibliometrics in understanding scholarly collaboration within a research community. Addresses: [Xian, Hanjun] Microsoft, Bellevue, WA 98004 USA. [Madhavan, Krishna] Purdue Univ, Sch Engn Educ, W Lafayette, IN 47907 USA. E-mail Addresses: hxian at microsoft.com; cm at purdue.edu Funding Acknowledgement: National Science Foundation [NSF TUES-1123108] Funding Text: This work was supported partially through National Science Foundation grant NSF TUES-1123108. Cited Reference Count: 76 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: AMER SOC ENGINEERING EDUCATION, 1818 N ST, N W, STE 600, WASHINGTON, DC 20036 USA ISSN: 1069-4730 eISSN: 2168-9830 Web of Science Categories: Education & Educational Research; Education, Scientific Disciplines; Engineering, Multidisciplinary Research Areas: Education & Educational Research; Engineering IDS Number: AL3YG Unique ID: WOS:000339067500007 Cited References: Peters I., 2009, Folksonomies: Indexing and retrieval in the Web 2.0 Studies in information science., GARFIELD E, 1972, SCIENCE, V178, P471 Polanyi M, 2000, MINERVA, V38, P1 Fronczak A, 2004, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V70, Small H, 1999, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V50, P799 Wankat PC, 2004, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V93, P13 Bozeman B, 2004, RESEARCH POLICY, V33, P599 Sims JL, 2003, CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL OPHTHALMOLOGY, V31, P14 Wasserman S., 1994, Advances in social network analysis: Research in the social and behavioral sciences, Adams Robin S., 2008, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V97, P239 Newman MEJ, 1999, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V60, P7332 SMITH LC, 1981, LIBRARY TRENDS, V30, P83 Albert R, 1999, NATURE, V401, P130 Tuire P., 2001, Higher Education, V42, P493 Levenshtein V. I., 1966, Soviet Physics Doklady, V10, P707 Barabasi A.-L., 2005, P69 Jesiek B. K., 2008, Proceedings of the 2008 SEFI Annual Conferences, Aalborg, Denmark, Barrat A, 2004, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V101, P3747 Powell WW, 2005, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY, V110, P1132 Felder Richard M., 2010, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V99, P121 Wankat Phillip C., 2011, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION, V54, P521 CRONIN B, 1994, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V50, P165 Streveler Ruth A., 2006, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V95, P103 COHEN PR, 1987, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V23, P255 Rogers E., 2003, Diffusion of innovations, Turney P.D., 2000, Information Retrieval, V2, SMITH M, 1958, AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGIST, V13, P596 Newman MEJ, 2001, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V98, P404 Felder RM, 2005, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V94, P7 CIP, 2000, Classification of Instructional Programs: 2000 Edition, Borgman CL, 2002, ANNUAL REVIEW OF INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V36, P3 Lohmann JR, 2005, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V94, P1 Salton G., 1983, Introduction to Modern Information Retrieval, Madhavan K., 2010, The FIE story-1991 to 2009, Beddoes K., 2009, Proceedings of the 39th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, San Antonio, TX, Roth Camille, 2010, SOCIAL NETWORKS, V32, P16 Mei Q., 2007, SIGKDD 2007, San Jose, CA., Booth W., 2008, The craft of research, Fincher Sally A., 2009, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V98, P109 He YL, 2002, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V38, P491 Jamieson L., 2009, Proceedings of 2009 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Austin, TX, Jesiek B. K., 2009, Proceedings of the 2009 SEFI Annual Conferences, Rotterdam, the Netherlands, Simpson T. W., 2010, ASME 2010 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Montreal, Canada, Kuhn T. S., 1962, The structure of scientific revolutions, Birnholtz Jeremy P., 2007, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V58, P2226 Roth C., 2007, UK Social Network Conference, London, Ramage D., 2009, Proceedings of the 2009 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Singapore, Campbell David, 2010, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EVALUATION, V31, P66 Borrego Maura, 2007, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V96, P5 Watts DJ, 1998, NATURE, V393, P440 ELMACIOGLU E, 2005, ACM SIGMOD RECORD, V34, P33 Streveler R. A., 2005, Proceedings of 2005 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Portland, OR, Wankat P. C., 1999, Journal of Engineering Education, V88, P37 Bornmann L., 2008, Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, V8, P93 Gmur M, 2003, SCIENTOMETRICS, V57, P27 Lafferty J., 2006, Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Machine Learning, Pittsburgh, PA, Laudel G, 2002, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V11, P3 HACOHENKERNER Y, 2005, COMPUTATIONAL LINGUI, V3406, P657 White D.R., 2004, Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory, V10, Madhavan K., 2012, Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, San Antonio, TX, March J. G., 2004, Management and Organization Review, V1, P5 Campbell D. T., 1969, Interdisciplinary relationships in the social sciences, P328 Steering Committee of the National Engineering Education Research Colloquies, 2006, Journal of Engineering Education, V95, P259 Acedo FJ, 2005, INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS REVIEW, V14, P619 Borrego Maura, 2010, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V99, P185 Madhavan K., 2010, Proceedings of 2010 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Louisville, KY, Medelyan O., 2009, Proceedings of the 2009 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Singapore, Johri A., 2011, Proceedings of the 41st ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Rapid City, SD, 2011, SOCIAL NETWORK DATA ANALYTICS, P1 Wei X., 2006, Proceedings of the 29th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information, Seattle, WA, Tsui Anne S., 2007, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, V33, P426 Rahm E, 2005, SIGMOD RECORD, V34, P48 Blei DM, 2003, JOURNAL OF MACHINE LEARNING RESEARCH18th International Conference on Machine Learning, JUN 28-JUL 01, 2001, WILLIAMSTOWN, MASSACHUSETTS, V3, P993 Harary F., 1994, Graph theory, Schubert A., 2005, P257 Osorio N. L., 2005, Proceedings of 2005 ASEE IL/IN Sectional Conference, DeKalb, IL, ========================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339010400007 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Measuring knowledge persistence: a genetic approach to patent citation networks Authors: Martinelli, A; Nomaler, O Author Full Names: Martinelli, Arianna; Nomaler, Onder Source: JOURNAL OF EVOLUTIONARY ECONOMICS, 24 (3):623-652; 10.1007/s00191-014-0349-5 JUL 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Patent data, Patent citation network, Technology dynamics, Telecommunication manufacturing industry KeyWords Plus: TECHNOLOGICAL TRAJECTORIES; GROWTH; STATISTICS Abstract: The aim of this paper is to propose a new empirical method for identifying technologically important patents within a patent citation network and to apply it to the telecommunication switching industry. The method proposed is labelled the genetic approach, as it is inspired by population genetics: as geneticists are interested in studying patterns of migration and therefore the common origins of people, in innovation studies we are interested in tracing the origin and the evolution of today knowledge. In the context of patent and citation networks, this is done by calculating the patent's persistence index, i.e., decomposing patent's knowledge applying the Mendelian law of gene inheritance. This draws on the idea that the more a patent is related (through citations) to "descendent" patents, the more it affects future technological development and therefore its contribution persists in the technology. Results show that the method proposed is successful in reducing the number of both nodes and links considered. Furthermore, our method is indeed successful in identifying technological discontinuities where previous knowledge is not relevant for current technological development. Addresses: [Martinelli, Arianna] Scuola Super Sant Anna, LEM, I-56127 Pisa, Italy. [Nomaler, Onder] Eindhoven Univ Technol, Sch Innovat Sci, NL-5600 MB Eindhoven, Netherlands. E-mail Addresses: a.martinelli at sssup.it Cited Reference Count: 37 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, 233 SPRING ST, NEW YORK, NY 10013 USA ISSN: 0936-9937 eISSN: 1432-1386 Web of Science Categories: Economics Research Areas: Business & Economics IDS Number: AL3FA Unique ID: WOS:000339010400007 Cited References: Wasserman S., 1994, Social network analysis: methods and applications, Hall B. H., 2001, NBER Working Paper No. 8498, Strandburg KJ, 2009, North Carolina Law Rev, V87, Trajtenberg Manuel, 1997, ECON. INNOVATION & NEW TECH., V5, P19 Barbera D, 2010, Res Policy, Karrer Brian, 2009, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V80, Balconi M, 2004, RESEARCH POLICYWorkshop on Innovation in Europe, Empirical Studies on Innovation Surveys and Economic Performance, JAN 28, 2003, ROME, ITALY, V33, P127 Fransman M, 1995, Japan's computer and communications industry, Mina A., 2007, RESEARCH POLICY, V36, P789 Albert R, 2002, REVIEWS OF MODERN PHYSICS, V74, P47 Harhoff D, 2005, VFS IV 97-27, Bottazzi G, 2010, lEM Working paper 2010/10, Barabasi AL, 1999, SCIENCE, V286, P509 Jaffe A. B., 2005, Patents, citations, and innovations: A window on the knowledge economy, Gambardella Alfonso, 2008, EUROPEAN MANAGEMENT REVIEW, V5, P69 Martinelli A, 2010, The dynamics of technological discontinuities: a patent citation network analysis of telecommunication switches, Yoon Janghyeok, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V88, P213 DOSI G, 1982, RESEARCH POLICY, V11, P147 Chapuis RJ, 1990, Electronics, computers and telephone switching, Valverde S, 2007, Phys Rev E (Stat Nonlinear Soft Matter Phys), V76, P056 Weitzman ML, 1998, QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, V113, P331 Verspagen Bart, 2007, ADVANCES IN COMPLEX SYSTEMS, V10, P93 Cavalli-Sforza LL, 1994, The history and geography of human genes, von Wartburg I, 2005, RESEARCH POLICY, V34, P1591 Weitzman ML, 1996, AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW108th Annual Meeting of the American-Economic-Association, JAN 05-07, 1996, SAN FRANCISCO, CA, V86, P207 GRILICHES Z, 1990, JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC LITERATURE, V28, P1661 Bessen James, 2009, RESEARCH POLICY, V38, P1604 Silverberg Gerald, 2007, JOURNAL OF ECONOMETRICS, V139, P318 Marsili O, 2005, Econ Innov New Tech, V14, P83 Martinelli Arianna, 2012, RESEARCH POLICY, V41, P414 Fontana R., 2009, Economics of Innovation and New Technology, V18, P311 Sutton J, 1998, Technology and market structure. Theory and history, Garfield E, 1979, Citation indexing: its theory and application in science, technology and humanities, Marco AC, 2007, Econ Lett, V94, HUMMON NP, 1989, SOCIAL NETWORKS, V11, P39 Nelson RR, 1989, Economics as a process: essays in the new institutional economics, ELLIS P, 1978, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V34, P12 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339111200001 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Citation Analysis of the Prognosis of Haux et al. for the Year 2013 Authors: Stausberg, J Author Full Names: Stausberg, Juergen Source: JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SYSTEMS, 38 (7):SI 10.1007/s10916-014-0071-8 JUL 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Citation analysis, Health care, Medical informatics, Prognosis KeyWords Plus: ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS; CLINICAL INFORMATION-TECHNOLOGY; MEDICAL-RECORDS; POTENTIAL IMPACT; CARE; SYSTEMS; PERSPECTIVES; FUTURE; TELEDERMATOLOGY; PUBLICATIONS Abstract: In 2002, Haux, Ammenwerth, Herzog, and Knaup published a prognosis about health care in the information society. In contrast to other prognoses, they underpinned their 30 theses with 71 quantitative statements that could be easily checked. A citation analysis was performed to assess the perception of this work in the medical informatics community. The ISI Web of Science was used for the citation search. From 55 hits, 38 articles were finally included in the metadata analysis, 33 articles in the qualitative analysis. The most prominent statement citing the paper of Haux et al. was identified in each article, divided into statements about the present and those about the future. Each statement was tagged with one keyword out of a convenient list. One article provided a statement about the present and the future. Most of the references were published in English as journal articles between 2006 and 2009. The majority of the first authors were from Europe. Twenty-two articles offered a statement about the present, 12 about the future. There was a shift from the present emphasis on electronic medical records and information and communication technologies to challenges in the future because of an aging population and the advent of personalized medicine. The citing papers seemed to be representative of medical informatics in terms of journals and the authors' countries of origin. The statements relating the citing literature with the paper of Haux et al. corresponded well with current notions about medical informatics. However, there was no debate about the concrete theses and prognoses offered in the cited paper. Therefore, the medical informatics community needs to rethink its own citation strategy. Addresses: Univ Munich, Inst Med Informat Verarbeitung Biometrie & Epidem, D-81377 Munich, Germany. E-mail Addresses: juergen.stausberg at ibe.med.uni-muenchen.de Cited Reference Count: 50 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, 233 SPRING ST, NEW YORK, NY 10013 USA ISSN: 0148-5598 eISSN: 1573-689X Article Number: 71 Web of Science Categories: Health Care Sciences & Services; Medical Informatics Research Areas: Health Care Sciences & Services; Medical Informatics IDS Number: AL4OB Unique ID: WOS:000339111200001 Cited References: Cocosila Mihail, 2009, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INFORMATICS, V78, P230 Schuemie M. J., 2009, METHODS OF INFORMATION IN MEDICINE, V48, P76 Stefanelli M, 2002, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INFORMATICS, V66, P39 Bhat Srividya, 2011, SECURITY-ENRICHED URBAN COMPUTING AND SMART GRID2nd International Conference on the Emerging Areas of Security-Enriched Urban Computing and Smart Grids, SEP 21-23, 2011, Hualien, TAIWAN, V223, P212 Traina A, 2003, CBMS 2003: 16TH IEEE SYMPOSIUM ON COMPUTER-BASED MEDICAL SYSTEMS, PROCEEDINGS16th IEEE Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems, JUN 26-27, 2003, NEW YORK, NY, P163 Berghout Rosanne M., 2007, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INFORMATICS, V76, PS384 Huebner Ursula, 2010, BMC MEDICAL INFORMATICS AND DECISION MAKING, V10, Sittig Dean F., 2006, CANCER CAUSES & CONTROL, V17, P813 Uslu Aykut, 2011, JOURNAL OF HEALTHCARE ENGINEERING, V2, P271 Noumeir R, 2006, JOURNAL OF BIOMEDICAL INFORMATICS, V39, P103 Jha Ashish K., 2009, NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, V360, P1628 Roque Francisco S., 2011, PLOS COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY, V7, Letrilliart L., 2009, EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER CARE, V18, P131 Essen Anna, 2008, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INFORMATICS, V77, P679 Lubitz D., 2006, Expert Systems with Applications, V30, P11 De Rouck Sofie, 2008, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INFORMATICS, V77, P589 Winter A., 2009, METHODS OF INFORMATION IN MEDICINE, V48, P62 Callen Joanne, 2008, HEALTH INFORMATION MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V37, P4 1997, The Computer-Based Patient Record: An Essential Technology for Health Care, Shabo Amnon, 2010, INFORMATICS FOR HEALTH & SOCIAL CARE, V35, P188 Whittaker Louise, 2011, TELEMEDICINE AND E-HEALTH, V17, P55 Chen Weiqin, 2009, MOBILIZING HEALTH INFORMATION TO SUPPORT HEALTHCARE-RELATED KNOWLEDGE WORK1st International Workshop on Mobilizing Health Information to Support Healthcare-related Knowledge Work, JAN, 2009, Porto, PORTUGAL, P32 Granlien Maren Sander, 2009, GROUP 2009 PROCEEDINGSInternational ACM Conference on Supporting Group Work, MAY 10-13, 2009, Sanibel Isl, FL, P321 Viitanen Johanna, 2011, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INFORMATICS, V80, P708 Bott O. J., 2006, METHODS OF INFORMATION IN MEDICINE, V45, P53 Moorman P. W., 2009, METHODS OF INFORMATION IN MEDICINE53rd Annual Conference of the German-Society-for-Medical-Informatics-Biometry-and-Epidemiology, SEP 15-19, 2008, Stuttgart, GERMANY, V48, P454 Hertzum Morten, 2008, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INFORMATICS, V77, P809 Lupianez-Villanueva Francisco, 2010, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INFORMATICS, V79, P478 Remmers Hartmut, 2010, INFORMATICS FOR HEALTH & SOCIAL CARE, V35, P200 Shabo A, 2006, METHODS OF INFORMATION IN MEDICINE, V45, P240 Kuretzki Carlos Henrique, 2009, 2009 WORLD CONGRESS ON NATURE & BIOLOGICALLY INSPIRED COMPUTING (NABIC 2009)World Congress on Nature and Biologically Inspired Computing, DEC 09-12, 2009, Coimbatore, INDIA, P839 Finch T, 2005, JOURNAL OF TELEMEDICINE AND TELECARETelemedicine and eHealth Forum, NOV 29-30, 2004, London, ENGLAND, V11, P51 Mikalef Patrick, 2011, HEALTHINF 2011: PROCEEDINGS OF THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON HEALTH INFORMATICS4th International Conference on Health Informatics (HEALTHINF 2011), JAN 26-29, 2011, Rome, ITALY, P164 Moghaddasi Hamid, 2010, JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SYSTEMS, V34, P1121 Gell G, 2002, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INFORMATICS, V66, P69 1991, Computer-Based Patient Record: An Essential Technology for Health Care, Fierz W, 2004, MEDICAL SCIENCE MONITOR, V10, PRA111 Moher David, 2009, JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, V62, P1006 Pagliari Claudia, 2005, Journal of medical Internet research, V7, Pe9 Schers H, 2006, FAMILY PRACTICE, V23, P349 Hayrinen Kristiina, 2008, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INFORMATICS, V77, P291 Sittig DF, 2004, MEDINFO 2004: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 11TH WORLD CONGRESS ON MEDICAL INFORMATICS, PT 1 AND 211th World Congress on Medical Informatics, SEP 07-11, 2004, San Francisco, CA, V107, P1379 Moorman PW, 2003, METHODS OF INFORMATION IN MEDICINE, V42, P199 Heintze C, 2006, MEDIZINISCHE KLINIK, V101, P357 Haux R, 2002, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INFORMATICS, V66, P3 Finch Tracy L., 2008, HEALTH & SOCIAL CARE IN THE COMMUNITY, V16, P86 Kulikowski Casimir A., 2012, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL INFORMATICS ASSOCIATION, V19, P931 Jen Wen-Yuan, 2009, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INFORMATICS, V78, P425 Ruiz Carlos, 2009, COLOMBIA MEDICA, V40, P259 Bellazzi Riccardo, 2008, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INFORMATICS, V77, P81 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339037000007 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: GRAPHICAL INTERFACE OF THE SCIMAGO JOURNAL AND COUNTRY RANK: AN INTERACTIVE APPROACH TO ACCESSING BIBLIOMETRIC INFORMATION Authors: Hassan-Montero, Y; Guerrero-Bote, VP; De-Moya-Anegon, F Author Full Names: Hassan-Montero, Yusef; Guerrero-Bote, Vicente P.; De-Moya-Anegon, Felix Source: PROFESIONAL DE LA INFORMACION, 23 (3):272-278; 10.3145/epi.2014.may.07 MAY-JUN 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Maps of scientific publications, Graphical interfaces, Bibliometric information, Science maps, Science analysis tools, Citations, Scopus, SCImago KeyWords Plus: VOS Abstract: A graphical interface designed to access the bibliometric indicators database of the SCImago Journal & Country Rank portal (http://scimagojr.com/shapeofscience) is described. The map was generated from the relational matrix based on the citation, co-citation, and bibliographic coupling formed by the nearly 20,000 publications (journals and conference proceedings) registered in Scopus. The map layout is based on a variant of a force-directed algorithm using Noack's proposal of an edge-repulsion energy model. The interface allows the publications' bibliometric indicators and the cluster structures that they form to be displayed based on their shared use by the authors of the documents. To facilitate navigation, the interface automatically positions the reference areas and subject categories which are viewable via zoom-and-pan. The interface may be found to constitute a useful tool for analyses of the Scopus publications' presence in different scientific domains, and of the global distribution of the publishing capacity of different countries and regions. It uses the method of overlaying maps to locate subsets of selected publications in the context of the global publication structure. Addresses: [Hassan-Montero, Yusef] Pompeu Fabra Univ, Barcelona, Spain. [Guerrero-Bote, Vicente P.] Univ Extremadura, Fac Ciencias Documentac & Comunicac, Badajoz 06001, Spain. [De-Moya-Anegon, Felix] CSIC, CCHS, Madrid 28037, Spain. [De-Moya-Anegon, Felix] SCImago Res Grp, Associated Unit, Madrid, Spain. E-mail Addresses: yusefhassan at gmail.com; guerrero at unex.es; felix.moya at scimago.es Cited Reference Count: 17 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: EPI, APARTADO 32 280, BARCELONA, 08080, SPAIN ISSN: 1386-6710 Web of Science Categories: Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: AL3OB Unique ID: WOS:000339037000007 Cited References: Kamada Tomihisa, 1989, Information processing letters, V31, P7 Newman Mark E. J., 2004, Physical review E, Noack Andreas, 2004, Technical report 02/04, Hadany R, 2001, DISCRETE APPLIED MATHEMATICS25th International Workshop on Graph-Theoretic Concepts in Computer Science (WG 99), JUN, 1999, ASCONA, SWITZERLAND, V113, P3 Newman Mark E. J., 2004, Phys. rev. E, Noack A., 2007, Journal of Graph Algorithms and Applications, V11, Koh Kyle, 2010, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VISUALIZATION AND COMPUTER GRAPHICS, V16, P1190 Leydesdorff Loet, 2010, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V61, P352 Noack Andreas, 2009, Physical review E, van Eck Nees Jan, 2010, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V61, P2405 De-Moya-Anegon Felix, 2014, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Van Eck Nees Jan, 2007, Advances in Data Analysis30th Annual Conference of the German-Classification-Society, MAR 08-10, 2006, Berlin, GERMANY, P299 Davidson Ron, 1989, Technical Report CS89-13, Van-Eck Nees-Jan, 2011, Methodological advances in bibliometric mapping of science, V247, Klavans Richard, 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P455 Eades Peter, 1984, Congressus numerantium, V42, P149 FRUCHTERMAN TMJ, 1991, SOFTWARE-PRACTICE & EXPERIENCE, V21, P1129 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338856600024 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Universal hierarchical behavior of citation networks Authors: Mones, E; Pollner, P; Vicsek, T Author Full Names: Mones, Enys; Pollner, Peter; Vicsek, Tamas Source: JOURNAL OF STATISTICAL MECHANICS-THEORY AND EXPERIMENT, 10.1088/1742-5468/2014/05/P05023 MAY 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: growth processes, network dynamics, communication, supply and information networks Abstract: Many of the essential features of the evolution of scientific research are imprinted in the structure of citation net Works. Connections in these net Works imply information about the transfer of knowledge among papers, or, in other words, edges describe the impact of papers on other publications. This inherent meaning of the edges implies that citation networks can exhibit hierarchical features that are typical of networks based on decision making. In this paper, we investigate the hierarchical structure of citation networks consisting of papers in the same field. We find that the majority of the networks follow a universal trend towards a highly hierarchical state, and the Various fields display differences only concerning (i) their phase in life (distance from the 'birth' of a field) or (ii) the characteristic time according to which they are approaching the stationary state. We also show by a simple argument that the alterations in the behavior are related to and can be understood by the degree of specialization corresponding to the fields. Our results suggest that during the accumulation of knowledge in a given field, some papers are gradually becoming relatively more influential than most other papers. Addresses: [Mones, Enys; Vicsek, Tamas] Eotvos Lorand Univ, Dept Biol Phys, H-1117 Budapest, Hungary. [Pollner, Peter; Vicsek, Tamas] MTA ELTE Stat & Biol Phys Res Grp, H-1117 Budapest, Hungary. [Pollner, Peter; Vicsek, Tamas] ELTE Fac Sci, Reg Knowledge Ctr, H-8000 Szekesfehervar, Hungary. E-mail Addresses: enys at hal.elte.hu; pollner at hal.elte.hu; vicsek at hal.elte.hu Funding Acknowledgement: European Union; European Social Fund through project FuturICT.hu [TAMOP-4.2.2.C-11/1/KONV-2012-0013]; Hungarian National Science Fund [OTKA K105447]; EU ERC FP7 COLLMOT [227878] Funding Text: This work was partially supported by the European Union and the European Social Fund through project FuturICT.hu (Grant No. TAMOP-4.2.2.C-11/1/KONV-2012-0013), by the Hungarian National Science Fund (OTKA K105447) and by the EU ERC FP7 COLLMOT Grant No. 227878. Cited Reference Count: 24 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: IOP PUBLISHING LTD, TEMPLE CIRCUS, TEMPLE WAY, BRISTOL BS1 6BE, ENGLAND ISSN: 1742-5468 Article Number: P05023 Web of Science Categories: Mechanics; Physics, Mathematical Research Areas: Mechanics; Physics IDS Number: AL0ZW Unique ID: WOS:000338856600024 Cited References: Chen P., 2010, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V4, P278 Lancichinetti Andrea, 2010, PLOS ONE, V5, Luo Jianxi, 2011, COMPLEXITY, V16, P53 Suchecki K, 2013, arXiv:1303.2085, PRICE DJD, 1965, NETWORKS SCIENTIFIC, V149, P510 Rowe R, 2007, Proc. 9th WebKDD and 1st SNA-KDD 2007 Workshop on Web Mining and Social Network Analysis, New York, P109 de Solla Price D J, 1963, Little Science, Big Science... and Beyond, PRICE DJD, 1976, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V27, P292 MacRoberts MH, 1996, SCIENTOMETRICS, V36, P435 Leicht E. A., 2007, EUROPEAN PHYSICAL JOURNAL B, V59, P75 Suh Won Hyuk, 2009, PROGRESS IN NEUROBIOLOGY, V87, P133 Karrer Brian, 2009, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V80, Nepusz Tamas, 2013, PLOS ONE, V8, Mones Enys, 2012, PLOS ONE, V7, 2006, HIERARCHY IN NATURAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES, V3, P1 Corominas-Murtra Bernat, 2013, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V110, P13316 GARFIELD E, 1955, CITATION INDEXES SCI, V122, P108 Nagy M, 2010, Nature, V464, P890 Eom Young-Ho, 2011, PLOS ONE, V6, Lane D, 2006, Hierarchy, Complexity, Society, Redner S, 2005, PHYSICS TODAY, V58, P49 Vazquez A, 2001, arXiv:cond-mat/0105031, Wang Dashun, 2013, SCIENCE, V342, P127 Krackhardt D, 1994, Computational Organizational Theory ed KCarley and M Prietula, P89 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339168100001 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Global research on soil contamination from 1999 to 2012: A bibliometric analysis Authors: Guo, K; Liu, YF; Zeng, C; Chen, YY; Wei, XJ Author Full Names: Guo, K.; Liu, Y. F.; Zeng, C.; Chen, Y. Y.; Wei, X. J. Source: ACTA AGRICULTURAE SCANDINAVICA SECTION B-SOIL AND PLANT SCIENCE, 64 (5):377-391; 10.1080/09064710.2014.913679 2014 Language: English Document Type: Review Author Keywords: soil contamination, bibliometrics analysis, geographic distribution, hot issues KeyWords Plus: DIFFUSE-REFLECTANCE SPECTROSCOPY; MICROBIAL COMMUNITY COMPOSITION; HEAVY-METALS; HUMAN HEALTH; NATURAL ATTENUATION; AGRICULTURAL SOILS; RISK ASSESSMENT; TRACE-ELEMENTS; POLLUTED SOILS; CHINA Abstract: We evaluated soil contamination research based on a bibliometric analysis of 14,090 articles published in journals in the Science Citation Index and Social Sciences Citation Index bibliographic databases from 1999 to 2012, which revealed scientific outputs, subject categories and major journals, international collaboration and geographic distribution of authors and countries, keywords, and hot issues. The results suggested that research on soil contamination developed well with increasing scientific production and research collaboration. Environmental science, engineering environment, soil science, and applied microbiology were the most frequently used subject categories in soil contamination studies. Chemosphere was the most active journal in this field. The clusters of authors were more in the USA, Western European countries, China, Japan, and India. Q. X. Zhou of Nankai University was the most productive author, and S. P. Mcgrath of Rothamsted Research England published the most influential articles. The USA exceeded all other countries with the most independent and collaborative papers in research on global soil contamination. Heavy metal pollution was the hottest issue, and bioremediation is the most promising research topic in combating against heavy metal pollution of soils. The status of publication on soil contamination research described here is significant for researchers on soil contamination in their future work. Addresses: [Guo, K.; Liu, Y. F.; Chen, Y. Y.; Wei, X. J.] Wuhan Univ, Sch Resource & Environm Sci, Wuhan 430079, Peoples R China. [Zeng, C.] Huazhong Agr Univ, Sch Econ & Management, Wuhan 430070, Peoples R China. E-mail Addresses: yfliuwhu at gmail.com Cited Reference Count: 115 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: TAYLOR & FRANCIS AS, KARL JOHANS GATE 5, NO-0154 OSLO, NORWAY ISSN: 0906-4710 eISSN: 1651-1913 Web of Science Categories: Agronomy; Soil Science Research Areas: Agriculture IDS Number: AL5IV Unique ID: WOS:000339168100001 Cited References: Park Jin Hee, 2011, JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, V185, P549 Rossato L., 2011, JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, V190, P772 Chakraborty Somsubhra, 2010, JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, V39, P1378 Kramer U, 2001, APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY AND BIOTECHNOLOGY, V55, P661 Rathod Paresh H., 2013, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHYTOREMEDIATION, V15, P405 Alexander M, 2000, ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, V34, P4259 Myers RT, 2001, SOIL SCIENCE SOCIETY OF AMERICA JOURNAL, V65, P359 Wilson M. A., 2008, ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT, V139, P151 Ehlers GAC, 2006, ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION, V141, P494 Peters RW, 1999, JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, V66, P151 Kabra K, 2004, INDUSTRIAL & ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY RESEARCH, V43, P7683 PRITCHAR.A, 1969, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V25, P348 Clemens S, 2002, TRENDS IN PLANT SCIENCE, V7, P309 Borgatti SP, 2002, Netdraw network visualization, Meharg AA, 2003, MYCOLOGICAL RESEARCH, V107, P1253 Lourenco Roberto Wagner, 2010, ENVIRONMENTAL EARTH SCIENCES, V60, P495 Chen CM, 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, P5303 McLaughlin MJ, 1999, FIELD CROPS RESEARCH, V60, P143 Jansson G, 2000, ACTA AGRICULTURAE SCANDINAVICA SECTION B-SOIL AND PLANT SCIENCE, V50, P49 Kavamura Vanessa Nessner, 2010, BIOTECHNOLOGY ADVANCES, V28, P61 Stenberg B, 1999, ACTA AGRICULTURAE SCANDINAVICA SECTION B-SOIL AND PLANT SCIENCE, V49, P1 Chiu Wen-Ta, 2007, SCIENTOMETRICS, V73, P3 Christelle P, 2006, J Soils Sediments., V6, P215 World Development Indicators Online, 2012, State Council of P. R. China, 2013, Plan of Soil Environmental Protection and Integrated Pollution Control No. 7, Udiwal K. H., 2010, International Journal of Chemical Environmental and Pharmaceutical Research, V1, P17 Aleksander-Kwaterczak Urszula, 2012, ENVIRONMENTAL EARTH SCIENCES, V65, P1179 Zakharova T, 2002, REGULATORY TOXICOLOGY AND PHARMACOLOGY, V36, P22 Einax JW, 1999, CHEMOMETRICS AND INTELLIGENT LABORATORY SYSTEMS, V46, P79 Wei BG, 2009, Microchem J, V94, P99 Albering HJ, 1999, ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PERSPECTIVES, V107, P27 Rascio Nicoletta, 2011, PLANT SCIENCE, V180, P169 Kirchmann H, 2000, EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF AGRONOMY, V12, P145 Smolders E, 1999, SOIL SCIENCE SOCIETY OF AMERICA JOURNAL, V63, P78 Mulligan CN, 2004, ENVIRONMENT INTERNATIONAL, V30, P587 Sun Bo, 2012, AMBIO, V41, P370 Hemen Sarma, 2011, Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, V4, P118 Papp Z, 2002, JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY, V59, P191 Jia Y., 2006, SOIL BIOLOGY & BIOCHEMISTRY, V38, P2543 N AL, 2005, J Environ Qual., V34, P496 Horrigan L, 2002, ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PERSPECTIVES, V110, P445 Ministry of Environmental Protection of P. R. China, 2006, Special Program of National Soil Survey and Pollution Control, Kandeler E, 2000, BIOLOGY AND FERTILITY OF SOILS, V32, P390 McGrath SP, 2003, CURRENT OPINION IN BIOTECHNOLOGY, V14, P277 Wilcke W, 2000, JOURNAL OF PLANT NUTRITION AND SOIL SCIENCE-ZEITSCHRIFT FUR PFLANZENERNAHRUNG UND BODENKUNDE, V163, P229 Stenberg Bo, 2010, ADVANCES IN AGRONOMY, VOL 107, V107, P163 Wang Suiling, 2006, JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, V138, P459 Almeida-Filho N, 2003, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, V93, P2037 Liu Xingjian, 2011, BIODIVERSITY AND CONSERVATION, V20, P807 Mermut AR, 2001, GEODERMA, V100, P403 Turkdogan MK, 2003, ENVIRONMENTAL TOXICOLOGY AND PHARMACOLOGY, V13, P175 Muller AK, 2002, MICROBIAL ECOLOGY, V44, P49 Shi Xiaonan, 2011, SOIL SCIENCE SOCIETY OF AMERICA JOURNAL, V75, P1214 Khan Sardar, 2010, ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH, V17, P288 Rodrigues S. M., 2012, ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTRY LETTERS, V10, P61 Groenenberg J. E., 2010, EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SOIL SCIENCE, V61, P58 Sun B, 2001, ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION, V113, P111 Liu Xingjian, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P747 Desaules Andre, 2010, JOURNAL OF PLANT NUTRITION AND SOIL SCIENCE, V173, P525 Zhuang Yanhua, 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V96, P203 Kramer U, 2005, CURRENT OPINION IN BIOTECHNOLOGY, V16, P133 Cui YJ, 2005, ENVIRONMENT INTERNATIONAL, V31, P784 Chen HM, 2000, CHEMOSPHEREConference on Environmental Contamination, Toxicology and Health, SEP 23-25, 1998, HONG KONG, PEOPLES R CHINA, V41, P229 Scanferla Petra, 2009, JOURNAL OF SOILS AND SEDIMENTS, V9, P229 Wu Gang, 2010, JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, V174, P1 Wang Haijun, 2012, LANDSCAPE AND URBAN PLANNING, V104, P299 Hanikenne Marc, 2011, CURRENT OPINION IN PLANT BIOLOGY, V14, P252 China SEPA, 2006, The notice about investigation of persistent organic pollutants (POPs) throughout China, Rao C. R. M., 2008, WATER AIR AND SOIL POLLUTION, V189, P291 Li XD, 2001, APPLIED GEOCHEMISTRY, V16, P1693 Karen E, 2009, Plant Sci., V176, P20 Patra M, 2000, BOTANICAL REVIEW, V66, P379 Fischer G, 2009, Agric Ecosyst Environ, V136, P116 Proctor DM, 2002, JOURNAL OF TOXICOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH-PART A, V65, P701 Ho YS, 2007, J Environ Prot Sci., V1, P1 White PA, 2004, MUTATION RESEARCH-REVIEWS IN MUTATION RESEARCH, V567, P227 Kooistra L, 2003, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF REMOTE SENSING, V24, P4995 Bastida F., 2008, GEODERMA, V147, P159 Girvan MS, 2005, ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY, V7, P301 Liu JG, 2005, NATURE, V435, P1179 Boyd Robert S., 2009, INSECT SCIENCE, V16, P19 Xia Xinghui, 2011, JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, V186, P2043 Alkorta I, 2001, BIORESOURCE TECHNOLOGY, V79, P273 Semple KT, 2001, ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION, V112, P269 Cheraghi Mehrdad, 2012, BIOLOGICAL TRACE ELEMENT RESEARCH, V145, P87 Zhao Qi-Guo, 2011, PEDOSPHERE, V21, P1 Alessandra COC, 2012, J Environ Manage., V113, P510 Glanzel W, 2000, SCIENTOMETRICS4th Nordic Workshop in Bibliometrics, AUG 27-28, 1999, COPENHAGEN, DENMARK, V48, P121 Lasat MM, 2002, JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, V31, P109 Li PJ, 2006, COMMUNICATIONS IN SOIL SCIENCE AND PLANT ANALYSIS, V37, P1031 Schwitzguebel J. -P., 2009, AGROCHIMICA, V53, P209 Liu Yaolin, 2013, SCIENCE, V339, P1382 Khan S., 2008, ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION, V152, P686 Liu Weitao, 2010, JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, V173, P737 Zeng Chen, 2014, CHINESE GEOGRAPHICAL SCIENCE, V24, P245 O'Reilly SE, 2001, SOIL SCIENCE SOCIETY OF AMERICA JOURNAL, V65, P67 Duruibe J. O., 2007, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL SCIENCES, V2, P112 Diels L, 1999, MOLECULAR BIOTECHNOLOGY, V12, P149 Margesin R, 2000, CHEMOSPHERE, V40, P339 Lee CS, 2006, SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT, V356, P45 Pruvot Christelle, 2006, JOURNAL OF SOILS AND SEDIMENTS, V6, P215 Facchinelli A, 2001, ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION, V114, P313 Shivaramaiah HM, 2002, JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL AND FOOD CHEMISTRY, V50, P5360 Cai Quan-Ying, 2008, SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT, V389, P209 Maderova L., 2011, SOIL BIOLOGY & BIOCHEMISTRY, V43, P1162 Soares Claudio R. F. S., 2008, BIOLOGY AND FERTILITY OF SOILS, V44, P833 Frey Beat, 2006, SOIL BIOLOGY & BIOCHEMISTRY, V38, P1745 Ruiz ON, 2003, PLANT PHYSIOLOGY, V132, P1344 Song Yinxian, 2012, APPLIED CLAY SCIENCE, V64, P75 Vamerali Teofilo, 2010, ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTRY LETTERS, V8, P1 Zhang Liang, 2010, ECOLOGICAL ENGINEERING, V36, P973 Watanabe T, 2001, JOURNAL OF HEALTH SCIENCE, V47, P433 Chen SR, 2005, REVUE FRANCAISE D ALLERGOLOGIE ET D IMMUNOLOGIE CLINIQUE, V45, P442 Hu Jing, 2012, ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, V46, P4607 Evangelou Michael W. H., 2007, CHEMOSPHERE, V68, P989 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000334705900025 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: An Instructive Case in Referencing, Priority Conflict, and Ethics: The Role of an Editor in a Scholarly Journal Authors: Szenberg, M Author Full Names: Szenberg, Michael Edited by: Szenberg M; Ramrattan L Source: SECRETS OF ECONOMICS EDITORS, 329-334; 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article; Book Chapter KeyWords Plus: SUBMISSIONS Addresses: Pace Univ, Lubin Sch Business, New York, NY 10038 USA. Cited Reference Count: 14 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: MIT PRESS, FIVE CAMBRIDGE CENTER, CAMBRIDGE, MA 02142 USA ISBN: 978-0-262-32010-8; 978-0-262-52546-6 Web of Science Categories: Economics Research Areas: Business & Economics IDS Number: BA3SB Unique ID: WOS:000334705900025 Cited References: Merton R. K., 1963, European Journal of Sociology, V4, P237 [Anonymous], 1976, American Sociologist, V11, P168 Szenberg Michael, 1977, The Welfare Effects of Trade Restrictions, Coase R. H., 1995, Essays on Economics and Economists, MERTON RK, 1963, BULLETIN OF THE JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL, V112, P77 SZENBERG M, 1994, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND SOCIOLOGY, V53, P303 Festinger L., 1985, A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, Snow Charles P., 1960, The Moral Un-Neutrality of Science. Address to the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Steinbeck John, 1962, Nobel Prize Banquet Acceptance Speech, Dyson F, 1995, New York Review of Books, P33 Freud Sigmund, 1938, The Basic Writings of Sigmund Freud, [Anonymous], 1975, Sociological Quarterly, V15, P163 PETERS CB, 1976, AMERICAN SOCIOLOGIST, V11, P165 Szenberg M., 1973, Economics of the Israeli Diamond Industry, ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339270100006 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Characteristics of the most frequently cited English-language journal publications 1981-2010 of psychology from the German-speaking countries Authors: Krampen, G; Schui, G; Ferring, D; Bauer, HPW Author Full Names: Krampen, Guenter; Schui, Gabriel; Ferring, Dieter; Bauer, Hans P. W. Source: PSYCHOLOGISCHE RUNDSCHAU, 65 (3):159-168; 10.1026/0033-3042/a000196 2014 Language: German Document Type: Article Author Keywords: scientometry, citation analysis, evaluation, psychology, German, Austria, Switzerland KeyWords Plus: SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTIVITY; UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENTS; SCIENCE; CITATIONS Abstract: The results of publication-based citation analyses for 28,383 English-language journal psychology publications from the German-speaking countries published between 1981 and 2010 are presented. Data for analyses stem from the Web of Science database, which covers nearly 90 % of such publications. The distribution of the frequency of citations by other authors is strongly skewed and shows that 20 % of the articles are never cited, 60 % are cited 1-22 times, and 20 % are cited more than 22 times. Age of publication and frequency of citations have significant, albeit numerically low, rank order correlations (Kendall's tau=.23). Therefore, the criteria of the number of citations by others per year since publication of the article is used to identify the 107 most frequently cited papers (TOP 107). The characteristics of these papers are described with reference to authorships and their internationality, the disciplines of psychology to which they belong, and to the study type (e. g., empirical vs. nonempirical). The limitations and possibilities of citation analyses are discussed with a preference for a rational integration of citation analyses into empirically supported peer review procedures. Addresses: [Krampen, Guenter; Schui, Gabriel; Bauer, Hans P. W.] Univ Trier, Fachbereich Psychol 1, D-54286 Trier, Germany. [Ferring, Dieter] Univ Luxembourg, FLHASE Res Unit INSIDE, Dept psychol, L-7201 Walferdange, Luxembourg. E-mail Addresses: krampen at uni-trier.de Cited Reference Count: 35 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: HOGREFE & HUBER PUBLISHERS, ROHNSWEG 25, D-37085 GOTTINGEN, GERMANY ISSN: 0033-3042 eISSN: 2190-6238 Web of Science Categories: Psychology, Multidisciplinary Research Areas: Psychology IDS Number: AL6VC Unique ID: WOS:000339270100006 Cited References: Abramo Giovanni, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V87, P499 Krampen Guenter, 2007, SCIENTOMETRICS, V71, P191 BASLER HD, 1995, PSYCHOLOGISCHE RUNDSCHAU, V46, P36 Smith Derek R., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P419 Mutz Ruediger, 2012, PLOS ONE, V7, Schui G., 2014, Psychologische Rundschau, V64, P24 Bilsky W., 1998, Psychologische Rundschau, V49, P225 Aguillo Isidro F., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS13th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, JUL 04-07, 2011, Durban, SOUTH AFRICA, V91, P343 Moed H. F., 2005, Citation analysis in research evaluation, Wainer Jacques, 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V96, P395 Larsen Peder Olesen, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V84, P575 Egloff B, 2006, PSYCHOLOGISCHE RUNDSCHAU, V57, P116 Markowitsch HJ, 1999, PSYCHOLOGISCHE RUNDSCHAU, V50, P168 Krampen Guenter, 2013, ZEITSCHRIFT FUR EVALUATION, V12, P79 ENDLER NS, 1978, AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGIST, V33, P1064 Johnston David W., 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V95, P1023 Gigerenter G, 1999, PSYCHOLOGISCHE RUNDSCHAU, V50, P101 2007, Thesaurus of Psychological Index Terms, Krampen Guenter, 2008, SCIENTOMETRICS, V76, P3 SEGLEN PO, 1992, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V43, P628 Montada L., 1998, Psychologische Rundschau, V49, P228 Honekopp J., 2011, Scientometrics, V90, P843 Westmeyer H., 1998, Psychologische Rundschau, V49, P227 Albarran Pedro, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V85, P329 Krampen G., 2005, Internationalitat und Internationalisierung der deutschsprachigen Psychologie, Marx W., 2012, Beitrage zur Hochschulforschung, V34, P50 Mattern F., 2013, Vortrag auf dem Jubilaums-Kolloquium, 20 Jahre dblp, 04.07, 2013, BAUMERT J, 1990, ZEITSCHRIFT FUR PADAGOGIK, V36, P73 Mingers John, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V85, P613 Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Psychologie (DGPs), 1998, Psychologische Rundschau, V49, P105 Kliegl Reinhold, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V87, P149 Frese M, 1990, Zeitschrift fur Arbeits- und Organisationspsychologie, V34, P155 Bornmann Luti, 2008, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V64, P45 Krampen G., 2013, Proceedings of the 14th International Society of Scientometrics and Informetrics Conference (ISSI2013), 15th-18th July, 2013, Montada L, 1999, PSYCHOLOGISCHE RUNDSCHAU, V50, P69 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339031501124 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Bibliometric analysis of achievements on the dam safety monitoring in SCI Authors: Liu, QS; Deng, NW; Hu, WL Author Full Names: Liu, Qiushi; Deng, Nianwu; Hu, Weiling Edited by: Huang Y Source: ADVANCES IN CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING III, PTS 1-4, 501-504 2026-2033; 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.501-504.2026 2014 Book Series: Applied Mechanics and Materials Language: English Document Type: Proceedings Paper Conference Title: 3rd International Conference on Civil Engineering and Transportation (ICCET 2013) Conference Date: DEC 14-15, 2013 Conference Location: Kunming, PEOPLES R CHINA Conference Sponsors: Guizhou Univ Author Keywords: Dam safety monitoring, bibliometric analysis, co-words, knowledge base, research focus Abstract: In this work, bibliometric analysis was applied to evaluate global scientific production and developing trend of the dam safety monitoring research through Science Citation Index (SCI) papers with online version published as following aspects: publication outputs, subject categories, countries, institutes, citations, authorship and co-authorship, author key words and co-words analysis. Global literature of the dam safety monitoring research has increased rapidly over the past years and has boosted in recent years. The quantity and quality of papers in P.R. China are in a leading position. There is a very important new finding from the research focus that tailings dam has been adequately studied. With the further development of the dam safety monitoring research, it is presumed that scientists might concentrate mainly on safety prediction and health monitoring instead of simple safety monitoring. Addresses: [Liu, Qiushi; Deng, Nianwu; Hu, Weiling] Wuhan Univ, Sch Water Resources & Hydropower, Wuhan 430072, Peoples R China. E-mail Addresses: liuqiushi at whu.edu.cn; liuqiushi at whu.edu.cn; liuqiushi at whu.edu.cn Cited Reference Count: 13 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: TRANS TECH PUBLICATIONS LTD, LAUBLSRUTISTR 24, CH-8717 STAFA-ZURICH, SWITZERLAND ISSN: 1660-9336 ISBN: 978-3-03835-005-7 Web of Science Categories: Construction & Building Technology; Engineering, Civil; Engineering, Mechanical; Engineering, Geological Research Areas: Construction & Building Technology; Engineering IDS Number: BA8YQ Unique ID: WOS:000339031501124 Cited References: Zhang Jin-ping, Journal of China Institute of Water Resources and Hydropower Research, P7 Zhang Han, 2007, Information Studies:Theory & Application, V30, P378 Zhong Weijin, 2008, Journal of Information, V5, P70 Zhao Rongying, 2010, Journal of Library Science in China, V36, P60 Wu Junru, 1997, Dam Safety Evaluation Expert System, Yu Guangming, 2012, The New Development of Security Studies of Tailings Dam Abroad and the Development Tendency of Security Studies of Tailings Dam in Our Country, V03, Qiu Junping, 2008, Journal of the China Society for Scientific and Technical Information, V27, Guo Tong, 2008, International academic trends, P26 Qiu Junping, 2007, Information metrology, Zhao Zhiren, 2010, Hydropower Automation and Dam Monitoring, V34, P52 Chen CM, 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, P5303 Xu fun, 2011, gold, V32, P43 Zhao Zhijun, 2010, Modern Electronic Technology, V5, P197 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338922300022 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Global Resources in Engineering Education: A Content Analysis of Worldwide Engineering Education Journals Authors: Chou, PN; Chen, WF Author Full Names: Chou, Pao-Nan; Chen, Wei-Fan Source: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, 30 (3):701-710; SI 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: content analysis, engineering education journal, Google database, H-index KeyWords Plus: IMPACT; INDEX; WEB Abstract: This study aims to employ a Google database to explore worldwide engineering education journals. Research questions focus on four areas: (1) journal indexing, (2) journal characteristics, (3) frequently cited articles, and (4) H-index profiles. A three-stage content analysis, which included journal sampling, journal examination, and journal identification, was used to obtain related data. A total of twenty engineering education journals were identified and examined through a quantitative investigation. The findings yielded in the study may allow engineering educators and researchers to gain in-depth information about journals in the engineering education area, to understand various ranking methods, and to select a suitable journal when submitting a manuscript for publication. Addresses: [Chou, Pao-Nan] Natl Univ Tainan, Dept Educ, Tainan, Taiwan. [Chen, Wei-Fan] Penn State Univ, Dept Informat Sci & Technol, State Coll, PA 18627 USA. E-mail Addresses: pnchou at mail.nutn.edu.tw; weifan at psu.edu Cited Reference Count: 31 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: TEMPUS PUBLICATIONS, IJEE , ROSSMORE,, DURRUS, BANTRY, COUNTY CORK 00000, IRELAND ISSN: 0949-149X Web of Science Categories: Education, Scientific Disciplines; Engineering, Multidisciplinary Research Areas: Education & Educational Research; Engineering IDS Number: AL1YJ Unique ID: WOS:000338922300022 Cited References: Kolari S., 2000, Global Journal of Engineering Education, V4, P275 Felder RM, 2005, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V21, P103 Wu T-. C., 2005, International Journal of Technology and Engineering Education, V2, P27 Coleman R, 1999, ANATOMICAL RECORD, V257, P54 Meho Lokman I., 2007, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V58, P2105 Mills J. E., 2003, Australasian Journal of Engineering Education, V9, P2 Berggren K., 2003, World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education, V2, P49 Neuendorf K. A., 2002, The Content Analysis Guidebook, P47 Jain P. K., 2008, Advances in Engineering Education, V1, P1 Avouris NM, 2001, COMPUTER APPLICATIONS IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V9, P8 Opthof T., 1999, Cardiovascular Research, V33, P1 Felder R., 2000, Chemical Engineering Education, V34, P26 Scott G., 2002, European Journal of Engineering Education, V27, Schwandt T. A., 2001, Dictionary of Qualitative Inquiry, Felder R. M., 2003, Journal of Engineering Education, V92, P7 Arthit S., 2004, International Journal of Electrical Engineering Education, V41, P158 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Campanella S., 2008, WSEAS Transactions on Advances in Engineering Education, V5, Depcik C., 2007, International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education, V35, Jeffers AT, 2004, JOURNAL OF PROFESSIONAL ISSUES IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION AND PRACTICE, V130, P95 Seglen PO, 1997, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V314, P498 JEE Special Report, 2006, Journal of Engineering Education, V95, P259 Brusilovsky P., 2003, International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Life-Long Learning, V13, Chou P-. N., 2013, International Journal of Computer and Information Technology, V2, P25 Monastersky R., 2005, The Chronicle of Higher Education, V52, PA12 Chou P-. N., 2010, World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education, V8, P462 Ko CC, 2001, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION, V44, P76 Sankat D. E., 2007, Latin American and Caribbean Journal of Engineering Education, V1, P27 Parkinson A., 2007, Online Journal of Global Engineering Education, V2, P1 Chou P-.N., 2012, Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, V9, P187 Zidek L. A., 2010, Journal of Applications and Practices in Engineering Education, V1, P109 ========================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338750200027 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Citation and Precedent: Conjunctions and Disjunctions of German Law and Literature Authors: LaFountain, P Author Full Names: LaFountain, Pascale Source: GERMAN STUDIES REVIEW, 36 (3):694-695; OCT 2013 Language: English Document Type: Book Review Amazon Blurb: Among Western literatures, only the German-speaking countries can boast a list of world-class writers such as Goethe, Hoffmann, Kleist, Kafka, Schmitt, and Schlink who were trained as legal scholars. Yet this list only hints at the complex interactions between German law and literature. It can be supplemented, for example, with the unique interventions of the legal system into literature, ranging from attempts to save literature from the tidal wave of Schund (pulp fiction) in the early twentieth century to audiences suing theaters over the improper production of classics in the twenty-first. The long list of instances where German literature cites law, or where German law serves literature as a precedent, signal the dream of German culture of a unity of interests and objectives between spheres of activity. Yet the very vitality of this dream stems from real historical and social processes that increasingly autonomize and separate these domains from each other. Beebee examines the history of this dialectical tension through close readings of numerous cases in the modern era, ranging from Grimm to Schmitt. Addresses: [LaFountain, Pascale] Montclair State Univ, Montclair, NJ 07043 USA. Cited Reference Count: 1 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: JOHNS HOPKINS UNIV PRESS, JOURNALS PUBLISHING DIVISION, 2715 NORTH CHARLES ST, BALTIMORE, MD 21218-4363 USA ISSN: 0149-7952 eISSN: 2164-8646 Web of Science Categories: Area Studies; Humanities, Multidisciplinary Research Areas: Area Studies; Arts & Humanities - Other Topics IDS Number: AK9MC Unique ID: WOS:000338750200027 Cited References: BEEBEE TO, 2011, CITATION PRECEDENT C, ======================================================================== ======================================================================== ========================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339168100001 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Global research on soil contamination from 1999 to 2012: A bibliometric analysis Authors: Guo, K; Liu, YF; Zeng, C; Chen, YY; Wei, XJ Author Full Names: Guo, K.; Liu, Y. F.; Zeng, C.; Chen, Y. Y.; Wei, X. J. Source: ACTA AGRICULTURAE SCANDINAVICA SECTION B-SOIL AND PLANT SCIENCE, 64 (5):377-391; 10.1080/09064710.2014.913679 2014 Language: English Document Type: Review Author Keywords: soil contamination, bibliometrics analysis, geographic distribution, hot issues KeyWords Plus: DIFFUSE-REFLECTANCE SPECTROSCOPY; MICROBIAL COMMUNITY COMPOSITION; HEAVY-METALS; HUMAN HEALTH; NATURAL ATTENUATION; AGRICULTURAL SOILS; RISK ASSESSMENT; TRACE-ELEMENTS; POLLUTED SOILS; CHINA Abstract: We evaluated soil contamination research based on a bibliometric analysis of 14,090 articles published in journals in the Science Citation Index and Social Sciences Citation Index bibliographic databases from 1999 to 2012, which revealed scientific outputs, subject categories and major journals, international collaboration and geographic distribution of authors and countries, keywords, and hot issues. The results suggested that research on soil contamination developed well with increasing scientific production and research collaboration. Environmental science, engineering environment, soil science, and applied microbiology were the most frequently used subject categories in soil contamination studies. Chemosphere was the most active journal in this field. The clusters of authors were more in the USA, Western European countries, China, Japan, and India. Q. X. Zhou of Nankai University was the most productive author, and S. P. Mcgrath of Rothamsted Research England published the most influential articles. The USA exceeded all other countries with the most independent and collaborative papers in research on global soil contamination. Heavy metal pollution was the hottest issue, and bioremediation is the most promising research topic in combating against heavy metal pollution of soils. The status of publication on soil contamination research described here is significant for researchers on soil contamination in their future work. Addresses: [Guo, K.; Liu, Y. F.; Chen, Y. Y.; Wei, X. J.] Wuhan Univ, Sch Resource & Environm Sci, Wuhan 430079, Peoples R China. [Zeng, C.] Huazhong Agr Univ, Sch Econ & Management, Wuhan 430070, Peoples R China. E-mail Addresses: yfliuwhu at gmail.com Cited Reference Count: 115 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: TAYLOR & FRANCIS AS, KARL JOHANS GATE 5, NO-0154 OSLO, NORWAY ISSN: 0906-4710 eISSN: 1651-1913 Web of Science Categories: Agronomy; Soil Science Research Areas: Agriculture IDS Number: AL5IV Unique ID: WOS:000339168100001 Cited References: Park Jin Hee, 2011, JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, V185, P549 Rossato L., 2011, JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, V190, P772 Chakraborty Somsubhra, 2010, JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, V39, P1378 Kramer U, 2001, APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY AND BIOTECHNOLOGY, V55, P661 Rathod Paresh H., 2013, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHYTOREMEDIATION, V15, P405 Alexander M, 2000, ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, V34, P4259 Myers RT, 2001, SOIL SCIENCE SOCIETY OF AMERICA JOURNAL, V65, P359 Wilson M. A., 2008, ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT, V139, P151 Ehlers GAC, 2006, ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION, V141, P494 Peters RW, 1999, JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, V66, P151 Kabra K, 2004, INDUSTRIAL & ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY RESEARCH, V43, P7683 PRITCHAR.A, 1969, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V25, P348 Clemens S, 2002, TRENDS IN PLANT SCIENCE, V7, P309 Borgatti SP, 2002, Netdraw network visualization, Meharg AA, 2003, MYCOLOGICAL RESEARCH, V107, P1253 Lourenco Roberto Wagner, 2010, ENVIRONMENTAL EARTH SCIENCES, V60, P495 Chen CM, 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, P5303 McLaughlin MJ, 1999, FIELD CROPS RESEARCH, V60, P143 Jansson G, 2000, ACTA AGRICULTURAE SCANDINAVICA SECTION B-SOIL AND PLANT SCIENCE, V50, P49 Kavamura Vanessa Nessner, 2010, BIOTECHNOLOGY ADVANCES, V28, P61 Stenberg B, 1999, ACTA AGRICULTURAE SCANDINAVICA SECTION B-SOIL AND PLANT SCIENCE, V49, P1 Chiu Wen-Ta, 2007, SCIENTOMETRICS, V73, P3 Christelle P, 2006, J Soils Sediments., V6, P215 World Development Indicators Online, 2012, State Council of P. R. China, 2013, Plan of Soil Environmental Protection and Integrated Pollution Control No. 7, Udiwal K. H., 2010, International Journal of Chemical Environmental and Pharmaceutical Research, V1, P17 Aleksander-Kwaterczak Urszula, 2012, ENVIRONMENTAL EARTH SCIENCES, V65, P1179 Zakharova T, 2002, REGULATORY TOXICOLOGY AND PHARMACOLOGY, V36, P22 Einax JW, 1999, CHEMOMETRICS AND INTELLIGENT LABORATORY SYSTEMS, V46, P79 Wei BG, 2009, Microchem J, V94, P99 Albering HJ, 1999, ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PERSPECTIVES, V107, P27 Rascio Nicoletta, 2011, PLANT SCIENCE, V180, P169 Kirchmann H, 2000, EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF AGRONOMY, V12, P145 Smolders E, 1999, SOIL SCIENCE SOCIETY OF AMERICA JOURNAL, V63, P78 Mulligan CN, 2004, ENVIRONMENT INTERNATIONAL, V30, P587 Sun Bo, 2012, AMBIO, V41, P370 Hemen Sarma, 2011, Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, V4, P118 Papp Z, 2002, JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY, V59, P191 Jia Y., 2006, SOIL BIOLOGY & BIOCHEMISTRY, V38, P2543 N AL, 2005, J Environ Qual., V34, P496 Horrigan L, 2002, ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PERSPECTIVES, V110, P445 Ministry of Environmental Protection of P. R. China, 2006, Special Program of National Soil Survey and Pollution Control, Kandeler E, 2000, BIOLOGY AND FERTILITY OF SOILS, V32, P390 McGrath SP, 2003, CURRENT OPINION IN BIOTECHNOLOGY, V14, P277 Wilcke W, 2000, JOURNAL OF PLANT NUTRITION AND SOIL SCIENCE-ZEITSCHRIFT FUR PFLANZENERNAHRUNG UND BODENKUNDE, V163, P229 Stenberg Bo, 2010, ADVANCES IN AGRONOMY, VOL 107, V107, P163 Wang Suiling, 2006, JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, V138, P459 Almeida-Filho N, 2003, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, V93, P2037 Liu Xingjian, 2011, BIODIVERSITY AND CONSERVATION, V20, P807 Mermut AR, 2001, GEODERMA, V100, P403 Turkdogan MK, 2003, ENVIRONMENTAL TOXICOLOGY AND PHARMACOLOGY, V13, P175 Muller AK, 2002, MICROBIAL ECOLOGY, V44, P49 Shi Xiaonan, 2011, SOIL SCIENCE SOCIETY OF AMERICA JOURNAL, V75, P1214 Khan Sardar, 2010, ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH, V17, P288 Rodrigues S. M., 2012, ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTRY LETTERS, V10, P61 Groenenberg J. E., 2010, EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SOIL SCIENCE, V61, P58 Sun B, 2001, ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION, V113, P111 Liu Xingjian, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P747 Desaules Andre, 2010, JOURNAL OF PLANT NUTRITION AND SOIL SCIENCE, V173, P525 Zhuang Yanhua, 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V96, P203 Kramer U, 2005, CURRENT OPINION IN BIOTECHNOLOGY, V16, P133 Cui YJ, 2005, ENVIRONMENT INTERNATIONAL, V31, P784 Chen HM, 2000, CHEMOSPHEREConference on Environmental Contamination, Toxicology and Health, SEP 23-25, 1998, HONG KONG, PEOPLES R CHINA, V41, P229 Scanferla Petra, 2009, JOURNAL OF SOILS AND SEDIMENTS, V9, P229 Wu Gang, 2010, JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, V174, P1 Wang Haijun, 2012, LANDSCAPE AND URBAN PLANNING, V104, P299 Hanikenne Marc, 2011, CURRENT OPINION IN PLANT BIOLOGY, V14, P252 China SEPA, 2006, The notice about investigation of persistent organic pollutants (POPs) throughout China, Rao C. R. M., 2008, WATER AIR AND SOIL POLLUTION, V189, P291 Li XD, 2001, APPLIED GEOCHEMISTRY, V16, P1693 Karen E, 2009, Plant Sci., V176, P20 Patra M, 2000, BOTANICAL REVIEW, V66, P379 Fischer G, 2009, Agric Ecosyst Environ, V136, P116 Proctor DM, 2002, JOURNAL OF TOXICOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH-PART A, V65, P701 Ho YS, 2007, J Environ Prot Sci., V1, P1 White PA, 2004, MUTATION RESEARCH-REVIEWS IN MUTATION RESEARCH, V567, P227 Kooistra L, 2003, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF REMOTE SENSING, V24, P4995 Bastida F., 2008, GEODERMA, V147, P159 Girvan MS, 2005, ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY, V7, P301 Liu JG, 2005, NATURE, V435, P1179 Boyd Robert S., 2009, INSECT SCIENCE, V16, P19 Xia Xinghui, 2011, JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, V186, P2043 Alkorta I, 2001, BIORESOURCE TECHNOLOGY, V79, P273 Semple KT, 2001, ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION, V112, P269 Cheraghi Mehrdad, 2012, BIOLOGICAL TRACE ELEMENT RESEARCH, V145, P87 Zhao Qi-Guo, 2011, PEDOSPHERE, V21, P1 Alessandra COC, 2012, J Environ Manage., V113, P510 Glanzel W, 2000, SCIENTOMETRICS4th Nordic Workshop in Bibliometrics, AUG 27-28, 1999, COPENHAGEN, DENMARK, V48, P121 Lasat MM, 2002, JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, V31, P109 Li PJ, 2006, COMMUNICATIONS IN SOIL SCIENCE AND PLANT ANALYSIS, V37, P1031 Schwitzguebel J. -P., 2009, AGROCHIMICA, V53, P209 Liu Yaolin, 2013, SCIENCE, V339, P1382 Khan S., 2008, ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION, V152, P686 Liu Weitao, 2010, JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, V173, P737 Zeng Chen, 2014, CHINESE GEOGRAPHICAL SCIENCE, V24, P245 O'Reilly SE, 2001, SOIL SCIENCE SOCIETY OF AMERICA JOURNAL, V65, P67 Duruibe J. O., 2007, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL SCIENCES, V2, P112 Diels L, 1999, MOLECULAR BIOTECHNOLOGY, V12, P149 Margesin R, 2000, CHEMOSPHERE, V40, P339 Lee CS, 2006, SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT, V356, P45 Pruvot Christelle, 2006, JOURNAL OF SOILS AND SEDIMENTS, V6, P215 Facchinelli A, 2001, ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION, V114, P313 Shivaramaiah HM, 2002, JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL AND FOOD CHEMISTRY, V50, P5360 Cai Quan-Ying, 2008, SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT, V389, P209 Maderova L., 2011, SOIL BIOLOGY & BIOCHEMISTRY, V43, P1162 Soares Claudio R. F. S., 2008, BIOLOGY AND FERTILITY OF SOILS, V44, P833 Frey Beat, 2006, SOIL BIOLOGY & BIOCHEMISTRY, V38, P1745 Ruiz ON, 2003, PLANT PHYSIOLOGY, V132, P1344 Song Yinxian, 2012, APPLIED CLAY SCIENCE, V64, P75 Vamerali Teofilo, 2010, ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTRY LETTERS, V8, P1 Zhang Liang, 2010, ECOLOGICAL ENGINEERING, V36, P973 Watanabe T, 2001, JOURNAL OF HEALTH SCIENCE, V47, P433 Chen SR, 2005, REVUE FRANCAISE D ALLERGOLOGIE ET D IMMUNOLOGIE CLINIQUE, V45, P442 Hu Jing, 2012, ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, V46, P4607 Evangelou Michael W. H., 2007, CHEMOSPHERE, V68, P989 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339270100006 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Characteristics of the most frequently cited English-language journal publications 1981-2010 of psychology from the German-speaking countries Authors: Krampen, G; Schui, G; Ferring, D; Bauer, HPW Author Full Names: Krampen, Guenter; Schui, Gabriel; Ferring, Dieter; Bauer, Hans P. W. Source: PSYCHOLOGISCHE RUNDSCHAU, 65 (3):159-168; 10.1026/0033-3042/a000196 2014 Language: German Document Type: Article Author Keywords: scientometry, citation analysis, evaluation, psychology, German, Austria, Switzerland KeyWords Plus: SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTIVITY; UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENTS; SCIENCE; CITATIONS Abstract: The results of publication-based citation analyses for 28,383 English-language journal psychology publications from the German-speaking countries published between 1981 and 2010 are presented. Data for analyses stem from the Web of Science database, which covers nearly 90 % of such publications. The distribution of the frequency of citations by other authors is strongly skewed and shows that 20 % of the articles are never cited, 60 % are cited 1-22 times, and 20 % are cited more than 22 times. Age of publication and frequency of citations have significant, albeit numerically low, rank order correlations (Kendall's tau=.23). Therefore, the criteria of the number of citations by others per year since publication of the article is used to identify the 107 most frequently cited papers (TOP 107). The characteristics of these papers are described with reference to authorships and their internationality, the disciplines of psychology to which they belong, and to the study type (e. g., empirical vs. nonempirical). The limitations and possibilities of citation analyses are discussed with a preference for a rational integration of citation analyses into empirically supported peer review procedures. Addresses: [Krampen, Guenter; Schui, Gabriel; Bauer, Hans P. W.] Univ Trier, Fachbereich Psychol 1, D-54286 Trier, Germany. [Ferring, Dieter] Univ Luxembourg, FLHASE Res Unit INSIDE, Dept psychol, L-7201 Walferdange, Luxembourg. E-mail Addresses: krampen at uni-trier.de Cited Reference Count: 35 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: HOGREFE & HUBER PUBLISHERS, ROHNSWEG 25, D-37085 GOTTINGEN, GERMANY ISSN: 0033-3042 eISSN: 2190-6238 Web of Science Categories: Psychology, Multidisciplinary Research Areas: Psychology IDS Number: AL6VC Unique ID: WOS:000339270100006 Cited References: Abramo Giovanni, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V87, P499 Krampen Guenter, 2007, SCIENTOMETRICS, V71, P191 BASLER HD, 1995, PSYCHOLOGISCHE RUNDSCHAU, V46, P36 Smith Derek R., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P419 Mutz Ruediger, 2012, PLOS ONE, V7, Schui G., 2014, Psychologische Rundschau, V64, P24 Bilsky W., 1998, Psychologische Rundschau, V49, P225 Aguillo Isidro F., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS13th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, JUL 04-07, 2011, Durban, SOUTH AFRICA, V91, P343 Moed H. F., 2005, Citation analysis in research evaluation, Wainer Jacques, 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V96, P395 Larsen Peder Olesen, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V84, P575 Egloff B, 2006, PSYCHOLOGISCHE RUNDSCHAU, V57, P116 Markowitsch HJ, 1999, PSYCHOLOGISCHE RUNDSCHAU, V50, P168 Krampen Guenter, 2013, ZEITSCHRIFT FUR EVALUATION, V12, P79 ENDLER NS, 1978, AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGIST, V33, P1064 Johnston David W., 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V95, P1023 Gigerenter G, 1999, PSYCHOLOGISCHE RUNDSCHAU, V50, P101 2007, Thesaurus of Psychological Index Terms, Krampen Guenter, 2008, SCIENTOMETRICS, V76, P3 SEGLEN PO, 1992, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V43, P628 Montada L., 1998, Psychologische Rundschau, V49, P228 Honekopp J., 2011, Scientometrics, V90, P843 Westmeyer H., 1998, Psychologische Rundschau, V49, P227 Albarran Pedro, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V85, P329 Krampen G., 2005, Internationalitat und Internationalisierung der deutschsprachigen Psychologie, Marx W., 2012, Beitrage zur Hochschulforschung, V34, P50 Mattern F., 2013, Vortrag auf dem Jubilaums-Kolloquium, 20 Jahre dblp, 04.07, 2013, BAUMERT J, 1990, ZEITSCHRIFT FUR PADAGOGIK, V36, P73 Mingers John, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V85, P613 Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Psychologie (DGPs), 1998, Psychologische Rundschau, V49, P105 Kliegl Reinhold, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V87, P149 Frese M, 1990, Zeitschrift fur Arbeits- und Organisationspsychologie, V34, P155 Bornmann Luti, 2008, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V64, P45 Krampen G., 2013, Proceedings of the 14th International Society of Scientometrics and Informetrics Conference (ISSI2013), 15th-18th July, 2013, Montada L, 1999, PSYCHOLOGISCHE RUNDSCHAU, V50, P69 ======================================================================== ======================================================================== -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amsciforum at GMAIL.COM Thu Aug 21 15:18:31 2014 From: amsciforum at GMAIL.COM (Stevan Harnad) Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 15:18:31 -0400 Subject: Crowd-Sourced Peer Review: Substitute or Supplement? Message-ID: Harnad, S. (2014) *Crowd-Sourced Peer Review: Substitute or supplement for the current outdated system? **LSE Impact Blog* 8/21 EXCERPT: If, as rumoured , google builds a platform for depositing unrefereed research papers for ?peer-reviewing? viacrowd-sourcing , can this create a *substitute * for classical peer-review or will it merely *supplement * classical peer review with crowd-sourcing? ... no one knows whether crowd-sourced peer-review, even if it could work, would be scaleable or sustainable. The key questions are hence: *1. Would all (most? many?) authors be willing to post their unrefereed papers publicly (and in place of submitting them to journals!)?2. Would all (most? many?) of the posted papers attract referees? competent experts?3. Who/what decides whether the refereeing is competent, and whether the author has adequately complied? (Relying on a Wikipedia-style cadre of 2nd-order crowd-sourcers who gain authority recursively in proportion to how much 1st-order crowd-sourcing they have done ? rather than on the basis of expertise ? sounds like a way to generate Wikipedia quality, but not peer-reviewed quality?)4. If any of this actually happens on any scale, will it be sustainable?5. Would this make the landscape (unrefereed preprints, referee comments, revised postprints) as navigable and useful as classical peer review, or not?* My own prediction (based on nearly a quarter century of umpiring both classical peer review and open peer commentary) is that crowdsourcing will provide an excellent supplement to classical peer review but not a substitute for it. Radical implementations will simply end up re-inventing classical peer review, but on a much faster and more efficient PostGutenberg platform. We will not realize this, however, until all of the peer-reviewed literature has first been made open access. And for that it is not sufficient for Google merely to provide a platform for authors to put their unrefereed papers, because most authors don?t even put their refereed papers in their institutional repositories until it is mandated by their institutions and funders. http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/1121-Crowd-Sourced-Peer-Review-Substitute-or-Supplement.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From harnad at ECS.SOTON.AC.UK Fri Aug 22 12:02:18 2014 From: harnad at ECS.SOTON.AC.UK (Stevan Harnad) Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 12:02:18 -0400 Subject: Crowd-Sourced Peer Review: Substitute or Supplement? In-Reply-To: <77a302704217486db221790239d06df1@AMXPR03MB023.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com> Message-ID: > Only Scientific Members who are affiliated with an accredited university and have at least > 5 publications assigned to their ORCID account may officially review an article at ScienceOpen. So being affiliated with an accredited university and having at least 5 publications makes anyone a specialist qualified to review anyone's research? The criterion for peership might have to be a trifle more exacting than that even before we raise once again the niggling question of answerability... Harnad, S. (1990) Scholarly Skywriting and the Prepublication Continuum of Scientific Inquiry Psychological Science 1: 342 - 343 (reprinted in Current Contents 45: 9-13, November 11 1991). http://cogprints.org/1581/ Stevan Harnad On Aug 22, 2014, at 4:41 AM, Jennifer Smith wrote: > Hi All > > As list members probably know, Frontiers In ? have a slightly different method of reviewing than traditional peer review model. > > I noticed recently another alternative model for reviewing, at ScienceOpen (based on having an academic ID, in this case, ORCiD): > > ?Comments and Reviews require registration via ORCID > > Everybody can read, download and share your article. Commenting, rating and reviewing, > however, requires previous registration via ORCID. Only Scientific Members who are > affiliated with an accredited university and have at least 5 publications assigned to their > ORCID account may officially review an article at ScienceOpen. Commenting requires > at least 1 publication. Please refer to our User Categories for a detailed description. In > any case, please consult our Peer Review Guidelines and Guidelines for Commenting > before writing a review or commenting on papers.? > > http://about.scienceopen.com/how-does-it-work/#more-9 > > Interesting times to see what develops and is taken up. > > Kind regards, > > Jennifer > > Jennifer Smith > Research Publications Librarian > Library > Information Services > St George's University of London > E: jesmith at sgul.ac.uk > T: +44 (0)20 8725 5393 > > From: Repositories discussion list [mailto:JISC-REPOSITORIES at JISCMAIL.AC.UK] On Behalf Of Stevan Harnad > Sent: 21 August 2014 20:19 > To: JISC-REPOSITORIES at JISCMAIL.AC.UK > Subject: Crowd-Sourced Peer Review: Substitute or Supplement? > > Harnad, S. (2014) Crowd-Sourced Peer Review: Substitute or supplement for the current outdated system? LSE Impact Blog 8/21 > > EXCERPT: > > If, as rumoured, google builds a platform for depositing unrefereed research papers for ?peer-reviewing? viacrowd-sourcing, can this create a substitute for classical peer-review or will it merely supplement classical peer review with crowd-sourcing? > > ... no one knows whether crowd-sourced peer-review, even if it could work, would be scaleable or sustainable. > > The key questions are hence: > 1. Would all (most? many?) authors be willing to post their unrefereed papers publicly (and in place of submitting them to journals!)? > > 2. Would all (most? many?) of the posted papers attract referees? competent experts? > > 3. Who/what decides whether the refereeing is competent, and whether the author has adequately complied? (Relying on a Wikipedia-style cadre of 2nd-order crowd-sourcers who gain authority recursively in proportion to how much 1st-order crowd-sourcing they have done ? rather than on the basis of expertise ? sounds like a way to generate Wikipedia quality, but not peer-reviewed quality?) > > > 4. If any of this actually happens on any scale, will it be sustainable? > > 5. Would this make the landscape (unrefereed preprints, referee comments, revised postprints) as navigable and useful as classical peer review, or not? > My own prediction (based on nearly a quarter century of umpiring both classical peer review and open peer commentary) is that crowdsourcing will provide an excellent supplement to classical peer review but not a substitute for it. Radical implementations will simply end up re-inventing classical peer review, but on a much faster and more efficient PostGutenberg platform. We will not realize this, however, until all of the peer-reviewed literature has first been made open access. And for that it is not sufficient for Google merely to provide a platform for authors to put their unrefereed papers, because most authors don?t even put their refereed papers in their institutional repositories until it is mandated by their institutions and funders. > > http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/1121-Crowd-Sourced-Peer-Review-Substitute-or-Supplement.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kboyack at MAPOFSCIENCE.COM Fri Aug 22 11:59:28 2014 From: kboyack at MAPOFSCIENCE.COM (Kevin Boyack) Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 09:59:28 -0600 Subject: continuous publication and what it takes to publish Message-ID: Dear Colleagues, Some of you may be aware of a recent PLOS One paper (http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0101698) that Dick Klavans and I published with John Ioannidis. In this work we explore continuous publication and show that those who publish continuously (each and every year) have much higher impact than those who don't. This result comes as no great surprise to most of us; it simply adds some quantitative proof to what we have long assumed. I've been reading some of the comments that have been made about this work, some positive, some negative. The purpose of this email is not to clarify or refute any particular point, but is rather to mention what I consider to be the most useful commentary I've seen. Bill Gardner gives a perspective on what it takes to publish a paper (http://theincidentaleconomist.com/wordpress/writing-for-science-and-the-one -percent/). He cites a previous post by Brian McGill (http://dynamicecology.wordpress.com/2014/01/23/william-shockley-on-what-mak es-a-person-write-a-lot-of-papers-and-the-superstar-researcher-system/), who in turn reflects on a paper written in 1957 (http://www.gwern.net/docs/1957-shockley.pdf) by William Shockley, a Nobel Prize winner in Physics. Shockley, among other things, provided a strawman list of factors (or what we might call tasks) involved in publishing a paper. This list may or may not be correct and/or complete, but that isn't the point. The point is that getting a paper published requires a lot of steps, and that there are really no shortcuts. As I think back to my education in engineering, I remember being taught the general process in a cursory way, but I really didn't learn what it takes to publish until I started to do it. I imagine many of you will have had a similar experience. Now for the question: Can this learning process by accelerated for the next generation of researchers? Is it worth our time to make students aware of the process in more than a cursory way? I don't have the answers to these questions, but I think they are worth asking, and recommend that reflection on this topic is worth our time. Cheers! Kevin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Fri Aug 22 16:32:02 2014 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 20:32:02 +0000 Subject: papers of interest to readers of the SIG-Metrics List (PART 1) Message-ID: *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339379600002 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Landmark papers written by the Nobelists in physics from 1901 *to* 2012: a bibliometric analysis of their citations and journals Authors: Zhou, ZW; Xing, R; Liu, J; Xing, FY Author Full Names: Zhou, Zhiwei; Xing, Rui; Liu, Jing; Xing, Feiyue Source: SCIENTOMETRICS, 100 (2):329-338; 10.1007/s11192-014-1306-7 AUG 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Nobel prize, Citation, Distribution, Characteristics, Bibliometric, Analysis KeyWords Plus: IMPACT FACTOR; PERFORMANCE Abstract: We collected 382 landmark papers written by 193 Nobel Laureates in physics from 1901 to 2012 and used bibliometric methods, citation frequencies, *impact factor* (IF), and tendency of the landmark journals to analyze their contents. The results show: (1) Of landmark papers published during 1980-2009, 74.7 % were cited more than 500 times. Average citation frequencies and proportion of highly cited papers were higher for theoretic discoveries than for experimental methods. However, the proportion of highly cited papers in both domains was lower than for an invention. The average test period for the latter was markedly shorter too. (2) Landmark papers by Nobelists were mainly published in journals with IF from 5.0 to 10.0, but journals below IF 5.0 ranked first among all landmark journals. (3) As to countries where landmark papers were published, the Netherlands ranked at the top of the countries with the most landmark journals, besides the United States and England. In addition, the majority of landmark papers written by non-mainstream countries' Nobelists were published in foreign journals with IF < 7.0. These data indicate some regularity and tendency of landmark papers written by Nobelists in physics. Addresses: [Zhou, Zhiwei; Xing, Feiyue] Jinan Univ, Inst Tissue Transplantat & Immunol, Dept Immunobiol, Guangzhou 510632, Guangdong, Peoples R China. [Zhou, Zhiwei; Xing, Feiyue] Jinan Univ, Guangdong Higher Educ Inst, Key Lab Funct Prot Res, Guangzhou 510632, Guangdong, Peoples R China. [Xing, Rui] Lanzhou Univ, Sch Life Sci, Life Sci & Technol Base Basic Sci Grade 2011, Lanzhou 730000, Peoples R China. [Liu, Jing] Jinan Univ, Sch Med, Dept Stomatol, Guangzhou 510632, Guangdong, Peoples R China. E-mail Addresses: tjliu at jnu.edu.cn; tfyxing at jnu.edu.cn Funding Acknowledgement: National Natural Science Foundation of China [81172824, 30971465, 30471635]; ''211'' project Funding Text: This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 81172824, 30971465, 30471635) and ''211'' project grant. Cited Reference Count: 23 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0138-9130 eISSN: 1588-2861 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications; Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Computer Science; Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: AL8HS Unique ID: WOS:000339379600002 ******************* See Also : http://www.garfield.library.upenn.edu/papers/onrpaper.html Garfield E. and Sher IH. "New tools for improving and evaluating the effectiveness of research" M.C. Yovits, D.M. Gilford, R.H. Wilcox, E. Staveley and H.D. Lemer, Eds., Research Program Effectiveness, Proceedings of the Conference Sponsored by the Office of Naval Research Washington, D.C., July 27-29, 1965 (New York: Gordon and Breach, 1966) p.135-146. [X] "Nobel Prize winners had a significantly higher number of their papers cited, in part reflecting their high rate of publication. However, there was also a higher number of references to each cited work, as compared with the average. The combination of both terms, that is number of items cited and number of reference citations, gives the number of citations per cited author. This term, the impact factor, reveals the greatest difference between groups. There are 30 times as many citations per average prize winner as there are per average cited author in the entire file. Not only is this average for the prize winners higher, but all but one of the 13 individual prize winners had a value at least several fold greater than that of the average author. The proportion of self-citations was not unusual for the prize winners. The occurrence of 20 or more citations to individual papers was higher for the prize winners as a group but did not occur in enough instances to make this a reliable statistic." ********************** Cited References: Ma Caifeng, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V93, P1151 Guo Y. L., 2002, Nobel Prize in Physics (a centenary volume), Bagatin Edileia, 2011, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY, V50, P1432 Braun I. T., 2007, Scientometrics, V71, P541 Agrawal AA, 2005, TRENDS IN ECOLOGY & EVOLUTION, V20, P157 Lehmann Sune, 2006, NATURE, V444, P1003 Duan Z. G., 2010, Studies in Philosophy of Science and Technology, V27, P86 Gingras Yves, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V82, P401 Raman CV, 1928, NATURE, V121, P501 Raman C.V., 1928, Indian Journal of Physics, V2, Kumar V, 2009, SINGAPORE MEDICAL JOURNAL, V50, P752 Oliveira Eduardo Araujo, 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V97, P149 Rodriguez-Navarro Alonso, 2011, PLOS ONE, V6, Rodriguez-Navarro Alonso, 2011, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V67, P582 Bornmann Luti, 2008, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V64, P45 Balaban Alexandru T., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P241 Liang L. M., 2006, Scientometrics: Theoretical exploration with case study, GARFIELD E, 1972, SCIENCE, V178, P471 Vanclay Jerome K., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P211 Simons Kai, 2008, SCIENCE, V322, P165 Bordons M, 2002, SCIENTOMETRICS8th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, JUL 17, 2001, SYDNEY, AUSTRALIA, V53, P195 van Leeuwen Thed, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P443 Grzybowski Andrzej, 2010, CLINICS IN DERMATOLOGY, V28, P455 ======================================================= *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339603400015 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Highly Cited Works in Radiology: The Top 100 Cited Articles in Radiologic Journals Authors: Pagni, M; Khan, NR; Cohen, HL; Choudhri, AF Author Full Names: Pagni, Matthew; Khan, Nickalus R.; Cohen, Harris L.; Choudhri, Asim F. Source: ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 21 (8):1056-1066; 10.1016/j.acra.2014.03.011 AUG 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Bibliometrics, citation, citation analysis, impact factor, radiology, scientometrics, Scopus, Web of Science KeyWords Plus: CITATION-CLASSICS; SURGERY JOURNALS; OPHTHALMOLOGY JOURNALS; PEDIATRIC NEUROSURGERY; ORTHOPEDIC-SURGERY; GOOGLE SCHOLAR; ARTICLES; AJR; PUBLICATIONS; UROLOGY Abstract: Rationale and Objectives: The number of citations a publication receives can be used to show its impact on a field of study. It may indicate the-educational interest in a given population or underline a perceived or real educational-gap. This article identifies and characterizes the 100 top cited publications in radiologic journals as of May 2013. Materials-and Methods: All clinical radiologic journals listed by Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Reports in 2011 were identified. A total of 46 journals were identified, and all articles published within these journals were analyzed for citation counts. The top 100 highly cited articles were recorded. Results: The most frequently cited radiologic articles appeared in 9 of the 46 journals. These included 59 articles in Radiology, 17 in Journal of Nuclear Medicine, 9 in the American Journal of Roentgenology, 5 in the British Journal of Radiology, 4 in Investigative Radiology, 2 in American Journal of Neuroradiology, 2 in European Radiology, 2 in Radiologic Clinics of North America, 1 in the Seminars in Nuclear Medicine, and 1 in Pediatric Radiology. The citation values ranged from 422 to 7506 with a mean of 751. Publication dates ranged from 1967 to 2006 with the 5-year period between 1986 and 1990 accounting for the: largest percentage of articles. The most frequently studied radiologic modality was magnetic resonance imaging (MRI; 28 articles), followed by vascular/interventional (19 articles) and nuclear medicine (13 articles). The central nervous system-was the most frequently studied organ system (22 articles), followed by Mixed organ systems (14 articles) and liver (12 articles). Conclusions: the top Cited articles in radiologic journals span a wide range of imaging modalities, subspecialties, and organ systems. Topics that occurred frequently in the top 100 cited articles included contrast and radiopharmaceutical characterization, MRI of motion, percutaneous radiofrequency ablation in the liver and percutaneous vertebroplasty. We present a methodology that uses citation analysis to identify and characterize these articles. Its use may aid radiologists, academic organization, and editorial staff in determining areas-of imaging interest or perceived educational gap. It also highlights the importance of including classic articles in current imaging education. Addresses: [Pagni, Matthew; Khan, Nickalus R.] Univ Tennessee, Ctr Hlth Sci, Coll Med, Memphis, TN 38163 USA. [Khan, Nickalus R.; Choudhri, Asim F.] Univ Tennessee, Ctr Hlth Sci, Dept Neurosurg, Memphis, TN 38163 USA. [Cohen, Harris L.; Choudhri, Asim F.] Univ Tennessee, Hlth Sci Ctr, Le Bonheur Childrens Hosp, Dept Radiol, Memphis, TN 38103 USA. [Cohen, Harris L.] Univ Tennessee, Ctr Hlth Sci, Dept Pediat, Memphis, TN 38163 USA. [Cohen, Harris L.] Univ Tennessee, Ctr Hlth Sci, Dept Obstet, Memphis, TN 38163 USA. [Choudhri, Asim F.] Univ Tennessee, Ctr Hlth Sci, Dept Ophthalmol, Memphis, TN 38163 USA. E-mail Addresses: achoudhri at uthsc.edu Cited Reference Count: 31 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC, 360 PARK AVE SOUTH, NEW YORK, NY 10010-1710 USA ISSN: 1076-6332 eISSN: 1878-4046 Web of Science Categories: Radiology, Nuclear Medicine & Medical Imaging Research Areas: Radiology, Nuclear Medicine & Medical Imaging IDS Number: AM1JY Unique ID: WOS:000339603400015 Cited References: Heldwein Flavio Lobo, 2010, UROLOGY, V75, P1261 Lefaivre Kelly A., 2011, CLINICAL ORTHOPAEDICS AND RELATED RESEARCH, V469, P1487 MODIC MT, 1988, RADIOLOGY, V166, P193 Nason Gregory J, 2013, Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada, V7, PE16 JUDKINS MP, 1967, RADIOLOGY, V89, P815 Loonen Martijn P. J., 2008, PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, V121, P320E Bui-Mansfield LT, 2005, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, V185, P597 Wilcox M. Angela, 2013, CHILDS NERVOUS SYSTEM, V29, P2201 Ohba Norio, 2007, ARCHIVES OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, V125, P952 Bakkalbasi Nisa, 2006, Biomedical digital libraries, V3, P7 Zhang Wen-Jun, 2013, ANNALS OF PLASTIC SURGERY, V71, P103 Kulkarni Abhaya V., 2009, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V302, P1092 FAZEKAS F, 1987, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, V149, P351 Shin Dong Ah, 2009, NEUROSURGICAL FOCUS, V27, [Anonymous], Journal Citation Reports, Baldwin Keith D., 2012, JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC ORTHOPAEDICS-PART B, V21, P463 Tripathi Ravi S., 2011, BMC ANESTHESIOLOGY, V11, Fenton JE, 2002, JOURNAL OF LARYNGOLOGY AND OTOLOGY9th Meeting of the British-Society-of-History-of-ENT, SEP, 2001, BIRMINGHAM, ENGLAND, V116, P494 Yoon Dae Young, 2013, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, V201, P471 Gehanno Jean-Francois, 2007, SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF WORK ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH, V33, P245 Namdari Surena, 2012, JOURNAL OF SHOULDER AND ELBOW SURGERY, V21, P1796 Rosenberg Andrew L., 2010, JOURNAL OF CRITICAL CARE, V25, P157 Khan Nickalus R., 2013, CHILDS NERVOUS SYSTEM, V29, P2215 Ponce Francisco A., 2010, JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, V112, P233 Ohba Norio, 2010, ARCHIVES OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, V128, P1610 Ponce Francisco A., 2010, JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, V112, P223 Flohr TG, 2006, EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, V16, P256 Thomas K, 2003, EUROPEAN UROLOGY, V43, P591 Bui-Mansfield LT, 2006, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, V186, P3 Noruzi A, 2005, LIBRI, V55, P170 Lim Kyoung Ja, 2012, RADIOLOGY, V264, P796 =================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339379600004 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Benefit distribution mechanism in the team members' *scientific* *research* collaboration network Authors: Zhao, LM; Zhang, QP; Wang, L Author Full Names: Zhao, Limei; Zhang, Qingpu; Wang, Liang Source: SCIENTOMETRICS, 100 (2):363-389; 10.1007/s11192-014-1322-7 AUG 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Scientific research collaboration, Benefit distribution mechanism, Scientific research collaboration network, Scientific research team KeyWords Plus: ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS; IMPACT FACTOR; PATTERNS; SCIENCE; PRODUCTIVITY; ENVIRONMENT; AUTHORSHIP; CENTRALITY; CREDIT; CHINA Abstract: Scientific research collaboration networks are well-established research topics, which can be divided into two kinds of research paradigms: (1) The topological features of the whole scientific collaboration networks and the collaboration representations in some given fields. (2) The individual nodes' characteristics in the collaboration networks and their endorsements in the networks. However, in the above studies, all the nodes' roles in the scientific collaboration network are the same, all of whom are called collaborators, thus the relationships among all the nodes in the scientific collaboration network are symmetric, and the scientific collaboration network is undirected. Such symmetric roles and relationships in the undirected networks have no incentive effects on the members' participations and efforts in the team's scientific research. In this paper, the roles of team members in the scientific research collaborations are defined, including the scientific research pioneers and contributors, their collaboration relationships are considered from the viewpoint of principal-agent theory, and then the directed scientific collaboration network is built. Then the benefit distribution mechanism in the team members' networked scientific research collaborations is presented, which will encourage the team members with different roles to make their efforts in their scientific research collaborations and improve the quality of scientific research outputs. An example is used to test the above ideas and conclude that the individual member's real outputs not only lie in his/her real scientific research efforts, but also rest with his/her contributions to other members' scientific research. Addresses: [Zhao, Limei] Heilongjiang Univ, Res Ctr Informat Resources Management, Harbin 150080, Heilongjiang, Peoples R China. [Zhang, Qingpu; Wang, Liang] Harbin Inst Technol, Sch Management, HIT UMKC Inst Innovat & Entrepreneurship, Harbin 150001, Heilongjiang, Peoples R China. E-mail Addresses: hdzhaolimei at sina.com Funding Acknowledgement: National Social Science Foundation Grant of China [12CTQ029]; National Natural Science Foundation Grants of China [71273076, 71202159]; Humanities and Social Science Project of the Educational Ministry in China [13YJC630166] Funding Text: Research for this paper is partly supported by the National Social Science Foundation Grant of China (No. 12CTQ029), the National Natural Science Foundation Grants of China (Nos. 71273076 and 71202159), and the Humanities and Social Science Project of the Educational Ministry in China under Grant No. 13YJC630166. Cited Reference Count: 47 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0138-9130 eISSN: 1588-2861 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications; Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Computer Science; Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: AL8HS Unique ID: WOS:000339379600004 Cited References: Matthew O. J., 2002, Journal of Economic Theory, V106, P265 Wasserman S., 1994, Social network analysis: Methods and applications, P92 Bordons Maria, 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V96, P443 Ellis D, 1997, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V53, P384 Meho LI, 2003, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V54, P570 Deng Q. H., 2011, 2011 International Conference on Information Science and Technology (ICIST), March 26-28, P259 Leydesdorff Loet, 2008, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V2, P317 Sonnenwald Diane H., 2007, ANNUAL REVIEW OF INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V41, P643 Aziz N. A., 2013, PLoS ONE, V8, P1 Portes A, 2010, ECONOMIC SOCIOLOGY: A SYSTEMATIC INQUIRY, P1 Guraya S. Y, 2013, Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences, V8, P69 Koustas Z, 1999, JOURNAL OF MONETARY ECONOMICS, V44, P105 Alonso Jose Antonio, 2006, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UNCERTAINTY FUZZINESS AND KNOWLEDGE-BASED SYSTEMS2nd International Conference on Modeling Decisions for Artifical Intelligence, JUL, 2005, Tsukuba, JAPAN, V14, P445 Liang LM, 2002, SCIENTOMETRICS, V55, P287 Goldfinch S, 2003, SCIENTOMETRICS, V57, P321 RIESENBERG D, 1990, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V264, P1857 Harkins A, 2010, Team incentives in networks, Tijssen R. J. W., 2012, Research collaboration and the expanding science grid: Measuring globalisation processes worldwide., Zhang Chun-Ting, 2009, EMBO REPORTS, V10, P416 Osborne J. W., 2009, Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, V14, P1 Liu Xue-li, 2013, CURRENT SCIENCE, V105, P1480 Newman M., 2002, Physical Review Letters, V89, P20870 FINE MA, 1993, AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGIST, V48, P1141 Abbasi Alireza, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V89, P687 Ding Ying, 2011, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V5, P187 Persson O, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS9th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informatics, AUG, 2003, Beijing, PEOPLES R CHINA, V60, P421 Dagdeviren Metin, 2009, EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS, V36, P8143 Lake D, 2009, Political Science and Politics, V43, P43 Aminbakhsh Saman, 2013, JOURNAL OF SAFETY RESEARCH, V46, P99 Dance Amber, 2012, Nature, V489, P591 Ellis D, 2004, ANNUAL REVIEW OF INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V38, P145 Lee S, 2005, SOCIAL STUDIES OF SCIENCE, V35, P673 Katz JS, 1997, RESEARCH POLICY, V26, P1 Wager C. S., 2008, The new invisible college: Science for development, Bermeo Andrade Helga, 2009, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V18, P301 ROMER PM, 1986, JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY, V94, P1002 Tscharntke Teja, 2007, PLOS BIOLOGY, V5, P13 GRANOVETTER M, 1985, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY, V91, P481 Yan Xiangbin, 2013, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V7, P223 Hennemann Stefan, 2012, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V6, P217 He Wei, 2009, DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS11th Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems, JUL 03-06, 2007, Auckland, NEW ZEALAND, V46, P826 Abbasi Alireza, 2012, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V6, P403 Seglen PO, 1997, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V314, P498 Watts A, 2001, GAMES AND ECONOMIC BEHAVIOR, V34, P331 Newman MEJ, 2001, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V98, P404 Liu Chen, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V89, P89 Newman MEJ, 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, P5200 =================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339379600012 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Relative age of references as a tool *to* identify emerging *research* fields with *an* application *to* the field of ecology and environmental sciences Authors: Jaric, I; Knezevic-Jaric, J; Lenhardt, M Author Full Names: Jaric, Ivan; Knezevic-Jaric, Jelena; Lenhardt, Mirjana Source: SCIENTOMETRICS, 100 (2):519-529; 10.1007/s11192-014-1268-9 AUG 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Bibliometry, Literature, Reference list, Publication year, Citation, Impact factor KeyWords Plus: RESEARCH FRONTS; IMPACT FACTOR; H-INDEX; ARTICLES; NETWORKS; JOURNALS; TRACKING; TRENDS; TIME Abstract: Emerging scientific fields are commonly identified by different citation based bibliometric parameters. However, their main shortcoming is the existence of a time lag needed for a publication to receive citations. In the present study, we assessed the relationship between the age of references in scientific publications and the change in publication rate within a research field. Two indices based on the age of references are presented, the relative age of references and the ratio of references published during the preceding 2 years, and applied thereafter on four datasets from the previously published studies, which assessed eutrophication research, sturgeon research, fisheries research, and the general field of ecology. We observed a consistent pattern that the emerging research topics had a lower median age of references and a higher ratio of references published in the preceding 2 years than their respective general research fields. The main advantage of indices based on the age of references is that they are not influenced by a time lag, and as such they are able to provide insight into current scientific trends. The best potential of the presented indices is to use them combined with other approaches, as each one can reveal different aspects and properties of the assessed data, and provide validation of the obtained results. Their use should be however assessed further before they are employed as standard tools by scientists, science managers and policy makers. Addresses: [Jaric, Ivan; Knezevic-Jaric, Jelena] Univ Belgrade, Inst Multidisciplinary Res, Belgrade 11000, Serbia. [Lenhardt, Mirjana] Univ Belgrade, Inst Biol Res, Belgrade 11000, Serbia. E-mail Addresses: ijaric at imsi.rs Funding Acknowledgement: Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia [173045] Funding Text: The authors acknowledge the support by the Project No. 173045, funded by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia. The authors would like to thank two anonymous referees for providing helpful comments and suggestions that improved the quality of the paper. Cited Reference Count: 34 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0138-9130 eISSN: 1588-2861 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications; Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Computer Science; Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: AL8HS Unique ID: WOS:000339379600012 Cited References: Takeda Yoshiyuki, 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS, V78, P543 Egghe L, 1997, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V48, P564 Small Henry, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS10th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, JUL, 2005, Stockholm, SWEDEN, V68, P595 Romo-Fernandez Luz M., 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V97, P743 Egghe L., 2006, ISSI Newsletter, V2, P8 Qiu Hao, 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS, V81, P601 Hirsch J. E., 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V85, P741 PRICE DJD, 1965, SCIENCE, V149, P510 Braun Tibor, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P169 Lee Woo Hyoung, 2008, SCIENTOMETRICS, V76, P503 Natale Fabrizio, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V90, P983 Yi Huang, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V89, P919 Krell FT, 2002, NATURE, V415, P957 Chen CM, 2006, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V57, P359 Shibata Naoki, 2008, TECHNOVATION, V28, P758 Bador Pascal, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V84, P65 Glanzel W, 1999, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT5th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, JUN 07-10, 1995, RIVER FOREST, ILLINOIS, V35, P31 Costas Rodrigo, 2007, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V1, P193 Jaric Ivan, 2012, REVIEWS IN FISHERIES SCIENCE, V20, P70 Glanzel W., 1995, Proceedings of 5th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, June 7-10, River Forest, IL, P177 BRAAM RR, 1991, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V42, P233 Althouse Benjamin M., 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P27 Morris SA, 2003, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V54, P413 de Solla Price D. J., 1970, Communication among scientists and engineers, P3 McCain KW, 2005, SCIENTOMETRICS, V65, P131 PRICE DJD, 1965, TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE, V6, P553 Jaric I., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V90, P715 Neff Mark William, 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS, V80, P657 Bergstrom C., 2007, College & Research Libraries News, V68, P314 Small Henry, 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS, V79, P365 Bornmann Lutz, 2011, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V5, P346 Bornmann Luti, 2008, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V64, P45 Kajikawa Yuya, 2008, TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING AND SOCIAL CHANGE, V75, P771 Todeschini Roberto, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V87, P621 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339379600003 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: OR/MS journals evaluation based on a refined PageRank method: *an* updated and more comprehensive review Authors: Cheang, B; Chu, SKW; Li, CS; Lim, A Author Full Names: Cheang, Brenda; Chu, Samuel Kai Wah; Li, Chongshou; Lim, Andrew Source: SCIENTOMETRICS, 100 (2):339-361; 10.1007/s11192-014-1272-0 AUG 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Journals evaluation, Citations analysis, Journal influence, Journal impact, Impact factor, Influence index, OR/MS, PageRank KeyWords Plus: AUTHOR AFFILIATION INDEX; OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT; CITATION INDICATORS; IMPACT FACTOR; RANKING; PROFESSORS; QUALITY; METRICS; SYSTEM Abstract: The purpose of this research is to furnish the OR/MS research community with an updated assessment of the discipline's journals set with refinements that also highlight the various characteristics of OR/MS journals. More specifically, we apply a refined PageRank method initially proposed by Xu et al. (2011) to evaluate the top 31 OR/MS journals for 2010, and report our findings. We also report the shifts in the rankings that span 5 years, from 2006 to 2010. We observe that Manufacturing and Service Operations Management, indexed by the SCI only in 2008, is a specialized journal that is consistently highly regarded within the discipline. The rankings also suggest that Management Science is more established as a generalized journal as it has more external impact. In general, our ranking results correlate with expert opinions, and we also observe, report and discuss some interesting patterns that have emerged over the past 5 years from 2006 to 2010. Addresses: [Cheang, Brenda; Lim, Andrew] Nanjing Univ, Sch Management & Engn, Int Ctr Management Sci & Engn, Nanjing 210093, Jiangsu, Peoples R China. [Cheang, Brenda; Chu, Samuel Kai Wah] Univ Hong Kong, Fac Educ, Div Informat & Technol Studies, Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Peoples R China. [Li, Chongshou] City Univ Hong Kong, Coll Business, Dept Management Sci, Kowloon, Hong Kong, Peoples R China. E-mail Addresses: chongshli2-c at my.cityu.edu.hk Cited Reference Count: 39 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0138-9130 eISSN: 1588-2861 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications; Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Computer Science; Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: AL8HS Unique ID: WOS:000339379600003 Cited References: Gorman Michael F., 2007, M&SOM-MANUFACTURING & SERVICE OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT, V9, P51 Pendlebury David A., 2009, ARCHIVUM IMMUNOLOGIAE ET THERAPIAE EXPERIMENTALIS, V57, P1 Wen Q., 2008, Journal Impact Assessment: Methodology and Experiments, Rousseau R, 2002, LIBRARY TRENDS, V50, P418 Page L., 1999, Technical Report, Agrawal Vijay K., 2011, PRODUCTION AND OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT, V20, P280 Gonzalez-Pereira Borja, 2010, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V4, P379 Butler Declan, 2008, NATURE, V451, P6 DuBois FL, 2000, JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS STUDIES, V31, P689 Feng Youyi, 2011, OPERATIONS RESEARCH, V59, P1297 Bressan M., 2010, Journal of Discrete Algorithms, V8, Goh C. H., 1997, Journal of Operations Management, V15, P123 Vokurka R. J., 1996, Journal of Operations Management, V14, P345 Moed Henk F., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P367 Leydesdorff Loet, 2008, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V59, P278 Chen Carl R., 2007, JOURNAL OF CORPORATE FINANCE, V13, P1008 PINSKI G, 1976, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V12, P297 Gorman M. F., 2005, Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, V7, P3 Cheang B., 2014, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, West J., 2008, Eigenfactor TM Score and Article Influence TM Score: Detailed Methods, Smith Richard, 2006, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, V35, P1129 Harless D., 1998, Revision of the journal list for doctoral designation, Lim Andrew, 2009, COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM, V52, P111 Palacios-Huerta I, 2004, ECONOMETRICA, V72, P963 Brin S, 1998, COMPUTER NETWORKS AND ISDN SYSTEMS7th International World Wide Web Conference, APR 14-18, 1998, BRISBANE, AUSTRALIA, V30, P107 Saladin B., 1985, Operations Management Review, V3, P3 Gorraiz J., 2012, 17th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators (STI), P5 Barman S, 2001, JOURNAL OF OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT, V19, P367 Weingart P, 2005, SCIENTOMETRICSConference on Bibliometric Analysis in Science and Research, NOV 05-07, 2003, Julich, GERMANY, V62, P117 Guerrero-Bote Vicente P., 2012, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V6, P674 Lim A., 2007, Proceeding of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, V22, P1723 Seglen PO, 1997, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V314, P498 Robey D., 1998, Information Resources Management Journal, V11, Olson JE, 2005, INTERFACES, V35, P323 Goh CH, 1996, OMEGA-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, V24, P337 Harzing A., 2007, Publish or Perish, Glanzel W, 2002, SCIENTOMETRICS8th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, JUL 17, 2001, SYDNEY, AUSTRALIA, V53, P171 Barman S., 1991, Journal of Operations Management, V10, P194 Xu Zhou, 2011, INTERFACES, V41, P375 ======================================================================== *Record 6 of 10. Search terms matched: IMPACT FACTOR(2) *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339460600002 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: The development of emergency medicine in South Korea: academic productivity in highly cited journals Authors: Lee, J; Kang, HG; Lim, TH; Oh, J; Cho, Y; Cho, JH Author Full Names: Lee, J.; Kang, H. G.; Lim, T. H.; Oh, J.; Cho, Y.; Cho, J. H. Source: HONG KONG JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 21 (4):205-212; JUL 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Bibliometrics, evaluation studies as topic, Far East, journal impact factor, publication KeyWords Plus: NATIONAL REPRESENTATION; BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS Abstract: The purpose of this study was to examine the number of publications by South Korean emergency physicians in highly cited journals and the increase in their numbers. It also sought to assess the impact factors of such publications. Methods: The present study was a retrospective quantitative literature review of the publications by South Korean emergency physicians from 1996 to 2011 in the category of "emergency medicine" in the science edition of Journal Citation Reports 2011. We analysed the total number of articles published by South Korean emergency physicians and their impact factors. Results: Between 1996 and 2011, the number of South Korean board-certified emergency physicians increased from 51 to 958, and 230 articles were published in 14 highly cited journals. The total *impact factor* (IF) of the original articles published during that period was 227.86, and the mean IF was 1.93. More than 10 articles had been published annually in the past 5 years in highly cited journals and there were over 400 South Korean board-certified emergency physicians. Conclusions: Emergency medicine in South Korea started about 20 years ago, but academic productivity, indicated by at least ten articles annually in highly cited journals, was only achieved in the last five years. The mean IF of these articles was similar to that in other highly productive countries. Addresses: [Lee, J.; Kang, H. G.; Lim, T. H.; Oh, J.] Hanyang Univ, Dept Emergency Med, Coll Med, Seoul 133791, South Korea. [Cho, Y.] Kandong Sacred Heart Hosp, Dept Emergency Med, Coll Med, Seoul, South Korea. [Cho, J. H.] Kangwon Natl Univ, Inst Med Sci, Sch Med, Dept Emergency Med, Kangwon Do, South Korea. E-mail Addresses: emer0905 at gmail.com Cited Reference Count: 12 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: MEDCOM LTD, ROOM 504-5, CHEUNG TAT CENTRE, 18 CHEUNG LEE ST, CHAI WAN, HONG KONG 00000, PEOPLES R CHINA ISSN: 1024-9079 Web of Science Categories: Emergency Medicine Research Areas: Emergency Medicine IDS Number: AL9KS Unique ID: WOS:000339460600002 Cited References: VILLAR J, 1988, MEDICINA CLINICA, V91, P23 Hwang Sung Oh, 2007, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, V25, P846 Singer AJ, 1997, ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINEAnnual Meeting of the Society-for-Academic-Emergency-Medicine, MAY 21, 1997, WASHINGTON, DC, V4, P1153 Jung GY, 1997, J Korean Soc Emerg Med, V8, P441 Wang Soon Joo, 2003, Prehospital and disaster medicine, V18, P140 Li Qiang, 2012, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, V30, P1530 [Anonymous], 2012, ISI Journal Citation Reports, United Nations Development Program, 2011, UNDP Human Development Reports, Bould M. D., 2010, ANAESTHESIA, V65, P799 Bounes Vincent, 2013, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, V31, P297 Shin Dongwon, 2010, KOREAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL HISTORY, V19, P1 Ginde Adit A., 2009, ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, V54, P349 =================================================================== =================================================================== -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Fri Aug 22 17:14:09 2014 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 21:14:09 +0000 Subject: Papers of possible interest for SIG-Metrics Message-ID: *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339431300005 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: The transition of a large-scale quality improvement initiative: a bibliometric analysis of the Productive Ward: Releasing Time to Care Programme Authors: White, M; Wells, JSG; Butterworth, T Author Full Names: White, Mark; Wells, John S. G.; Butterworth, Tony Source: JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING, 23 (17-18):2414-2423; 10.1111/jocn.12585 SEP 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: health service research, implementation, lean healthcare, multidisciplinary care team, Productive Ward, quality improvement, Releasing Time to Care KeyWords Plus: HEALTH-CARE; IMPLEMENTATION Abstract: Aims and objectives. To examine the literature related to a large-scale quality improvement initiative, the 'Productive Ward: Releasing Time to Care', providing a bibliometric profile that tracks the level of interest and scale of roll-out and adoption, discussing the implications for sustainability. Background. Productive Ward: Releasing Time to Care (aka Productive Ward) is probably one of the most ambitious quality improvement efforts engaged by the UK-NHS. Politically and financially supported, its main driver was the NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement. The NHS institute closed in early 2013 leaving a void of resources, knowledge and expertise. UK roll-out of the initiative is well established and has arguably peaked. International interest in the initiative however continues to develop. Methods. A comprehensive literature review was undertaken to identify the literature related to the Productive Ward and its implementation (January 2006-June 2013). A bibliometric analysis examined/reviewed the trends and identified/measured interest, spread and uptake. Results. Overall distribution patterns identify a declining trend of interest, with reduced numbers of grey literature and evaluation publications. However, detailed examination of the data shows no reduction in peer-reviewed outputs. There is some evidence that international uptake of the initiative continues to generate publications and create interest. Conclusions. Sustaining this initiative in the UK will require re-energising, a new focus and financing. The transition period created by the closure of its creator may well contribute to further reduced levels of interest and publication outputs in the UK. However, international implementation, evaluation and associated publications could serve to attract professional/academic interest in this well-established, positively reported, quality improvement initiative. Relevance to clinical practice. This paper provides nurses and ward teams involved in quality improvement programmes with a detailed, current-state, examination and analysis of the Productive Ward literature, highlighting the bibliometric patterns of this large-scale, international, quality improvement programme. It serves to disseminate updated publication information to those in clinical practice who are involved in Productive Ward or a similar quality improvement initiative. Addresses: [White, Mark] HSE South, Prod Ward, Kilkenny, Ireland. [White, Mark] HSE South, Nursing & Midwifery Planning & Dev Unit, Kilkenny, Ireland. [Wells, John S. G.] Waterford Inst Technol, Sch Hlth Sci, Waterford, Ireland. [Butterworth, Tony] Lincoln Univ, Lincoln, England. E-mail Addresses: whiteser at eircom.net Cited Reference Count: 76 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: WILEY-BLACKWELL, 111 RIVER ST, HOBOKEN 07030-5774, NJ USA ISSN: 0962-1067 eISSN: 1365-2702 Web of Science Categories: Nursing Research Areas: Nursing IDS Number: AL9AI Unique ID: WOS:000339431300005 Cited References: Foster Sam, 2009, Nursing times, V105, P28 NHS Institute & NNRU, 2010, Improving Healthcare Quality at Scale and Pace, Lessons for the Productive Ward: Releasing Time to Care Programme, Jenny K, 2007, Nursing Management, V14, P8 White M, 2013, Journal of Nursing Management, Haylock J, 2010, Chartered Accountants Journal, V89, P57 Radnor Zoe J., 2012, SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE, V74, P364 Darzi A, 2008, High Quality Care for All: NHS Next Stage Review Final Report, Davidson S, 2011, Oregon Nurse 2011, Morrow Elizabeth, 2013, JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, V66, P856 Bloodworth Kerry, 2009, Nursing times, V105, P22 Davis Jacqueline, 2012, JOURNAL OF NURSING MANAGEMENT, V20, P354 Morrow Elizabeth, 2012, International journal of health care quality assurance, V25, P237 Burston Sarah, 2011, JOURNAL OF ADVANCED NURSING, V67, P2488 Blakemore Sophie, 2009, Nursing management (Harrow, London, England : 1994), V16, P14 Carlisle Daloni, 2013, Nursing standard (Royal College of Nursing (Great Britain) : 1987), V27, P14 McDonald L, 2010, Florence Nightingale: At First Hand, McIntyre Robert C., Jr., 2012, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, V204, P815 Radnor Zoe, 2008, PUBLIC MONEY & MANAGEMENT, V28, P13 Gribben B, 2009, Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, Productive Ward - Releasing Time to Care Evaluation Report, Nightingale JM, 2011, Radiography, V18, P60 Robert Glenn, 2011, JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING, V20, P1196 NHS Institute, 2012, Annual Report and Accounts of the NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement, Shepherd S, 2008, The Health Service Journal, NHS Institute & NNRU, 2010, Top Tips for Spreading the Productive Ward within NHS Trusts, Walshe Kieran, 2009, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR QUALITY IN HEALTH CARE, V21, P153 Nursing Standard, 2012, Nursing Standard, V26, P7 Davies Huw, 2007, Journal of health services research & policy, V12, P129 Foley B, 2013, Work Organisation and Innovation: Case Study: Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, UK, Gollop R, 2004, QUALITY & SAFETY IN HEALTH CARE, V13, P108 Smith Judith, 2010, Nursing standard (Royal College of Nursing (Great Britain) : 1987), V24, P45 NHS Scotland, 2008, NHS Scotland, Releasing Time to Care Evaluation, Avis K, 2011, Looking Back Thinking forward; Insight and Recommendations from Health Region Leadership on Creating a Culture of Continuous Performance in Saskatchewan, Kinnair Donna, 2012, Nursing management (Harrow, London, England : 1994), V18, P3 NHS Institute, 2012, Avis K, 2009, Releasing Time to Care in Saskatchewan: Promising Signs that Programme Engages Clinicians, Robert Glenn, 2011, Nursing times, V107, P18 Radnor Zoe, 2008, PUBLIC MONEY & MANAGEMENT, V28, P3 Taylor Jennifer, 2006, The Health service journal, V116, P26 Wright Stella, 2013, JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING, V22, P1361 Bloodworth Kerry, 2010, Nursing standard (Royal College of Nursing (Great Britain) : 1987), V24, P64 Evans R, 2007, Nursing Times (Supplement), V103, P6 Bloodworth Kerry, 2011, Nursing management (Harrow, London, England : 1994), V17, P11 NHS Institute, 2011, Rapid Impact Assessment of the Productive Ward: Releasing Time to Care, Coutts Jane, 2010, Healthcare quarterly (Toronto, Ont.), V13, P21 Health Quality Council, 2011, Releasing Time to Care: The Productive Ward Long-term Care Pilot Project Report, Langley Ann, 2011, BMJ QUALITY & SAFETY, V20, PI43 Bloodworth Kerry, 2011, Journal of perioperative practice, V21, P97 Dixon-Woods Mary, 2011, MILBANK QUARTERLY, V89, P167 Armitage Claire, 2011, Nursing management (Harrow, London, England : 1994), V18, P28 Kemp P, 2011, Mental Health Practice, V15, P20 Nursing Management, 2008, Nursing Management, V15, P5 Ferlie EB, 2001, MILBANK QUARTERLY, V79, P281 QIPP-NHS Evidence, 2009, The Productive Ward-Quality and Productivity Example, Kendall-Raynor P, 2010, Nursing Standard, V25, P8 Greenhalgh T, 2004, How to Spread Good Ideas: A Systematic Review of the Literature on Diffusion, Dissemination and Sustainability of Innovations in Health Service Delivery and Organisation, Bate P, 2004, QUALITY & SAFETY IN HEALTH CARE, V13, P62 Morrow E, 2010, Facilitating the Spread of the Productive Ward, Gautier E, 1998, Bibliometric Analysis of Scientific and Technological Research: A User's Guide to the Methodology, Blakemore S, 2009, Mental Health Practice, V12, P8 Farrell M, 2011, World of Irish Nursing & Midwifery, V19, P36 Allsopp Pete, 2009, Nursing times, V105, P19 Lennard C, 2012, Mental Health Practice, V15, P30 Castledine George, 2008, British journal of nursing (Mark Allen Publishing), V17, P801 Ovretveit John, 2011, BMJ QUALITY & SAFETY, V20, PI18 Clews G, 2011, Nursing Times.net, Radnor Z, 2012, Public Management Review, V15, P265 Shojania KG, 2004, Closing the Quality Gap: A Critical Analysis of Quality Improvement Strategies, Wilson Gwyneth, 2009, JOURNAL OF NURSING MANAGEMENT, V17, P647 Perla Rocco J, 2013, Journal for healthcare quality : official publication of the National Association for Healthcare Quality, V35, P30 Grant P, 2008, The International Journal of Clinical Leadership, V16, P193 Rudge Trudy, 2013, NURSING PHILOSOPHY, V14, P201 Cilliers L, 2006, Curationis, V29, P34 NHS Institute & NNRU, 2010, The Productive Ward: Releasing Time to Care Learning and Impact Review, Nolan A, 2007, The Health Services Journal, van den Broek J, 2013, Public Management Review, V16, P1 Edmunds G, 2010, Magnet Conference, ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339482700024 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: The state of your *journal*. A bibliometric analysis Authors: Stefansson, E Author Full Names: Stefansson, Einar Source: ACTA OPHTHALMOLOGICA, 92 (5):403-403; 10.1111/aos.12449 AUG 2014 Language: English Document Type: Editorial Material Cited Reference Count: 0 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: WILEY-BLACKWELL, 111 RIVER ST, HOBOKEN 07030-5774, NJ USA ISSN: 1755-375X eISSN: 1755-3768 Web of Science Categories: Ophthalmology Research Areas: Ophthalmology IDS Number: AL9SZ Unique ID: WOS:000339482700024 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339379600016 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Citation curves of "all-elements-sleeping-beauties": "flash in the pan" first and then "delayed recognition" Authors: Li, J Author Full Names: Li, Jiang Source: SCIENTOMETRICS, 100 (2):595-601; 10.1007/s11192-013-1217-z AUG 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: All-elements-sleeping-beauty, Sleeping beauty, Flash in the pan, Delayed recognition KeyWords Plus: HIGHLY CITED PAPERS; SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERY; SCIENCE; TIME Abstract: "Delayed recognition" refers to the phenomenon where papers did not achieve recognition in terms of citations until some years after their original publication. A paper with delayed recognition was termed a "sleeping beauty": a princess sleeps (goes unnoticed) for a long time and then, almost suddenly, is awakened (receives a lot of citations) by a prince (another article). There are a sleeping period and an awakening period in the definition of a "sleeping beauty". Apart from and prior to the two periods, an awaking period was found in citation curves of some publications, "sleeping beauties" was hence expanded to "all-elements-sleeping-beauties". The opposite effect of "delayed recognition" was described as "flash in the pan": documents that were noticed immediately after publication but did not seem to have a lasting impact. In this work, we briefly discussed the citation curves of two remarkable "all-elements-sleeping-beauties". We found they appeared "flash in the pan" first and then "delayed recognition". We also found happy endings of sleeping beauties and princes, and hence suggest the citation curve of an "all-elements-sleeping-beauty" include an awaking period, a sleeping period, an awakening period and a happy ending. Addresses: Zhejiang Univ, Dept Informat Resource Management, Hangzhou 310003, Zhejiang, Peoples R China. E-mail Addresses: li-jiang at zju.edu.cn Funding Acknowledgement: National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [71203193]; Zhijiang Youth Project of Zhejiang province [13ZJQN045YB] Funding Text: We acknowledge the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC Grant No. 71203193) and the Zhijiang Youth Project of Zhejiang province (Grant No. 13ZJQN045YB) for financial support, and comments from Prof. Fred Y Ye, Ms. Helen F Xue and Mr. Star X Zhao. We also thank Dr. Langtao Huang and Mr. Dongbo Shi for providing background of Physics. Cited Reference Count: 22 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0138-9130 eISSN: 1588-2861 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications; Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Computer Science; Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: AL8HS Unique ID: WOS:000339379600016 Cited References: Braun Tibor, 2010, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V19, P195 van Dalen HP, 2005, SCIENTOMETRICS, V64, P209 Costas Rodrigo, 2010, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V61, P329 Moed HF, 1998, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V54, P387 AVERSA ES, 1985, SCIENTOMETRICS, V7, P383 Aksnes DW, 2003, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V12, P159 Mingers J., 2007, Shooting stars and sleeping beauties: The secret life of citations, Burrell QL, 2005, SCIENTOMETRICS, V65, P381 GARFIELD E, 1989, CURRENT CONTENTS, V38, P3 van Raan AFJ, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS, V59, P467 GINSPARG PH, 1982, PHYSICAL REVIEW D, V25, P2649 Lange Lydia L, 2005, History of psychology, V8, P194 Ohba Norio, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V93, P253 Wyatt H. V., 1961, Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, V18, P149 BARBER B, 1961, SCIENCE, V134, P596 Li Jiang, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P795 STENT GS, 1972, SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, V227, P84 COLE S, 1970, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY, V76, P286 DERUJULA A, 1977, PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS, V38, P317 Glanzel W, 2003, SCIENTOMETRICS, V58, P571 Van Calster Ben, 2012, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V63, P2341 GARFIELD E, 1990, CURRENT CONTENTS, V9, P3 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339335700007 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: PERSPECTIVE Powering up citations Full paper available at : http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v511/n7510_supp/full/511S77a.html Authors: Finkel, A Author Full Names: Finkel, Alan Source: NATURE, 511 (7510):S76-S76; JUL 24 2014 Language: English Document Type: Editorial Material Addresses: [Finkel, Alan] Australian Acad Technol Sci & Engn, Melbourne, Vic, Australia. [Finkel, Alan] Monash Univ, Clayton, Vic 3800, Australia. E-mail Addresses: alan at finkel.net Cited Reference Count: 3 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP, MACMILLAN BUILDING, 4 CRINAN ST, LONDON N1 9XW, ENGLAND ISSN: 0028-0836 eISSN: 1476-4687 Web of Science Categories: Multidisciplinary Sciences Research Areas: Science & Technology - Other Topics IDS Number: AL7SO Unique ID: WOS:000339335700007 Cited References: [Anonymous], 2011, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard 2011, Pettigrew A. G., 2012, Australia's Position in the World of Science, Technology & Innovation, [Anonymous], 2012, Excellence in Research for Australia 2012, National Report, ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339460600002 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: The development of emergency medicine in South Korea: academic productivity in highly cited *journals* Authors: Lee, J; Kang, HG; Lim, TH; Oh, J; Cho, Y; Cho, JH Author Full Names: Lee, J.; Kang, H. G.; Lim, T. H.; Oh, J.; Cho, Y.; Cho, J. H. Source: HONG KONG JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 21 (4):205-212; JUL 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Bibliometrics, evaluation studies as topic, Far East, journal impact factor, publication KeyWords Plus: NATIONAL REPRESENTATION; BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS Abstract: The purpose of this study was to examine the number of publications by South Korean emergency physicians in highly cited journals and the increase in their numbers. It also sought to assess the impact factors of such publications. Methods: The present study was a retrospective quantitative literature review of the publications by South Korean emergency physicians from 1996 to 2011 in the category of "emergency medicine" in the science edition of Journal Citation Reports 2011. We analysed the total number of articles published by South Korean emergency physicians and their impact factors. Results: Between 1996 and 2011, the number of South Korean board-certified emergency physicians increased from 51 to 958, and 230 articles were published in 14 highly cited journals. The total impact factor (IF) of the original articles published during that period was 227.86, and the mean IF was 1.93. More than 10 articles had been published annually in the past 5 years in highly cited journals and there were over 400 South Korean board-certified emergency physicians. Conclusions: Emergency medicine in South Korea started about 20 years ago, but academic productivity, indicated by at least ten articles annually in highly cited journals, was only achieved in the last five years. The mean IF of these articles was similar to that in other highly productive countries. Addresses: [Lee, J.; Kang, H. G.; Lim, T. H.; Oh, J.] Hanyang Univ, Dept Emergency Med, Coll Med, Seoul 133791, South Korea. [Cho, Y.] Kandong Sacred Heart Hosp, Dept Emergency Med, Coll Med, Seoul, South Korea. [Cho, J. H.] Kangwon Natl Univ, Inst Med Sci, Sch Med, Dept Emergency Med, Kangwon Do, South Korea. E-mail Addresses: emer0905 at gmail.com Cited Reference Count: 12 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: MEDCOM LTD, ROOM 504-5, CHEUNG TAT CENTRE, 18 CHEUNG LEE ST, CHAI WAN, HONG KONG 00000, PEOPLES R CHINA ISSN: 1024-9079 Web of Science Categories: Emergency Medicine Research Areas: Emergency Medicine IDS Number: AL9KS Unique ID: WOS:000339460600002 Cited References: VILLAR J, 1988, MEDICINA CLINICA, V91, P23 Hwang Sung Oh, 2007, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, V25, P846 Singer AJ, 1997, ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINEAnnual Meeting of the Society-for-Academic-Emergency-Medicine, MAY 21, 1997, WASHINGTON, DC, V4, P1153 Jung GY, 1997, J Korean Soc Emerg Med, V8, P441 Wang Soon Joo, 2003, Prehospital and disaster medicine, V18, P140 Li Qiang, 2012, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, V30, P1530 [Anonymous], 2012, ISI Journal Citation Reports, United Nations Development Program, 2011, UNDP Human Development Reports, Bould M. D., 2010, ANAESTHESIA, V65, P799 Bounes Vincent, 2013, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, V31, P297 Shin Dongwon, 2010, KOREAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL HISTORY, V19, P1 Ginde Adit A., 2009, ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, V54, P349 *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338519300005 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: The Matthew effect in empirical data Authors: Perc, M Author Full Names: Perc, Matjaz Source: JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY INTERFACE, 11 (98):10.1098/rsif.2014.0378 SEP 6 2014 Language: English Document Type: Review Author Keywords: Matthew effect, preferential attachment, cumulative advantage, self-organization, power law, empirical data KeyWords Plus: MEASURING PREFERENTIAL ATTACHMENT; SMALL-WORLD NETWORKS; COMPLEX NETWORKS; SCIENTIFIC IMPACT; POWER LAWS; COLLABORATION NETWORK; GROWING NETWORKS; ZIPFS LAW; 1ST-MOVER ADVANTAGE; CITATION NETWORKS Abstract: The Matthew effect describes the phenomenon that in societies, the rich tend to get richer and the potent even more powerful. It is closely related to the concept of preferential attachment in network science, where the more connected nodes are destined to acquire many more links in the future than the auxiliary nodes. Cumulative advantage and success-breads-success also both describe the fact that advantage tends to beget further advantage. The concept is behind the many power laws and scaling behaviour in empirical data, and it is at the heart of self-organization across social and natural sciences. Here, we review the methodology for measuring preferential attachment in empirical data, as well as the observations of the Matthew effect in patterns of scientific collaboration, socio-technical and biological networks, the propagation of citations, the emergence of scientific progress and impact, career longevity, the evolution of common English words and phrases, as well as in education and brain development. We also discuss whether the Matthew effect is due to chance or optimization, for example related to homophily in social systems or efficacy in technological systems, and we outline possible directions for future research. Addresses: Univ Maribor, Fac Nat Sci & Math, SLO-2000 Maribor, Slovenia. E-mail Addresses: matjaz.perc at uni-mb.si ResearcherID Numbers: Perc, Matjaz/A-5148-2009 ORCID Numbers: Perc, Matjaz/0000-0002-3087-541X Funding Acknowledgement: Slovenian Research Agency [P5-0027] Funding Text: This work was supported by the Slovenian Research Agency (Grant P5-0027). Cited Reference Count: 164 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: ROYAL SOC, 6-9 CARLTON HOUSE TERRACE, LONDON SW1Y 5AG, ENGLAND ISSN: 1742-5689 eISSN: 1742-5662 Article Number: Web of Science Categories: Multidisciplinary Sciences Research Areas: Science & Technology - Other Topics IDS Number: AK6DW Unique ID: WOS:000338519300005 Cited References: Dorogovtsev SN, 2002, ADVANCES IN PHYSICS, V51, P1079 Gabaix X, 1999, QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, V114, P739 Vespignani Alessandro, 2012, NATURE PHYSICS, V8, P32 Caldarelli G, 2002, PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS, V89, Yule GU, 1925, PHILOSOPHICAL TRANSACTIONS OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF LONDON SERIES B-CONTAINING PAPERS OF A BIOLOGICAL CHARACTER, V213, P21 Pfeiffer T, 2005, PLOS BIOLOGY, V3, P1269 Baronchelli A, 2006, J. Stat. Mech., V6, MILLER GA, 1957, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY, V70, P311 Beel Joeran, 2009, PROCEEDINGS OF ISSI 2009 - 12TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR SCIENTOMETRICS AND INFORMETRICS, VOL 112th International Conference of the International-Society-for-Scientometrics-and-Informetrics, JUL 14-17, 2009, Rio de Janeiro, BRAZIL, V1, P230 SHAYWITZ BA, 1995, READING RESEARCH QUARTERLY, V30, P894 Loreto Vittorio, 2007, NATURE PHYSICS, V3, P758 Capocci A., 2006, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V74, Redner S, 2005, PHYSICS TODAY, V58, P49 Dorogovtsev S.N., 2003, Evolution of networks: from biological networks to the Internet and WWW, Pennock DM, 2002, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V99, P5207 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Clauset Aaron, 2009, SIAM REVIEW, V51, P661 Cohen Geoffrey L., 2009, SCIENCE, V324, P400 Eom Y. -H., 2008, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V77, Sornette D., 2006, Critical Phenomena in Natural Sciences, Watts DJ, 1998, NATURE, V393, P440 Guimera R, 2005, SCIENCE, V308, P697 Barabasi AL, 2002, PHYSICA A-STATISTICAL MECHANICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS, V311, P590 Mitzenmacher M, 2004, Internet Math, V1, P226 Pan Raj Kumar, 2012, SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, V2, Bernhardsson Sebastian, 2009, NEW JOURNAL OF PHYSICS, V11, Penner Orion, 2013, PHYSICS TODAY, V66, P8 Newman MEJ, 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, P5200 Petersen Alexander M., 2010, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V81, Simmons MP, 2011, Proc. ICWSM, 17-21 July, Barcelona, Spain, P353 Reed WJ, 2001, ECONOMICS LETTERS, V74, P15 Baronchelli Andrea, 2012, ADVANCES IN COMPLEX SYSTEMS, V15, Jin EM, 2001, Phys. Rev. E, V64, Uzzi Brian, 2013, SCIENCE, V342, P468 Gibrat R., 1931, Les Inegalites economiques, Barabasi A. L., 2002, Linked: The New Science of Networks, Adar E., 2005, Proceedings. The 2005 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web IntelligenceProceedings. The 2005 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence, 19-22 Sept. 2005, Compiegne, France, Massen Claire P., 2007, PHYSICA A-STATISTICAL MECHANICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS, V377, P351 Newman M. E. J., 2009, EPL, V86, Stringer Michael J., 2010, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V61, P1377 Maillart T., 2008, PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS, V101, Bettencourt LMA, 2006, PHYSICA A-STATISTICAL MECHANICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS, V364, P513 Kunegis J, 2013, Proc. ACM WSC, 2-4 May, Paris, France, P205 Ferrer i Cancho R, 2001, J. Quant. Linguistics, V8, P165 Radicchi Filippo, 2012, PLOS ONE, V7, Newman MEJ, 2001, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V98, P404 Radicchi Filippo, 2008, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V105, P17268 Pastor-Satorras R., 2004, Evolution and Structure of the Internet: A Statistical Physics Approach, Vazquez A, 2003, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V67, Zipf G. K., 1949, Human behavior and the principle of least effort, Christakis N. A., 2009, Connected: The surprising power of our social networks and how they shape our lives, Leskovec J, 2009, Proc. ACM SIGKDD, 28 June-1 July, Paris, France, P497 Sole R, 2005, NATURE, V434, P289 Krapivsky PL, 2000, PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS, V85, P4629 Pacheco JM, 2014, Phys. Life. Rev., Angeles Serrano M., 2009, PLOS ONE, V4, Pfeiffer Thomas, 2007, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V104, P12052 Stanovich K. E., 2008, Journal of Education, V189, P23 Evans James A., 2011, SCIENCE, V331, P721 Wang Mingyang, 2009, PHYSICA A-STATISTICAL MECHANICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS, V388, P4273 Milojevic Stasa, 2014, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V111, P3984 Amaral LAN, 2000, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V97, P11149 BAK P, 1987, PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS, V59, P381 Perc Matjaz, 2010, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V4, P475 Weng L, 2013, Proc. ACM SIGKDD, 11-14 August, Chicago, IL, P356 Baek Seung Ki, 2011, NEW JOURNAL OF PHYSICS, V13, Borner K, 2014, Atlas of knowledge, Baronchelli Andrea, 2012, PLOS ONE, V7, Jeong H, 2003, EUROPHYSICS LETTERS, V61, P567 Reed WJ, 2002, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V66, Carlson JM, 1999, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V60, P1412 Borner K, 2010, Atlas of science, Kornai Andras, 2008, MATHEMATICAL LINGUISTICS, P1 Newman MEJ, 2003, SIAM REVIEW, V45, P167 Pareto V, 1895, Giornale degli Economisti, V10, P59 Newman M.E.J., 2006, The Structure and Dynamics of Networks, Dawkins R., 1989, The Selfish Gene, Petersen Alexander M., 2011, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V108, P18 D'Souza Raissa M., 2007, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V104, P6112 Reed WJ, 2003, PHYSICA A-STATISTICAL MECHANICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS, V319, P469 Merton RK, 1968, Science, V159, P53 Mocanu Delia, 2013, PLOS ONE, V8, Puglisi Andrea, 2008, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V105, P7936 Redner S, 1998, EUROPEAN PHYSICAL JOURNAL B, V4, P131 Newman MEJ, 2001, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V64, Moody J, 2004, AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW, V69, P213 SIMON HA, 1955, BIOMETRIKA, V42, P425 Pareto V, 1997, Rivista di Politica Economica, V87, P691 Morgan Paul L., 2008, LEARNING DISABILITY QUARTERLY, V31, P187 Fortunato Santo, 2010, PHYSICS REPORTS-REVIEW SECTION OF PHYSICS LETTERS, V486, P75 Sneppen K, 1997, PHYSICA D, V110, P209 Cancho RFI, 2005, EUROPEAN PHYSICAL JOURNAL B, V44, P249 Tsonis AA, 1997, Complexity, V3, P12 Raizada Rajeev D. S., 2010, FRONTIERS IN HUMAN NEUROSCIENCE, V4, Trist E, 1981, Occas. Paper, V2, P1 Champernowne D. G., 1953, ECONOMIC JOURNAL, V63, P318 Tomassini Marco, 2007, PHYSICA A-STATISTICAL MECHANICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS, V385, P750 Papadopoulos Fragkiskos, 2012, NATURE, V489, P537 de Blasio Birgitte Freiesleben, 2007, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V104, P10762 Scarborough HS, 2003, ANNALS OF DYSLEXIA, V53, P47 Barrat A., 2008, Dynamical Processes on Complex Networks, Nazir A, 2008, Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, 20-22 October, Vouliagmeni, Greece, P43 Krapivsky PL, 2005, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V71, Leskovec J, 2012, Mining of massive datasets, Zhang Qian, 2013, SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, V3, Rigney D, 2013, The Matthew effect: how advantage begets further advantage, Watts D. J., 1999, Small Worlds, Borge-Holthoefer J, 2013, J. Complex Netw., V1, P3 Golosovsky Michael, 2013, JOURNAL OF STATISTICAL PHYSICS, V151, P340 SEGLEN PO, 1992, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V43, P628 Rozenfeld Hernan D., 2008, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V105, P18702 Acuna Daniel E., 2012, NATURE, V489, P201 Pastor-Satorras R, 2003, JOURNAL OF THEORETICAL BIOLOGY, V222, P199 Wang Mingyang, 2008, PHYSICA A-STATISTICAL MECHANICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS, V387, P4692 von Mering C, 2002, NATURE, V417, P399 Cohen Geoffrey L., 2006, SCIENCE, V313, P1307 Sole Ricard V., 2010, JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY INTERFACE, V7, P1647 Sornette D, 1998, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V57, P4811 Schumpeter J. A., 1934, The Theory of Economic Development, PRICE DJD, 1965, SCIENCE, V149, P510 Cancho RFI, 2003, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V100, P788 Valverde Sergi, 2007, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V76, Perc Matjaz, 2013, JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY INTERFACE, V10, Lehmann S, 2003, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V68, Radicchi Filippo, 2012, SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, V2, Herdagdelen A., 2007, EPL, V78, Wasserman S, 1994, Social network analysis, Kumar R, 2006, Proc. ACM SIGKDD, 20-23 August, Philadelphia, PA, P611 Barabasi Albert-Laszlo, 2012, NATURE PHYSICS, V8, P14 Newman MEJ, 2005, CONTEMPORARY PHYSICS, V46, P323 Golosovsky Michael, 2012, PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS, V109, Light S, 2005, BMC GENOMICS, V6, Conover M., 2011, Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, P89 Perc Matjaz, 2012, JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY INTERFACE, V9, P3323 Dall'Asta Luca, 2006, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V74, Eisenberg E, 2003, PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS, V91, Arenas Alex, 2008, PHYSICS REPORTS-REVIEW SECTION OF PHYSICS LETTERS, V469, P93 Dorogovtsev S. N., 2008, REVIEWS OF MODERN PHYSICS, V80, P1275 Chavalarias David, 2013, PLOS ONE, V8, Dorogovtsev SN, 2000, PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS, V85, P4633 Stanley H. E., 1971, Introduction to Phase Transitions and Critical Phenomena, Gleeson James P., 2014, PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS, V112, Wang Dashun, 2013, SCIENCE, V342, P127 KERIN RA, 1992, JOURNAL OF MARKETING, V56, P33 Radicchi Filippo, 2009, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V80, Gomez Rodriguez M, 2010, Proc. ACM SIGKDD, P1019 Barabasi AL, 1999, SCIENCE, V286, P509 Sheridan Paul, 2012, PHYSICA A-STATISTICAL MECHANICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS, V391, P5031 Mazloumian Amin, 2013, SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, V3, Penner Orion, 2013, SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, V3, Barabasi Albert-Laszlo, 2012, NATURE, V489, P507 Willis JC, 1922, NATURE, V109, P177 Weng L., 2012, SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, V2, P1 Newman MEJ, 2001, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V64, Albert R, 2002, REVIEWS OF MODERN PHYSICS, V74, P47 Jones JH, 2003, PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY B-BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES, V270, P1123 Brakman S, 1999, JOURNAL OF REGIONAL SCIENCE, V39, P183 Perc Matjaz, 2013, SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, V3, Newman MEJ, 2001, Phys. Rev. E, V64, Boccaletti S., 2006, PHYSICS REPORTS-REVIEW SECTION OF PHYSICS LETTERS, V424, P175 Michel Jean-Baptiste, 2011, SCIENCE, V331, P176 Poncela Julia, 2008, PLOS ONE, V3, Holme Petter, 2012, PHYSICS REPORTS-REVIEW SECTION OF PHYSICS LETTERS, V519, P97 Eom Young-Ho, 2011, PLOS ONE, V6, ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339379600006 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Topic-based Pagerank: toward a topic-level scientific evaluation Authors: Yan, EJ Author Full Names: Yan, Erjia Source: SCIENTOMETRICS, 100 (2):407-437; 10.1007/s11192-014-1308-5 AUG 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Scientific evaluation, Impact, PageRank, Topic models KeyWords Plus: LATENT DIRICHLET ALLOCATION; INFORMATION-SCIENCE; CITATION NETWORKS; IMPACT FACTORS; LIBRARY; COMMUNITIES; DISCIPLINE; ALGORITHM; INDICATOR Abstract: Within the same research field, different subfields and topics may exhibit varied citation behaviors and scholarly communication patterns. For a more effect scientific evaluation at the topic level, this study proposes a topic-based PageRank approach. This approach aims to evaluate the scientific impact of research entities (e.g., papers, authors, journals, and institutions) at the topic-level. The proposed topic-based PageRank, when applied to a data set on library and information science publications, has effectively detected a variety of research topics and identified authors, papers, and journals of the highest impact from each topic. Evaluation results show that compared with the standard PageRank and a topic modeling technique, the proposed topic-based PageRank has the best performance on relevance and impact. Different perspectives of organizing scientific literature are also discussed and this study recommends the mode of organization that integrates stable research domains and dynamic topics. Addresses: Drexel Univ, Coll Comp & Informat, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA. E-mail Addresses: ey86 at drexel.edu Cited Reference Count: 51 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0138-9130 eISSN: 1588-2861 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications; Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Computer Science; Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: AL8HS Unique ID: WOS:000339379600006 Cited References: Janssens Frizo, 2008, SCIENTOMETRICS11th International Conference of the International-Society-for-Scientometrics-and-Informetrics, JUN 25-27, 2007, Madrid, SPAIN, V75, P607 Milojevic Stasa, 2011, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V62, P1933 LIN JH, 1991, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION THEORY, V37, P145 Moed Henk F., 2010, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V4, P436 Klein J. T., 1990, Interdisciplinarity: History, theory, and practice, Ma Nan, 2008, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V44, P800 Yan E., 2014, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Yan Erjia, 2011, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V62, P1498 Chen P., 2007, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V1, P8 Yan Erjia, 2012, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V6, P140 Bergstrom Carl T., 2008, NEUROLOGY, V71, P1850 Zitt M, 2005, Measurement, V3, P38 Waltman Ludo, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V89, P301 White HD, 1998, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V49, P327 Cronin B., 1984, The citation process: The role and significance of citations in scientific communication, Yan Erjia, 2011, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V47, P125 Blei DM, 2003, JOURNAL OF MACHINE LEARNING RESEARCH18th International Conference on Machine Learning, JUN 28-JUL 01, 2001, WILLIAMSTOWN, MASSACHUSETTS, V3, P993 Liu XM, 2005, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V41, P1462 Ding Ying, 2011, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V62, P449 Holton G., 1978, scientific imaginations: Case studies, P199 Yan Erjia, 2013, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V7, P249 Guerrero-Bote Vicente P., 2012, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V6, P674 Haveliwala TH, 2003, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON KNOWLEDGE AND DATA ENGINEERING11th International World Wide Web Conference, MAY 07-11, 2002, HONOLULU, HAWAII, V15, P784 Chen CM, 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, P5303 Ding Ying, 2011, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V62, P236 Tang Jie, 2008, Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD'08), New York, P990 Bollen Johan, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P669 Jarvelin K, 2002, ACM TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION SYSTEMS, V20, P422 Waltman Ludo, 2012, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V63, P2378 van Raan Anthony F. J., 2008, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V59, P461 Glanzel Wolfgang, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS13th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, JUL 04-07, 2011, Durban, SOUTH AFRICA, V91, P399 Narin F., 1976, Evaluative bibliometrics: The use of publication and citation analysis in the evaluation of scientific activity, Glaenzel Wolfgang, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V88, P297 Zyczkowski Karol, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V85, P301 HIRST G, 1978, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V29, P171 Yan Erjia, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V90, P499 Blei David M., 2007, ANNALS OF APPLIED STATISTICS, V1, P17 Li Daifeng, 2012, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V6, P237 van Raan AFJ, 2004, HANDBOOK OF QUANTITATIVE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH: THE USE OF PUBLICATION AND PATENT STATISTICS IN STUDIES OF S&T SYSTEMS, P19 Radicchi Filippo, 2009, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V80, Sayyadi H., 2009, Proceedings of the Ninth SIAM International Conference on Data Mining, McCallum A., 2004, Technical Report UM-CS-2004-096, PINSKI G, 1976, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V12, P297 Rafols Ismael, 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P1823 Walker Dylan, 2007, JOURNAL OF STATISTICAL MECHANICS-THEORY AND EXPERIMENT, Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Ni Chaoqun, 2013, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V64, P265 Steyvers M., 2004, Proceedings of the tenth ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, P306 Yan Erjia, 2011, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V62, P467 Sugimoto Cassidy R., 2011, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V62, P185 Boyack KW, 2005, SCIENTOMETRICS, V64, P351 ======================================================================== *Record 3 of 22. *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339066500015 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: How Many Athletes Qualified for the London Olympic Games? Authors: Miroiu, A Author Full Names: Miroiu, Adrian Source: JOURNAL OF THE ASSOCIATION FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 65 (8):1728-1728; 10.1002/asi.23188 AUG 2014 Language: English Document Type: Letter Addresses: SNSPA, Bucharest 010643, Romania. E-mail Addresses: admiroiu at snspa.ro Cited Reference Count: 3 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: WILEY-BLACKWELL, 111 RIVER ST, HOBOKEN 07030-5774, NJ USA ISSN: 2330-1635 eISSN: 2330-1643 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Information Systems; Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Computer Science; Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: AL3XY Unique ID: WOS:000339066500015 Cited References: Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 IAAF, 2012, Entry Standards-Games of the XXX Olympiad-London 2012, Edwards AWF, 2005, NATURE, V437, P951 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339040600059 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Estimates of the Continuously Publishing Core in the Scientific Workforce Authors: Ioannidis, JPA; Boyack, KW; Klavans, R Author Full Names: Ioannidis, John P. A.; Boyack, Kevin W.; Klavans, Richard Source: PLOS ONE, 9 (7):10.1371/journal.pone.0101698 JUL 9 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article KeyWords Plus: PRODUCTIVITY; SCIENCE; LIFE Abstract: Background: The ability of a scientist to maintain a continuous stream of publication may be important, because research requires continuity of effort. However, there is no data on what proportion of scientists manages to publish each and every year over long periods of time. Methodology/Principal Findings: Using the entire Scopus database, we estimated that there are 15,153,100 publishing scientists (distinct author identifiers) in the period 1996-2011. However, only 150,608 (<1%) of them have published something in each and every year in this 16-year period (uninterrupted, continuous presence [UCP] in the literature). This small core of scientists with UCP are far more cited than others, and they account for 41.7% of all papers in the same period and 87.1% of all papers with >1000 citations in the same period. Skipping even a single year substantially affected the average citation impact. We also studied the birth and death dynamics of membership in this influential UCP core, by imputing and estimating UCP-births and UCP-deaths. We estimated that 16,877 scientists would qualify for UCP-birth in 1997 (no publication in 1996, UCP in 1997-2012) and 9,673 scientists had their UCP-death in 2010. The relative representation of authors with UCP was enriched in Medical Research, in the academic sector and in Europe/North America, while the relative representation of authors without UCP was enriched in the Social Sciences and Humanities, in industry, and in other continents. Conclusions: The proportion of the scientific workforce that maintains a continuous uninterrupted stream of publications each and every year over many years is very limited, but it accounts for the lion's share of researchers with high citation impact. This finding may have implications for the structure, stability and vulnerability of the scientific workforce. Addresses: [Ioannidis, John P. A.] Stanford Univ, Dept Med, Stanford, CA 94305 USA. [Ioannidis, John P. A.] Stanford Univ, Dept Hlth Res & Policy, Stanford, CA 94305 USA. [Ioannidis, John P. A.] Stanford Univ, Dept Stat, Stanford, CA 94305 USA. [Boyack, Kevin W.] SciTech Strategies Inc, Albuquerque, NM USA. [Klavans, Richard] SciTech Strategies Inc, Berwyn, PA USA. E-mail Addresses: jioannid at stanford.edu Cited Reference Count: 26 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE, 1160 BATTERY STREET, STE 100, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 USA ISSN: 1932-6203 Article Number: e101698 Web of Science Categories: Multidisciplinary Sciences Research Areas: Science & Technology - Other Topics IDS Number: AL3PK Unique ID: WOS:000339040600059 Cited References: Boyack Kevin W., 2013, EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL INVESTIGATION, V43, P1339 Wray KB, 2004, SCIENTOMETRICS, V61, P117 O'Brien Timothy L., 2012, SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY & HUMAN VALUES, V37, P210 Garfield E, 2006, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V295, P90 Ioannidis John P. A., 2006, PLOS ONE, V1, Michels Carolin, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V93, P831 Young Neal S., 2008, PLOS MEDICINE, V5, P1418 Oster SM, 1998, REVIEW OF ECONOMICS AND STATISTICS, V80, P154 de Solla Price DJ, 1963, Little science, big science, Adams JD, 2005, RESEARCH POLICY, V34, P259 Stephan P E, 2007, Economics of Innovation and New Technology, V16, P71 Garfield E, 1996, SCIENTIST, V10, P13 MCNAMEE SJ, 1994, KNOWLEDGE-CREATION DIFFUSION UTILIZATION, V15, P396 Nicholson Joshua M., 2012, NATURE, V492, P34 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 LONG JS, 1981, AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW, V46, P422 Ioannidis John P. A., 2011, NATURE, V477, P529 Boerner Katy, 2012, PLOS ONE, V7, Stephan PE, 1992, Striking the mother lode in science. The importance of age, place, and time, DE SOLLA PRICE DEREK J., 1965, SCIENCE, V149, P510 LEVIN SG, 1991, AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, V81, P114 MADDOX GL, 1979, ANNUAL REVIEW OF SOCIOLOGY, V5, P113 Boyack Kevin W., 2014, JOURNAL OF THE ASSOCIATION FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V65, P670 SIMONTON DK, 1988, PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, V104, P251 Macleod Malcolm R., 2014, LANCET, V383, P101 BLACKBURN RT, 1986, REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, V56, P265 ======================================================================== * *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338279800006 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Orphan drugs and rare diseases: a scientometric review (2000-2014) Authors: Chen, CM; Dubin, R; Kim, MC Author Full Names: Chen, Chaomei; Dubin, Rachael; Kim, Meen Chul Source: EXPERT OPINION ON ORPHAN DRUGS, 2 (7):709-724; 10.1517/21678707.2014.920251 JUL 2014 Language: English Document Type: Review Author Keywords: CiteSpace, orphan drugs, rare diseases, scientometrics KeyWords Plus: PULMONARY ARTERIAL-HYPERTENSION; NIJMEGEN BREAKAGE SYNDROME; DNA-DAMAGE RESPONSE; CLINICAL CLASSIFICATION; EMERGING TRENDS; BREAST-CANCER; ATM; ASSOCIATION; COMPLEX; CHALLENGES Abstract: Introduction: The literature of orphan drugs and rare diseases between 2000 and 2014 is reviewed. The overall structure of its intellectual landscape is characterized in terms of thematic concentrations of co-cited references and emerging trends of surging keywords and citations to references through a scientometric review - a quantitative study of scientific literature. Areas covered: The review is based on two sets of bibliographic records retrieved from the Web of Science. The core dataset, consisting of 9461 original research articles and review papers, was constructed from a topic search. The expanded dataset, consisting of 82,765 articles and reviews, was constructed by citation expansion. Expert opinion: The study has revealed three broad categories of research. The research policy category focuses on the strategic and integral role of the study of orphan drugs and rare diseases in a wide-ranging societal context, including optimizing the allocation of resources and setting appropriate evaluation standards. The basic research category focuses on understanding the complex biological and genetic mechanisms of rare diseases. The disease-specific research category focuses on specific rare diseases with clinical and therapeutic goals. The study has revealed the fundamental role of genetic variation in linking a diverse range of rare and complex phenotypic patterns. The field would benefit from more comprehensive reviews of all three categories as a whole and disseminating findings and technical advances across various specialties. Finally, building stronger connections between the study of rare diseases and the study of more common diseases is recommended for all three categories. Addresses: [Chen, Chaomei; Dubin, Rachael; Kim, Meen Chul] Drexel Univ, Coll Comp & Informat, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA. E-mail Addresses: chaomei.chen at drexel.edu Cited Reference Count: 61 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: INFORMA HEALTHCARE, TELEPHONE HOUSE, 69-77 PAUL STREET, LONDON EC2A 4LQ, ENGLAND ISSN: 2167-8707 Web of Science Categories: Pharmacology & Pharmacy Research Areas: Pharmacology & Pharmacy IDS Number: AK2WG Unique ID: WOS:000338279800006 Cited References: Lander ES, 2001, NATURE, V409, P860 ARNO PS, 1995, MILBANK QUARTERLY, V73, P231 Burt Christiana, 2010, CURRENT VASCULAR PHARMACOLOGY, V8, P412 Girgis Reda E., 2010, EXPERT OPINION ON EMERGING DRUGS, V15, P71 Chen CM, 2006, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V57, P359 SALVADORI B, 1994, EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, V30A, P930 Barrett JC, 2005, BIOINFORMATICS, V21, P263 Hugot JP, 2001, NATURE, V411, P599 Terwilliger JD, 2000, HUMAN BIOLOGYSymposium on Anthropological Genetics in the 21st Century at the 14th International Congress of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences, JUL27, 1998, WILLIAMSBURG, VA, V72, P63 Rubin LJ, 2002, NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, V346, P896 Zhao S, 2000, NATURE, V405, P473 Lim DS, 2000, NATURE, V404, P613 Barst RJ, 1996, NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, V334, P296 Paul Steven M., 2010, NATURE REVIEWS DRUG DISCOVERY, V9, P203 Risch N, 1996, SCIENCE, V273, P1516 McCabe C, 2006, QJM-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, V99, P341 Bertram Lars, 2010, NEURON, V68, P270 Reis Abilio, 2010, REVISTA PORTUGUESA DE CARDIOLOGIA, V29, P253 Cheung Richard Y, 2004, Health law journal, V12, P183 Peltonen L, 2000, NATURE REVIEWS GENETICS, V1, P182 Griggs Robert C., 2009, MOLECULAR GENETICS AND METABOLISM, V96, P20 Schultz LB, 2000, JOURNAL OF CELL BIOLOGY, V151, P1381 Gatei M, 2000, NATURE GENETICS, V25, P115 Antzelevitch C, 2005, CIRCULATION, V111, P659 Risch NJ, 2000, NATURE, V405, P847 Neyroud N, 1997, NATURE GENETICS, V15, P186 Kesselheim Aaron S., 2011, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V305, P2320 Carney JP, 1998, CELL, V93, P477 Simonneau G, 2004, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGYThird World Symposium on Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension, JUN 23-25, 2003, Venice, ITALY, V43, P5S Buckley Brendan M., 2008, LANCET, V371, P2051 KAPLAN EL, 1958, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION, V53, P457 Chen Chaomei, 2010, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V61, P1386 Haffner ME, 2002, NATURE REVIEWS DRUG DISCOVERY, V1, P821 Wu XH, 2000, NATURE, V405, P477 Zhou BBS, 2000, NATURE, V408, P433 Galie Nazzareno, 2010, REVISTA ESPANOLA DE CARDIOLOGIA, V63, P708 RICH S, 1987, ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, V107, P216 Anderson Joe R., 2010, CARDIOLOGY IN REVIEW, V18, P148 GARFIELD E, 1955, SCIENCE, V122, P108 Simonneau Gerald, 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY4th World Symposium on Pulmonary Hypertension, FEB, 2008, Dana Point, CA, V54, PS43 Channick RN, 2001, LANCET, V358, P1119 Marckmann Peter, 2006, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF NEPHROLOGY, V17, P2359 Shiloh Y, 2000, COLD SPRING HARBOR SYMPOSIA ON QUANTITATIVE BIOLOGYCold Spring Harbor Symposium on Quantitative Biology, 2000, NEW YORK, NEW YORK, V65, P527 Rioux JD, 2001, NATURE GENETICS, V29, P223 Jorde LB, 2000, GENOME RESEARCH, V10, P1435 Jorde LB, 2000, HUMAN HEREDITY, V50, P57 Purcell Shaun, 2007, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS, V81, P559 BRUGADA P, 1992, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, V20, P1391 Humbert M, 2006, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF RESPIRATORY AND CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, V173, P1023 Chen Chaomei, 2012, EXPERT OPINION ON BIOLOGICAL THERAPY, V12, P593 SMALL HG, 1977, SOCIAL STUDIES OF SCIENCE, V7, P139 Zheng L, 2000, ONCOGENE, V19, P6159 Fentiman IS, 2006, LANCET, V367, P595 Drummond Michael F., 2007, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN HEALTH CARERoundtable Meeting on Use of Health Economics for Orphan Drugs, DEC16, 2005, London, ENGLAND, V23, P36 Kastan MB, 2000, NATURE REVIEWS MOLECULAR CELL BIOLOGY, V1, P179 DALONZO GE, 1991, ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, V115, P343 Dear James W., 2006, BRITISH JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, V62, P264 Rinaldi A, 2005, EMBO REPORTS, V6, P507 KERR GS, 1994, ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, V120, P919 Kleinberg J., 2002, Proceedings of the 8th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, July, 2002, Alberta, P91 Chen Chaomei, 2013, TECHNOLOGY ANALYSIS & STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT, V25, P619 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338718300005 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Worldwide performance and trends in nonpoint source pollution modeling research from 1994 to 2013: A review based on bibliometrics Authors: Li, SS; Zhuang, YH; Zhang, L; Du, Y; Liu, HB Author Full Names: Li, Sisi; Zhuang, Yanhua; Zhang, Liang; Du, Yun; Liu, Hongbin Source: JOURNAL OF SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION, 69 (4):121A-126A; 10.2489/jswc.69.4.121A JUL-AUG 2014 Language: English Document Type: Review KeyWords Plus: DIFFUSE POLLUTION; WATER-QUALITY; FRESH-WATER; EUTROPHICATION; NITROGEN; AGNPS; LAND; AREA Addresses: [Li, Sisi; Zhuang, Yanhua; Zhang, Liang; Du, Yun] Chinese Acad Sci, Inst Geodesy & Geophys, Key Lab Environm & Disaster Monitoring & Evaluat, Wuhan, Hubei, Peoples R China. [Liu, Hongbin] Chinese Acad Agr Sci, Inst Agr Resources & Reg Planning, Key Lab Nonpoint Source Pollut Control, Beijing 100193, Peoples R China. E-mail Addresses: lzhang at whigg.ac.cn Funding Acknowledgement: National Natural Science Foundation of China [41001333]; Key Laboratory of Nonpoint Source Pollution Control, Ministry of Agriculture [20130102]; National Key Technology R&D Program of China [2012BAC06B03] Funding Text: The authors thank the support by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 41001333), Key Laboratory of Nonpoint Source Pollution Control, Ministry of Agriculture (20130102), and the National Key Technology R&D Program of China (2012BAC06B03). Cited Reference Count: 23 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SOIL WATER CONSERVATION SOC, 945 SW ANKENY RD, ANKENY, IA 50023-9723 USA ISSN: 0022-4561 eISSN: 1941-3300 Web of Science Categories: Ecology; Soil Science; Water Resources Research Areas: Environmental Sciences & Ecology; Agriculture; Water Resources IDS Number: AK8ZW Unique ID: WOS:000338718300005 Cited References: Pretty JN, 2003, ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, V37, P201 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Alexander RB, 2002, BIOGEOCHEMISTRY, V57, P295 Heathwaite AL, 2003, ENVIRONMENTAL MODELLING & SOFTWAREConference on Modelling of Hydrologic Systems (MODSIM 2001), DEC 10-13, 2001, CANNBERRA, AUSTRALIA, V18, P753 Chen CM, 2006, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V57, P359 YOUNG RA, 1989, JOURNAL OF SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION, V44, P168 Shen Zhenyao, 2012, SEPARATION AND PURIFICATION TECHNOLOGY6th International Conference on Sustainable Water Environment, JUL 29-31, 2010, Newark, DE, V84, P104 Ma Xiao, 2011, SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT, V412, P154 SRINIVASAN R, 1994, WATER RESOURCES BULLETIN, V30, P453 Johnes PJ, 1997, HYDROLOGICAL PROCESSES, V11, P269 Liu Xingjian, 2011, BIODIVERSITY AND CONSERVATION, V20, P807 Bingner R., 2001, AnnAGNPS technical processes: Documentation version 2, Borah DK, 2003, TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASAEASAE International Meeting, JUL 28-31, 2002, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, V46, P1553 Smith VH, 2003, ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH, V10, P126 Arnold JG, 1998, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN WATER RESOURCES ASSOCIATION, V34, P73 Bouraoui F, 1996, JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING-ASCE, V122, P493 Williams J. R., 1995, Computer models of watershed hydrology., P909 PRITCHAR.A, 1969, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V25, P348 Rewerts C.C., 1991, Paper 91-2621, MITCHELL JK, 1993, WATER RESOURCES BULLETIN, V29, P833 Novotny V, 1999, WATER SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGYInternational Conference and Workshop on Integrated Management of Water Quality at CSIM, MAY 11-16, 1997, TEOLO, ITALY, V39, P1 Davis JR, 2006, HYDROBIOLOGIA, V559, P23 Zhuang Yanhua, 2012, 2012 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MEDICAL PHYSICS AND BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING (ICMPBE2012)International Conference on Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering (ICMPBE), 2012, Qingdao, PEOPLES R CHINA, V33, P138 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339067500007 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Anatomy of Scholarly Collaboration in Engineering Education: A Big-Data Bibliometric Analysis Authors: Xian, HJ; Madhavan, K Author Full Names: Xian, Hanjun; Madhavan, Krishna Source: JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, 103 (3):486-514; 10.1002/jee.20052 JUL 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: bibliometrics, scholarly collaboration, small-world network KeyWords Plus: AUTHOR COCITATION ANALYSIS; CITATION ANALYSIS; NETWORKS; SCIENCE; IMPACT; FIELD; INSTITUTE; DYNAMICS; JOURNALS; BEHAVIOR Abstract: Background Engineering education has become a large community with an increasing number of scholars and publications. As the number of publications has grown, it has become increasingly difficult to understand the epistemic nature and diffusion characteristics of knowledge generated by this community. Techniques to study community topology require nontrivial computational workflows. Purpose/Hypothesis The present study characterizes the topology of scholarly collaboration and important factors affecting this topology in engineering education research. Design/Methods A bibliometric analysis was conducted of 24,172 papers in engineering education research journals and conference proceedings for the years 2000-2011. A total of 29,116 unique authors are present. Social network analyses were used to characterize the network topology of overall scientific collaboration. Analyses based on grouping scholars by disciplinary backgrounds, research areas, and geographical locations were performed. Results The results show that the engineering education research community is in its early stage of forming a small-world network that relies primarily on 5% of scholars to build capacity. Typical small-world networks provide some very clear characterizations about the state, stability, and growth of the community. Deviations from this ideal model suggest the need for rethinking collaboration in engineering education. Scholars with interdisciplinary backgrounds play a critical role in bridging isolated research teams. Conclusions Compared with other disciplines and the ideal small-world network model, the topology of collaboration in engineering education shows significant barriers to the fast diffusion of innovations. This study demonstrates the value of big-data bibliometrics in understanding scholarly collaboration within a research community. Addresses: [Xian, Hanjun] Microsoft, Bellevue, WA 98004 USA. [Madhavan, Krishna] Purdue Univ, Sch Engn Educ, W Lafayette, IN 47907 USA. E-mail Addresses: hxian at microsoft.com; cm at purdue.edu Funding Acknowledgement: National Science Foundation [NSF TUES-1123108] Funding Text: This work was supported partially through National Science Foundation grant NSF TUES-1123108. Cited Reference Count: 76 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: AMER SOC ENGINEERING EDUCATION, 1818 N ST, N W, STE 600, WASHINGTON, DC 20036 USA ISSN: 1069-4730 eISSN: 2168-9830 Web of Science Categories: Education & Educational Research; Education, Scientific Disciplines; Engineering, Multidisciplinary Research Areas: Education & Educational Research; Engineering IDS Number: AL3YG Unique ID: WOS:000339067500007 Cited References: Peters I., 2009, Folksonomies: Indexing and retrieval in the Web 2.0 Studies in information science., GARFIELD E, 1972, SCIENCE, V178, P471 Polanyi M, 2000, MINERVA, V38, P1 Fronczak A, 2004, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V70, Bozeman B, 2004, RESEARCH POLICY, V33, P599 Wankat PC, 2004, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V93, P13 Small H, 1999, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V50, P799 Sims JL, 2003, CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL OPHTHALMOLOGY, V31, P14 Wasserman S., 1994, Advances in social network analysis: Research in the social and behavioral sciences, Adams Robin S., 2008, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V97, P239 Newman MEJ, 1999, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V60, P7332 Madhavan K., 2012, Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, San Antonio, TX, White D.R., 2004, Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory, V10, Beddoes K., 2009, Proceedings of the 39th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, San Antonio, TX, SMITH LC, 1981, LIBRARY TRENDS, V30, P83 Barabasi A.-L., 2005, P69 Jesiek B. K., 2008, Proceedings of the 2008 SEFI Annual Conferences, Aalborg, Denmark, Powell WW, 2005, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY, V110, P1132 Barrat A, 2004, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V101, P3747 Felder Richard M., 2010, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V99, P121 Wankat Phillip C., 2011, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION, V54, P521 CRONIN B, 1994, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V50, P165 Streveler Ruth A., 2006, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V95, P103 Salton G, 1983, Introduction to modern information retrieval, Rogers EM, 2003, Diffusion of Innovations, Turney P.D., 2000, Information Retrieval, V2, SMITH M, 1958, AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGIST, V13, P596 Newman MEJ, 2001, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V98, P404 Felder RM, 2005, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V94, P7 CIP, 2000, Classification of Instructional Programs: 2000 Edition, Borgman CL, 2002, ANNUAL REVIEW OF INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V36, P3 Lohmann JR, 2005, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V94, P1 COHEN PR, 1987, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V23, P255 Madhavan K., 2010, The FIE story-1991 to 2009, Tuire P., 2001, Higher Education, V42, P493 Booth Wayne C., 2008, The Craft of Research, Tsui Anne S., 2007, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, V33, P426 Roth Camille, 2010, SOCIAL NETWORKS, V32, P16 Fincher Sally A., 2009, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V98, P109 He YL, 2002, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V38, P491 Jamieson L., 2009, Proceedings of 2009 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Austin, TX, Jesiek B. K., 2009, Proceedings of the 2009 SEFI Annual Conferences, Rotterdam, the Netherlands, Simpson T. W., 2010, ASME 2010 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Montreal, Canada, Birnholtz Jeremy P., 2007, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V58, P2226 Roth C., 2007, UK Social Network Conference, London, Campbell David, 2010, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EVALUATION, V31, P66 Ramage D., 2009, Proceedings of the 2009 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Singapore, Kuhn Thomas, 1962, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Borrego Maura, 2007, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V96, P5 Watts DJ, 1998, NATURE, V393, P440 ELMACIOGLU E, 2005, ACM SIGMOD RECORD, V34, P33 Streveler R. A., 2005, Proceedings of 2005 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Portland, OR, Wankat P. C., 1999, Journal of Engineering Education, V88, P37 Bornmann L., 2008, Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, V8, P93 Gmur M, 2003, SCIENTOMETRICS, V57, P27 Lafferty J., 2006, Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Machine Learning, Pittsburgh, PA, Laudel G, 2002, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V11, P3 HACOHENKERNER Y, 2005, COMPUTATIONAL LINGUI, V3406, P657 Albert R, 1999, NATURE, V401, P130 Levenshtein V. I., 1966, Soviet Physics Doklady, V10, P707 March J. G., 2004, Management and Organization Review, V1, P5 Campbell D. T., 1969, Interdisciplinary relationships in the social sciences, P328 Steering Committee of the National Engineering Education Research Colloquies, 2006, Journal of Engineering Education, V95, P259 Acedo FJ, 2005, INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS REVIEW, V14, P619 Borrego Maura, 2010, JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, V99, P185 Madhavan K., 2010, Proceedings of 2010 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Louisville, KY, Medelyan O., 2009, Proceedings of the 2009 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Singapore, Johri A., 2011, Proceedings of the 41st ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Rapid City, SD, 2011, SOCIAL NETWORK DATA ANALYTICS, P1 Wei X., 2006, Proceedings of the 29th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information, Seattle, WA, Mei Q., 2007, SIGKDD 2007, San Jose, CA., Rahm E, 2005, SIGMOD RECORD, V34, P48 Harary F., 1994, Graph Theory, Blei DM, 2003, JOURNAL OF MACHINE LEARNING RESEARCH18th International Conference on Machine Learning, JUN 28-JUL 01, 2001, WILLIAMSTOWN, MASSACHUSETTS, V3, P993 Glanzel W., 2005, P257 Osorio N. L., 2005, Proceedings of 2005 ASEE IL/IN Sectional Conference, DeKalb, IL, ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338953500002 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Worldwide research productivity in the field of electronic cigarette: a bibliometric analysis Authors: Zyoud, SH; Al-Jabi, SW; Sweileh, WM Author Full Names: Zyoud, Sa'ed H.; Al-Jabi, Samah W.; Sweileh, Waleed M. Source: BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, 14 10.1186/1471-2458-14-667 JUN 30 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Bibliometric, Electronic cigarette, E-Cigarette, Scopus KeyWords Plus: NICOTINE DELIVERY-SYSTEMS; EASTERN ARAB COUNTRIES; DEVICE E-CIGARETTE; WEB-OF-SCIENCE; PERIOD 2003-2012; SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS; GOOGLE-SCHOLAR; TOBACCO USE; SCOPUS; SMOKING Abstract: Background: Electronic cigarette (EC) is an emerging phenomenon that is becoming increasingly popular with smokers worldwide. There is a lack of data concerning the evaluation of research productivity in the field of EC originating from the world. The main objectives of this study were to analyse worldwide research output in EC field, and to examine the authorship pattern and the citations retrieved from the Scopus database. Methods: Data were searched for documents with specific words regarding EC as "keywords" in the title. Scientific output was evaluated based on the methodology developed and used in other bibliometric studies by investigation: (a) total and trends of contributions in EC research during all previous years up to the date of data analysis (June 13, 2014); (b) authorship patterns and research productivity; (c) countries contribution; and (d) citations received by the publications. Results: Three hundred and fifty-six documents were retrieved comprising 31.5% original journal articles, 16% letters to the editor, 7.9% review articles, and 44.6% documents that were classified as other types of publications, such as notes or editorials or opinions. The retrieved documents were published in 162 peer-reviewed journals. All retrieved documents were published from 27 countries. the largest number of publications in the field of EC was from the United States of America (USA); (33.7%), followed by the United Kingdom (UK); (11.5%), and Italy (8.1%). The total number of citations at the time of data analysis was 2.277, with an average of 6.4 citations per document and median (interquartile range) of 0.0 (0.0-5.0). The h-index of the retrieved documents was 27. The most productive institutions were Food and Drug Administration, USA (4.2% of total publications) followed by Universita degli Studi di Catania, Italy (3.9%), University of California, San Francisco, USA (3.7%). Conclusions: This bibliometric study is a testament to the progress in EC research from the world over the last few years. More effort is needed to bridge the gap in EC-based research and to promote better evaluation of EC, risks, health effects, or control services worldwide. Addresses: [Zyoud, Sa'ed H.] An Najah Natl Univ, Poison Control & Drug Informat Ctr, Coll Med & Hlth Sci, Nablus, Israel. [Zyoud, Sa'ed H.; Al-Jabi, Samah W.] An Najah Natl Univ, Dept Clin & Community Pharm, Coll Med & Hlth Sci, Nablus, Israel. [Zyoud, Sa'ed H.] Univ Sains Malaysia, Natl Poison Ctr, WHO Collaborating Ctr Drug Informat, George Town, Malaysia. [Sweileh, Waleed M.] An Najah Natl Univ, Dept Pharmacol & Toxicol, Coll Med & Hlth Sci, Nablus, Israel. E-mail Addresses: saedzyoud at yahoo.com Cited Reference Count: 54 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: BIOMED CENTRAL LTD, 236 GRAYS INN RD, FLOOR 6, LONDON WC1X 8HL, ENGLAND ISSN: 1471-2458 Article Number: 667 Web of Science Categories: Public, Environmental & Occupational Health Research Areas: Public, Environmental & Occupational Health IDS Number: AL2KC Unique ID: WOS:000338953500002 Cited References: Oncology TL, 2013, Lancet Oncol, V14, P1027 Tadmouri GO, 2004, SAUDI MEDICAL JOURNAL, V25, P7 Polosa Riccardo, 2013, LANCET ONCOLOGY, V14, PE582 Polosa Riccardo, 2011, BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, V11, Zyoud Sa'ed H., 2014, TOBACCO INDUCED DISEASES, V12, Miro Oscar, 2009, TOXICOLOGY LETTERS, V189, P1 Bullen C., 2010, TOBACCO CONTROL, V19, P98 Ignacio de Granda-Orive Jose, 2011, ARCHIVOS DE BRONCONEUMOLOGIA, V47, P213 Wagener Theodore L., 2012, ADDICTION, V107, P1545 Falagas Matthew E., 2006, ACTA TROPICA, V99, P155 Webster N. R., 2011, BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, V107, P306 Falagas Matthew E., 2008, FASEB JOURNAL, V22, P338 Ayers John W., 2011, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PREVENTIVE MEDICINE, V40, P448 Capasso Lorenzo, 2014, LANCET, V383, P1883 Kira Anette, 2011, NICOTINE & TOBACCO RESEARCH, V13, P474 Zyoud Sa'ed H., 2014, HARM REDUCTION JOURNAL, V11, De Battisti Francesca, 2013, STATISTICAL METHODS AND APPLICATIONS, V22, P269 Etter Jean-Francois, 2011, ADDICTION, V106, P2017 Siegel Michael B., 2011, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PREVENTIVE MEDICINE, V40, P472 Luo C, 2013, Lect Notes Comput Sci, V8040, P1 Smith Derek R., 2010, ARCHIVES OF ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH, V65, P173 Stidham Ryan W., 2012, GASTROENTEROLOGY, V143, P520 Meho Lokman I., 2008, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V59, P1711 Caponnetto Pasquale, 2012, EXPERT REVIEW OF RESPIRATORY MEDICINE, V6, P63 Eissenberg Thomas, 2010, TOBACCO CONTROL, V19, P87 World Health Organization, 2011, WHO report on the global tobacco epidemic 2011: warning about the dangers of tobacco, Mayer Bernd, 2014, ARCHIVES OF TOXICOLOGY, V88, P5 Essential Science Indicators, 2012, Top 20 countries in ALL FIELDS, 2001-August 31, 2011, Warner Kenneth E., 2014, TOBACCO CONTROL, V23, P231 Cahn Zachary, 2011, Journal of public health policy, V32, P16 Henningfield J. E., 2010, TOBACCO CONTROL, V19, P89 Cohen Joanna E., 2010, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PREVENTIVE MEDICINE, V39, P352 Sweileh Waleed M, 2014, BMC research notes, V7, P258 Nykiforuk Candace I. J., 2010, HEALTH POLICY, V97, P1 Etter Jean-Francois, 2011, TOBACCO CONTROL, V20, P243 Farsalinos Konstantinos E, 2014, Therapeutic advances in drug safety, V5, P67 Pauly John, 2007, TOBACCO CONTROL, V16, P357 Vansickel Andrea R., 2010, CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY BIOMARKERS & PREVENTION, V19, P1945 Zyoud Sa'ed H., 2014, HEALTH RESEARCH POLICY AND SYSTEMS, V12, Royle Pamela, 2013, Systematic reviews, V2, P74 Farsalinos Konstantinos E., 2014, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DRUG POLICY, V25, P340 Wallin JA, 2005, BASIC & CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY & TOXICOLOGY, V97, P261 Harrell PT, Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, Devos P., 2011, CLINICS AND RESEARCH IN HEPATOLOGY AND GASTROENTEROLOGY, V35, P336 Weightman Alison L., 2011, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V342, Kulkarni Abhaya V., 2009, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V302, P1092 Garcia-Lopez JA, 1999, EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, V15, P23 World Health Organization, 2013, Questions and answers on electronic cigarettes or electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS), Huggett Sarah, 2013, ATHEROSCLEROSIS, V230, P275 Trtchounian Anna, 2010, NICOTINE & TOBACCO RESEARCH, V12, P905 Zyoud SH, 2003, Hum Exp Toxicol, Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Etter Jean-Francois, 2010, BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, V10, Hunter Paul R., 2009, LANCET, V373, P630 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339037000006 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Development of Spanish research on stem cells. Visualization and identification of the main research fronts Authors: Cantos-Mateos, G; Zulueta, MA; Vargas-Quesada, B; Chinchilla-Rodriguez, Z Author Full Names: Cantos-Mateos, Gisela; Zulueta, Maria-Angeles; Vargas-Quesada, Benjamin; Chinchilla-Rodriguez, Zaida Source: PROFESIONAL DE LA INFORMACION, 23 (3):259-271; 10.3145/epi.2014.may.06 MAY-JUN 2014 Language: Spanish Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Co-word analysis, Network analysis, Information visualization, Stem cells, Science trends, Research trends, Spain KeyWords Plus: AUTHOR COCITATION ANALYSIS; CO-WORD ANALYSIS; INFORMATION-SCIENCE; RESEARCH FIELDS; ISI WEB; SCIENTOMETRICS; NETWORKS; CITATION; INDICATORS; EVOLUTION Abstract: Using visualization techniques based on social networks, this study aims to analyze stem cell research in Spain, as reflected in the Science Citation Index (SCI) database between 1997 and 2010, divided into three sub-periods. The selected unit of analysis was the Key Words Plus descriptors (KW+), the unit of measurement was their co-occurrence, and the Pajek and VOSviewer tools were used to generate and display the social networks. The results show two complementary images of research: the static structure, distinguishing between clinical and basic research, and the evolutionary dynamic, analysing both the most established and the emerging lines. The main contribution of this work is to present a methodology for the visualization and detection of the main research lines over time, demonstrating its applicability and its predictability in scientific and geographic domains. Addresses: [Cantos-Mateos, Gisela; Chinchilla-Rodriguez, Zaida] CSIC, Inst Polit & Bienes Publ CSIC IPP, Madrid 28037, Spain. [Zulueta, Maria-Angeles] Univ Alcala de Henares, Fac Documentac, Madrid 28804, Spain. [Vargas-Quesada, Benjamin] Univ Granada, Fac Comunicac & Documentac, E-18071 Granada, Spain. E-mail Addresses: gisela.cantos at csic.es; ma.zulueta at uah.es; benjamin at ugr.es; zaida.chinchilla at csic.es Cited Reference Count: 51 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: EPI, APARTADO 32 280, BARCELONA, 08080, SPAIN ISSN: 1386-6710 Web of Science Categories: Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: AL3OB Unique ID: WOS:000339037000006 Cited References: White HD, 1998, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V49, P327 Borner K, 2003, ANNUAL REVIEW OF INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V37, P179 RIP A, 1984, SCIENTOMETRICS, V6, P381 Takahashi Kazutoshi, 2006, CELL, V126, P663 Leydesdorff Loet, 2008, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V59, P1810 Boyack Kevin W., 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS11th International Conference of the International-Society-for-Scientometrics-and-Informetrics, JUN 25-27, 2007, Madrid, SPAIN, V79, P45 Leydesdorff Loet, 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P348 HAMMOND J, 1949, NATURE, V163, P28 Soos Sandor, 2013, EUROPEAN PHYSICAL JOURNAL-SPECIAL TOPICS, V222, P1441 Ding Ying, 2001, Information processing & management, V37, P67 White HD, 2003, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V54, P423 Rafols Ismael, 2010, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V61, P1871 Lee Woo Hyoung, 2008, SCIENTOMETRICS, V76, P503 GARFIELD E, 1990, CURRENT CONTENTS, V32, P5 Gabor Csardi, 2006, Artificial neural networks - Icann 2006, 16thIntl conf, Sept. 10-14, Athens, Greece, P698 Zhao Dangzhi, 2011, Scientometrics, V87, P15 Glaenzel Wolfgang, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V88, P297 van Eck Nees Jan, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V84, P523 Zitt M, 1996, SCIENTOMETRICS4th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators, OCT 05-07, 1995, ANTWERP, BELGIUM, V37, P223 Wilmut I, 1997, NATURE, V385, P810 CALLON M, 1983, SOCIAL SCIENCE INFORMATION SUR LES SCIENCES SOCIALES, V22, P191 Zulueta Maria-Angeles, 2011, Scientometrics, V88, P679 Cantos-Mateos G., 2012, ASLIB PROCEEDINGS, V64, P561 de Moya-Anegon Felix, 2007, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V58, P2167 Batagelj Vladimir, 2010, Pajek 2.0: package for large network analysis, Leydesdorff Loet, 2008, PROFESIONAL DE LA INFORMACION, V17, P611 Chen Chaomei, 2010, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V61, P1386 Boyack Kevin W., 2010, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V61, P2389 Chen Dar-Zen, 2011, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V5, P400 GARFIELD E, 1993, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V44, P298 De-Moya-Anegon Felix, 2007, Indicadores bibliometricos de la actividad cientifica espanola: 1990-2004, Cantos-Mateos Gisela, 2013, I Congresso ISKO Espanha e Portugal / XI Con gresso ISKO Espanha, 7-9 nov., 2013, Oporto (Portugal), P173 WHITE HD, 1981, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V32, P163 de Moya-Anegon Felix, 2006, PROFESIONAL DE LA INFORMACION, V15, P258 Vargas-Quesada Benjamin, 2008, PROFESIONAL DE LA INFORMACION, V17, P22 Leydesdorff Loet, 2013, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V64, P2573 Small Henry, 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS, V79, P365 Vargas-Quesada Benjamin, 2010, INFORMATION VISUALIZATION, V9, P288 EuroStemCell iCeMS, Elsevier, 2013, Stem cell research. Trends and perspectives on the evolving international landscape, KESSLER MM, 1963, AMERICAN DOCUMENTATION, V14, P10 BRAAM RR, 1991, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V42, P252 Takahashi Kazutoshi, 2007, CELL, V131, P861 Leydesdorff Loet, 2011, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V5, P469 Zitt Michel, 2011, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V62, P19 Wasserman Stanley, 1998, Social network analysis: methods and applications, Guerrero-Bote Vicente P., 2013, Scientometrics, V97, P743 CAMBROSIO A, 1993, SCIENTOMETRICS, V27, P119 KAMADA T, 1989, INFORMATION PROCESSING LETTERS, V31, P7 De-Moya-Anegon Felix, 2009, Indicadores bibliometricos de la actividad cieniffica espanola: 2007, Schank Thomas, 2008, Dynamic graph drawing in visone, VANRAAN AFJ, 1993, SCIENTOMETRICSEUROPEAN WORKSHOP ON SCIENTOMETRIC METHODS OF RESEARCH EVALUATION IN THE SCIENCES, SOCIAL SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGY, APR 13-17, 1991, POTSDAM, GERMANY, V26, P169 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339037000005 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Trends in science mapping: Co-use of scientific literatures as evidence of researchers' interests Authors: Torres-Salinas, D; Jimenez-Contreras, E; Robinson-Garcia, N Author Full Names: Torres-Salinas, Daniel; Jimenez-Contreras, Evaristo; Robinson-Garcia, Nicolas Source: PROFESIONAL DE LA INFORMACION, 23 (3):253-258; 10.3145/epi.2014.may.05 MAY-JUN 2014 Language: Spanish Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Science maps, Information visualization, Co-use, Consumption of scientific literature, Metodologies, Information retrieval, Research interests, University of Navarre KeyWords Plus: JOURNAL USAGE; IMPACT; WEBOMETRICS; COCITATION; METRICS; WEB Abstract: The possibility of constructing science maps based on co-use of scientific literature by academic users is explored. We define co-use as the co-occurrence of scientific information requests by pairs of users recorded in platforms of scientific journals. We used search data from the University of Navarre to the ScienceDirect platform in 2012 in order to test the validity and to analyze the possibilities of this methodological approach. We conclude by emphasizing the viability of this methodology when exploring the research interests of an academic institution along with the relations among different disciplines. Addresses: [Torres-Salinas, Daniel; Jimenez-Contreras, Evaristo; Robinson-Garcia, Nicolas] Univ Granada, Res Grp EC3, E-18071 Granada, Spain. E-mail Addresses: torressalinas at gmail.com; evaristo at ugr.es; elrobin at ugr.es Cited Reference Count: 21 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: EPI, APARTADO 32 280, BARCELONA, 08080, SPAIN ISSN: 1386-6710 Web of Science Categories: Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: AL3OB Unique ID: WOS:000339037000005 Cited References: Torres-Salinas Daniel, 2013, Comunicar, V41, P53 Torres-Salinas Daniel, 2013, Anuario ThinkEPI, V7, P114 Leydesdorff Loet, 2008, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V59, P77 Aguillo Isidro F., 2006, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V57, P1296 Brody Tim, 2006, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V57, P1060 SMALL H, 1973, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V24, P265 Borrego Angel, 2005, El profesional de la informacion, V14, P30 Torres-Salinas Daniel, 2011, PROFESIONAL DE LA INFORMACION, V20, P111 Nicholas D, 2005, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V61, P248 Thelwall Mike, 2008, JOURNAL OF INFORMATION SCIENCE, V34, P605 Tenopir Carol, Learned publishing., LUUKKONEN T, 1992, SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY & HUMAN VALUES, V17, P101 Almind TC, 1997, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V53, P404 Noyons Christiaan M., 2004, P237 Priem Jason, 2010, Altmetrics.org., Rodriguez-Bravo Blanca, 2012, PROFESIONAL DE LA INFORMACION, V21, P585 Haustein Stefanie, 2011, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V5, P446 Van-Noorden Richard, 2014, Nature., Rowlands Ian, 2007, ASLIB PROCEEDINGS, V59, P222 Bollen J, 2005, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V41, P1419 Kurz Michael J., 2010, Annual review of information science and technology, V44, P1 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338613700009 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Detecting research fronts using different types of weighted citation networks Authors: Fujita, K; Kajikawa, Y; Mori, J; Sakata, I Author Full Names: Fujita, Katsuhide; Kajikawa, Yuya; Mori, Junichiro; Sakata, Ichiro Source: JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT, 32 129-146; SI 10.1016/j.jengtecman.2013.07.002 APR-JUN 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Research front, Citation network analysis, Bibliometrics, Decision support KeyWords Plus: SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE; SCIENCE; COCITATION; RELATEDNESS; DOCUMENTS; MAP Abstract: In this paper, we investigate the performance of different types of weighted citation networks for detecting emerging research fronts by a comparative study. Three citation patterns including direct citation, co-citation and bibliographic coupling, have been tested in three research domains including gallium nitride, complex networks, and nano-carbon. These three patterns of citation networks are constructed for each research domain, and the papers in those domains are divided into clusters to detect the research front. Additionally, we apply some measures to weighted citations like difference in publication years between citing and cited papers and similarities of keywords between them, which are expected to be able to effectively to detect emerging research fronts. To investigate the performance of different types of weighted citation networks for detecting emerging research fields, we evaluate the performance of each approach by using the following measures of extracted research fronts: visibility, speed, and topological and textual relevance. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Addresses: [Fujita, Katsuhide] Tokyo Univ Agr & Technol, Fac Engn, Koganei, Tokyo 1848588, Japan. [Kajikawa, Yuya] Tokyo Inst Technol, Grad Sch Innovat Management, Minato Ku, Tokyo 1080023, Japan. [Mori, Junichiro] Univ Tokyo, Platinum Soc, Bunkyo Ku, Tokyo 1130033, Japan. [Sakata, Ichiro] Univ Tokyo, Sch Engn, Bunkyo Ku, Tokyo 1138656, Japan. E-mail Addresses: katfuji at cc.tuat.ac.jp Cited Reference Count: 33 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, PO BOX 211, 1000 AE AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0923-4748 eISSN: 1879-1719 Web of Science Categories: Business; Engineering, Industrial; Management Research Areas: Business & Economics; Engineering IDS Number: AK7MZ Unique ID: WOS:000338613700009 Cited References: Jaccard P, 1912, New Phytol, V11, P37 Chen CM, 1999, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V35, P401 Newman MEJ, 2004, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V69, Chen C., 2003, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, V53, P678 SMALL H, 1974, SCIENCE STUDIES, V4, P17 Small H, 1999, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V50, P799 Hoperoft J., 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, V101, P5249 Kostoff RN, 1997, JOURNAL OF INFORMATION SCIENCE, V23, P301 Barabasi AL, 1999, SCIENCE, V286, P509 Small Henry, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS10th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, JUL, 2005, Stockholm, SWEDEN, V68, P595 Boyack Kevin W., 2010, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V61, P2389 Jarneving Bo, 2007, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V1, P287 IIJIMA S, 1991, NATURE, V354, P56 Chen CM, 2006, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V57, P359 Leydesdorff Loet, 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P348 SMALL H, 1973, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V24, P265 Shibata Naoki, 2008, TECHNOVATION, V28, P758 NAKAMURA S, 1994, APPLIED PHYSICS LETTERS, V64, P1687 Jain A, 2005, PATTERN RECOGNITION, V38, P2270 Shibata Naoki, 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P571 NAKAMURA S, 1992, JAPANESE JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSICS PART 1-REGULAR PAPERS SHORT NOTES & REVIEW PAPERS, V31, P2883 NAKAMURA S, 1991, JAPANESE JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSICS PART 2-LETTERS, V30, PL1705 Shibata Naoki, 2011, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V62, P1360 Kostoff RN, 2001, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V52, P1148 Losiewicz P, 2000, JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS, V15, P99 Klavans Richard, 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P455 Davidson GS, 1998, JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS, V11, P259 Klavans R, 2006, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V57, P251 KESSLER MM, 1963, AMERICAN DOCUMENTATION, V14, P10 Boyack KW, 2005, SCIENTOMETRICS, V64, P351 BRAAM RR, 1991, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V42, P233 Watts DJ, 1998, NATURE, V393, P440 Leydesdorff L, 2004, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V60, P371 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338613700011 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Finding linkage between technology and social issue: A Literature Based Discovery approach Authors: Ittipanuvat, V; Fujita, K; Sakata, I; Kajikawa, Y Author Full Names: Ittipanuvat, Vitavin; Fujita, Katsuhide; Sakata, Ichiro; Kajikawa, Yuya Source: JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT, 32 160-184; SI 10.1016/j.jengtecman.2013.05.006 APR-JUN 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Literature Based Discovery, Text mining, Link mining, Citation analysis, Innovation KeyWords Plus: LAPAROSCOPIC RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY; TOTAL HIP-REPLACEMENT; CITATION ANALYSIS; FISH-OIL; MEDICAL LITERATURES; COCITATION ANALYSIS; KNEE-REPLACEMENT; PATENT ANALYSIS; ROBOT; SCIENCE Abstract: This paper investigates Literature Based Discovery (LBD) approach to reveal linkages between technology and social issue to elucidate plausible contribution of science and technology for solving social issues. Robotics and gerontology were selected as an example in our analysis. The result shows various technological options of robotics contributing to healthcare and well-being of elderly people, mainly in surgery, rehabilitation, and companionship. In addition, we comparatively evaluated effectiveness of semantic similarity measures to extract these linkages from bibliographic database. Our methodology can be utilized as a decision support tool for managers and policy makers to extract and design promising research targets. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Addresses: [Ittipanuvat, Vitavin] Univ Tokyo, Grad Sch Engn, Dept Technol Management Innovat, Bunkyo Ku, Tokyo 1138656, Japan. [Ittipanuvat, Vitavin; Kajikawa, Yuya] Univ Tokyo, Innovat Policy Res Ctr, Bunkyo Ku, Tokyo 1138656, Japan. [Fujita, Katsuhide] Tokyo Univ Agr & Technol, Fac Engn, Koganei, Tokyo 1848588, Japan. [Sakata, Ichiro] Univ Tokyo, Todai Policy Alternat Res Inst, Bunkyo Ku, Tokyo 1130033, Japan. [Kajikawa, Yuya] Tokyo Inst Technol, Grad Sch Innovat Management, Minato Ku, Tokyo 1080023, Japan. E-mail Addresses: kajikawa at mot.titech.ac.jp Cited Reference Count: 93 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, PO BOX 211, 1000 AE AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0923-4748 eISSN: 1879-1719 Web of Science Categories: Business; Engineering, Industrial; Management Research Areas: Business & Economics; Engineering IDS Number: AK7MZ Unique ID: WOS:000338613700011 Cited References: Bellotto Nicola, 2010, AUTONOMOUS ROBOTS, V28, P425 Mitchell JM, 2006, REHABILITATION COUNSELING BULLETIN, V49, P157 SWANSON DR, 1990, PERSPECTIVES IN BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE, V33, P157 SWANSON DR, 1986, PERSPECTIVES IN BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE, V30, P7 Johnson Kurt L., 2010, PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, V21, P267 Wang Jue, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V87, P563 Sakata I., 2010, Proceedings of Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology 2010 Conference, Bangkok, Smith Adrian, 2010, RESEARCH POLICY, V39, P435 Plinkert PK, 2001, HNO, V49, P514 Small H, 1999, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V50, P799 McMurray A, 2002, JOURNAL OF ADVANCED NURSING, V40, P663 Wilson TD, 1997, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V33, P551 Ganiz M. C., 2005, Technical report, Lehigh University, LU-CSE-05-027, Smalheiser NR, 1996, NEUROLOGY, V47, P809 Eriksson J., 2005, Proceedings of the IEEE 9th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics, Chicago, SWANSON DR, 1987, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V38, P228 Shibata N., 2011, Foresight, V13, Melson Gail F., 2009, JOURNAL OF SOCIAL ISSUES, V65, P545 Adai AT, 2004, JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR BIOLOGY, V340, P179 SALTON G, 1975, COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM, V18, P613 Hughes T. P, 1994, Does Technology Drive History? The Dilemma of Technological Determinism, Martelli M, 2000, ANNALS OF BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING, V28, P1146 Lee Yong Scong, 2007, YONSEI MEDICAL JOURNAL, V48, P341 Kirkim Gunay, 2007, MEDITERRANEAN JOURNAL OF OTOLOGY28th National Meeting of the Turkish-Otolaryngology-and-Head-and-Neck-Surgery-Society, SEP 22-26, 2005, Antalya, TURKEY, V3, P126 Shibata Naoki, 2008, TECHNOVATION, V28, P758 Williams R, 1996, RESEARCH POLICY, V25, P865 Hatzinger Martin, 2006, JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, V20, P848 Smalheiser NR, 1998, COMPUTER METHODS AND PROGRAMS IN BIOMEDICINE, V57, P149 Klavans Richard, 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P455 Sakata Ichiro, 2013, TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING AND SOCIAL CHANGE, V80, P1085 Swanson DR, 1997, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, V91, P183 Robinson L., 2007, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GERIATRIC PSYCHIATRY, V22, P9 Almeida P, 1996, STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V17, P155 Alcacer Juan, 2006, REVIEW OF ECONOMICS AND STATISTICS, V88, P774 Cory KA, 1997, COMPUTERS AND THE HUMANITIES, V31, P1 Shibata Naoki, 2011, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V62, P1360 Mynatt E., 1999, Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Cooperative Buildings, Pittsburgh, Wada K, 2004, PROCEEDINGS OF THE IEEE, V92, P1780 Gordon MD, 1998, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V49, P674 Porter Alan L., 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS, V81, P719 Jorm AF, 1997, MEDICAL JOURNAL OF AUSTRALIA, V166, P376 Joseph JV, 2005, BJU INTERNATIONAL, V96, P39 Boyack KW, 2002, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V53, P764 Charlifue S, 2004, NEUROREHABILITATION, V19, P91 Qin J, 1997, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V48, P893 Kajikawa Yuya, 2007, SUSTAINABILITY SCIENCE, V2, P221 Gordon M. D., 2002, ACM Transactions on Internet Technology, V2, P261 VALDESPEREZ RE, 1994, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, V65, P247 Chen CM, 2002, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V53, P678 Weeber M, 2005, BRIEFINGS IN BIOINFORMATICS, V6, P277 Lupsakko T, 2002, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GERIATRIC PSYCHIATRY, V17, P808 Lo Szu-Chia, 2007, SCIENTOMETRICS, V70, P183 Llorente MD, 2005, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GERIATRIC PSYCHIATRY, V13, P195 Barnason Susan, 2006, HEART & LUNG, V35, P225 Mynatt E., 2001, Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Seattle, Camarinha-Matos L. M., 2001, Kostoff Ronald N., 2008, TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING AND SOCIAL CHANGE, V75, P165 Shoval Noam, 2010, JOURNAL OF TRANSPORT GEOGRAPHY, V18, P603 Borner M, 1997, UNFALLCHIRURG, V100, P640 Truesdale Matthew D., 2010, JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY27th World Congress of Endourology, OCT 06-10, 2009, Munich, GERMANY, V24, P1055 Arnold E, 2004, RESEARCH EVALUATIONEVA Conference on Nordic Evaluators, SEP, 2001, Haholmen, NORWAY, V13, P3 Thelwall Mike, 2008, JOURNAL OF INFORMATION SCIENCE, V34, P605 Figl Michael, 2010, COMPUTERIZED MEDICAL IMAGING AND GRAPHICS, V34, P61 NARIN F, 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, P147 Weeber M, 2001, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V52, P548 Schaffernicht E, 2005, KI2005: ADVANCES IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, PROCEEDINGS28th Annual German Conference on Artificial Intelligence, SEP 11-14, 2005, Koblenz, GERMANY, V3698, P320 Estey Eric P., 2009, CUAJ-CANADIAN UROLOGICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL, V3, P488 Weber BA, 2000, GERIATRIC NURSING, V21, P250 Davidson GS, 1998, JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS, V11, P259 Harwin William S., 2006, PROCEEDINGS OF THE IEEE, V94, P1717 SWANSON DR, 1989, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V40, P432 Borner K, 2003, ANNUAL REVIEW OF INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V37, P179 Webster Kate E., 2006, JOURNAL OF AGING AND PHYSICAL ACTIVITY, V14, P181 Banks Marian R., 2008, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL DIRECTORS ASSOCIATION, V9, P173 D'Attellis N, 2002, JOURNAL OF CARDIOTHORACIC AND VASCULAR ANESTHESIA, V16, P397 Small Henry, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS10th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, JUL, 2005, Stockholm, SWEDEN, V68, P595 Shibata Naoki, 2010, TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING AND SOCIAL CHANGE, V77, P1147 Aoyagi Daisuke, 2007, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON NEURAL SYSTEMS AND REHABILITATION ENGINEERING10th IEEE International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics, JUN 13-15, 2007, Noordwijk, NETHERLANDS, V15, P387 Osareh F, 1996, LIBRI, V46, P149 Federspil PA, 2004, BIOMEDIZINISCHE TECHNIK54th Annual Meeting of the German-Society-of-Neurosurgery, APR, 2003, Saarbrucken, GERMANY, V49, P78 Frantzi K., 2000, International Journal on Digital Libraries, V3, Pirraglia PA, 1999, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GERIATRIC PSYCHIATRY, V14, P668 Klavans R, 2006, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V57, P251 Osareh F, 1996, LIBRI, V46, P217 Boyack KW, 2005, SCIENTOMETRICS, V64, P351 Shibata Naoki, 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P571 Newman MEJ, 2004, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V69, SWANSON DR, 1988, PERSPECTIVES IN BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE, V31, P526 Daim Tugrul U., 2006, TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING AND SOCIAL CHANGE, V73, P981 Sausville J., 2010, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PRACTICE, V64, P1740 Gordon MD, 1996, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V47, P116 FREEMAN C, 1979, FUTURES, V11, P206 Francois Dorothee, 2009, INTERACTION STUDIES, V10, P324 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338613700010 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Characterizing the emergence of two nanotechnology topics using a contemporaneous global micro-model of science Authors: Boyack, KW; Klavans, R; Small, H; Ungar, L Author Full Names: Boyack, Kevin W.; Klavans, Richard; Small, Henry; Ungar, Lyle Source: JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT, 32 147-159; SI 10.1016/j.jengtecman.2013.07.001 APR-JUN 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Emergence, Emerging technologies, Hot topics, Graphene, Science mapping KeyWords Plus: CITATION; FIELDS Abstract: This study presents a methodology that can be used to characterize emergent topics within the context of a contemporaneous, global micro-model of the scientific literature. To illustrate its effectiveness, two known emergent nanotechnology topics (graphene and dye-sensitized solar cells) are characterized. We show that the model and methodology are suitable for characterizing the emergence of topics as they are emerging. In addition, we show that the two topics follow two different patterns of emergence - one where topic is not focused but then grows explosively, and one in which the topic quickly becomes an area of focus and grows steadily. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V.Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Addresses: [Boyack, Kevin W.; Klavans, Richard; Small, Henry] SciTech Strategies Inc, Albuquerque, NM 87122 USA. [Ungar, Lyle] Univ Penn, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA. E-mail Addresses: kboyack at mapofscience.com Funding Acknowledgement: Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA) via Department of Interior National Business Center (DoI/NBC) [D11PC20152] Funding Text: This research is supported by the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA) via Department of Interior National Business Center (DoI/NBC) contract number D11PC20152. The U.S. Government is authorized to reproduce and distribute reprints for Governmental purposes notwithstanding any copyright annotation thereon. Disclaimer: The views and conclusions contained herein are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official policies or endorsements, either expressed or implied, of IARPA, DoI/NBC, or the U.S. Government. Cited Reference Count: 26 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, PO BOX 211, 1000 AE AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0923-4748 eISSN: 1879-1719 Web of Science Categories: Business; Engineering, Industrial; Management Research Areas: Business & Economics; Engineering IDS Number: AK7MZ Unique ID: WOS:000338613700010 Cited References: Small H, 1997, SCIENTOMETRICS, V38, P275 Chen Chaomei, 2009, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V3, P191 Goldstein J., 1999, Emergence, V1, P49 Klavans Richard, 2011, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V62, P1 Tu Yi-Ning, 2012, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V48, P303 Garfield E., 1964, The Use of Citation Data in Writing the History of Science, de Haan J., 2006, ECOLOGICAL COMPLEXITYConference on Complexity and Ecological Economics, SEP 11-14, 2005, Liverpool, ENGLAND, V3, P293 Mane KK, 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, P5287 Corning P.A., 2002, Complexity, V7, Alexander Jeffrey, 2012, PICMET '12: PROCEEDINGS - TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT FOR EMERGING TECHNOLOGIESConference of PICMET - Technology Management for Emerging Technologies (PICMET), JUL 29-AUG 02, 2012, Vancouver, CANADA, P1286 National Science Board, 2008, Science and Engineering Indicators 2008, V1, Klavans R., 2012, 17th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators, Montreal, Canada, Novoselov KS, 2004, SCIENCE, V306, P666 Boyack KW, 2005, SCIENTOMETRICS, V64, P351 Guo Hanning, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V89, P421 SMALL H, 1985, SCIENTOMETRICS, V8, P321 Bettencourt Luis M. A., 2008, SCIENTOMETRICS, V75, P495 Boyack K. W., 2013, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, National Science Board, 2008, Science and Engineering Indicators 2008, V2, Kuhn T.S., 1970, The structure of scientific revolutions, PRICE D, 1976, INTERNATIONAL FORUM ON INFORMATION AND DOCUMENTATION, V1, P17 SMALL H, 1974, SCIENCE STUDIES, V4, P17 SMALL HG, 1976, INTERNATIONAL CLASSIFICATION, V3, P67 Dreyer Daniel R., 2010, ANGEWANDTE CHEMIE-INTERNATIONAL EDITION, V49, P9336 Bettencourt Luis M. A., 2009, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V3, P210 Boyack Kevin W., 2010, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V61, P2389 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339575200002 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: How Far Has the International Neurourology Journal Progressed Since Its Transformation Into an English Language Journal? Authors: Huh, S Author Full Names: Huh, Sun Source: INTERNATIONAL NEUROUROLOGY JOURNAL, 18 (1):3-9; 10.5213/inj.2014.18.1.3 MAR 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Journal impact factor, Bibliographic database, PubMed KeyWords Plus: MEDICINE; SCIENCE Abstract: Purpose: The publisher of the International Neurourology Journal changed the text to English in 2010 to promote the journal as an international publication. Four years later, what has happened to this journal? This paper will use citation indicators to describe the degree of internationalization. Methods: Citation indicators such as impact factors, total citations from Web of Science, Science Journal Rankings (SJR), cites per documents (2 years), and Hirsch indexes (h-indexes) from Web of Science, digital object identifier (DOI)/CrossRef, Scimago-JR, or Scopus were calculated. In addition, the native countries of the authors and researchers citing the journal in Web of Science were analyzed. Results: Impact factors in 2012 and 2013 were 0.645 and 0.857, respectively. Total citations in 2011, 2012, and 2013 from Web of Science were 15, 51, and 99, respectively, and the SJRs in 2011 and 2012 were 0.220 and 0.390, respectively. The h-indexes from DOI/CrossRef, Scopus, and Web of Science were 7, 8, and 6, respectively. Out of 153 unsolicited published papers, 27 (17.6%) were from outside of Korea. The researchers citing the journal in Web of Science and Scopus were primarily from the United States, Korea, China, the United Kingdom, and France. Funding agencies supported 39 of 101 original articles (38.6%). Conclusions: After changing the text to the English language, the citation indicators show that the International Neurourology Journal has been elevated to an international journal. Although the nationality of authors varies from year to year, the increase in the number of manuscripts from international authors is obvious. Addresses: Hallym Univ, Coll Med, Inst Med Educ, Dept Parasitol, Chunchon 200702, South Korea. E-mail Addresses: shuh at hallym.ac.kr Funding Acknowledgement: National Research Foundation of Korea; Korean Federation of Science and Technology Societies (KOFST), Government of the Republic of Korea Funding Text: This work is supported by a research grant from the National Research Foundation of Korea (policy research-2013-003-academic infrastructure promotion) and the Korean Federation of Science and Technology Societies (KOFST-2013), Government of the Republic of Korea. Cited Reference Count: 18 Times Cited: 1 Publisher: KOREAN CONTINENCE SOC, DEPT UROLOGY, AJOU UNIV COLL MEDICINE, SAN 5 WONCHEN-DONG, YEONGOTONG-GU, SUWON 443-721, SOUTH KOREA ISSN: 2093-4777 eISSN: 2093-6931 Web of Science Categories: Urology & Nephrology Research Areas: Urology & Nephrology IDS Number: AM0ZC Unique ID: WOS:000339575200002 Cited References: Huh Sun, 2013, BIOCHEMIA MEDICA, V23, P235 Huh S, 2014, Sci Ed, V1, P19 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Kim JA, 2014, Sci Ed, V1, P27 [Anonymous], 2014, Web of Science, Huh Sun, 2013, KOREAN JOURNAL OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, V28, P635 Jeong GH, 2014, Sci Ed, V1, P24 Hames I, 2014, Sci Ed, V1, P9 Huh Sun, 2013, Journal of educational evaluation for health professions, V10, P3 Piryani Rano Mal, 2013, Journal of educational evaluation for health professions, V10, P13 Huh Sun, 2011, Korean Journal of Internal Medicine, V26, P1 Lammey R, 2014, Sci Ed, V1, P13 Kim NY, 2014, Sci Ed, V1, P43 KoreaMed Synapse, 2014, Huh Sun, 2013, JOURNAL OF NEUROGASTROENTEROLOGY AND MOTILITY, V19, P419 Huh Sun, 2011, Neurointervention, V6, P49 [Anonymous], 2007, SCImago Journal & Country Rank, Huh Sun, 2013, Korean journal of urology, V54, P220 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339270100006 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Characteristics of the most frequently cited English-language journal publications 1981-2010 of psychology from the German-speaking countries Authors: Krampen, G; Schui, G; Ferring, D; Bauer, HPW Author Full Names: Krampen, Guenter; Schui, Gabriel; Ferring, Dieter; Bauer, Hans P. W. Source: PSYCHOLOGISCHE RUNDSCHAU, 65 (3):159-168; 10.1026/0033-3042/a000196 2014 Language: German Document Type: Article Author Keywords: scientometry, citation analysis, evaluation, psychology, German, Austria, Switzerland KeyWords Plus: SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTIVITY; UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENTS; SCIENCE; CITATIONS Abstract: The results of publication-based citation analyses for 28,383 English-language journal psychology publications from the German-speaking countries published between 1981 and 2010 are presented. Data for analyses stem from the Web of Science database, which covers nearly 90 % of such publications. The distribution of the frequency of citations by other authors is strongly skewed and shows that 20 % of the articles are never cited, 60 % are cited 1-22 times, and 20 % are cited more than 22 times. Age of publication and frequency of citations have significant, albeit numerically low, rank order correlations (Kendall's tau=.23). Therefore, the criteria of the number of citations by others per year since publication of the article is used to identify the 107 most frequently cited papers (TOP 107). The characteristics of these papers are described with reference to authorships and their internationality, the disciplines of psychology to which they belong, and to the study type (e. g., empirical vs. nonempirical). The limitations and possibilities of citation analyses are discussed with a preference for a rational integration of citation analyses into empirically supported peer review procedures. Addresses: [Krampen, Guenter; Schui, Gabriel; Bauer, Hans P. W.] Univ Trier, Fachbereich Psychol 1, D-54286 Trier, Germany. [Ferring, Dieter] Univ Luxembourg, FLHASE Res Unit INSIDE, Dept psychol, L-7201 Walferdange, Luxembourg. E-mail Addresses: krampen at uni-trier.de Cited Reference Count: 35 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: HOGREFE & HUBER PUBLISHERS, ROHNSWEG 25, D-37085 GOTTINGEN, GERMANY ISSN: 0033-3042 eISSN: 2190-6238 Web of Science Categories: Psychology, Multidisciplinary Research Areas: Psychology IDS Number: AL6VC Unique ID: WOS:000339270100006 Cited References: Abramo Giovanni, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V87, P499 Krampen Guenter, 2007, SCIENTOMETRICS, V71, P191 BASLER HD, 1995, PSYCHOLOGISCHE RUNDSCHAU, V46, P36 Smith Derek R., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P419 Mutz Ruediger, 2012, PLOS ONE, V7, Schui G., 2014, Psychologische Rundschau, V64, P24 Bilsky W., 1998, Psychologische Rundschau, V49, P225 Aguillo Isidro F., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS13th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, JUL 04-07, 2011, Durban, SOUTH AFRICA, V91, P343 Moed H. F., 2005, Citation analysis in research evaluation, Wainer Jacques, 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V96, P395 Larsen Peder Olesen, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V84, P575 Egloff B, 2006, PSYCHOLOGISCHE RUNDSCHAU, V57, P116 Markowitsch HJ, 1999, PSYCHOLOGISCHE RUNDSCHAU, V50, P168 Krampen Guenter, 2013, ZEITSCHRIFT FUR EVALUATION, V12, P79 ENDLER NS, 1978, AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGIST, V33, P1064 Johnston David W., 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V95, P1023 Gigerenter G, 1999, PSYCHOLOGISCHE RUNDSCHAU, V50, P101 2007, Thesaurus of Psychological Index Terms, SEGLEN PO, 1992, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, V43, P628 Krampen Guenter, 2008, SCIENTOMETRICS, V76, P3 Montada L., 1998, Psychologische Rundschau, V49, P228 Honekopp J., 2011, Scientometrics, V90, P843 Westmeyer H., 1998, Psychologische Rundschau, V49, P227 Albarran Pedro, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V85, P329 Krampen G., 2005, Internationalitat und Internationalisierung der deutschsprachigen Psychologie, Marx W., 2012, Beitrage zur Hochschulforschung, V34, P50 Mattern F., 2013, Vortrag auf dem Jubilaums-Kolloquium, 20 Jahre dblp, 04.07, 2013, BAUMERT J, 1990, ZEITSCHRIFT FUR PADAGOGIK, V36, P73 Mingers John, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V85, P613 Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Psychologie (DGPs), 1998, Psychologische Rundschau, V49, P105 Kliegl Reinhold, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V87, P149 Frese M, 1990, Zeitschrift fur Arbeits- und Organisationspsychologie, V34, P155 Bornmann Luti, 2008, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V64, P45 Krampen G., 2013, Proceedings of the 14th International Society of Scientometrics and Informetrics Conference (ISSI2013), 15th-18th July, 2013, Montada L, 1999, PSYCHOLOGISCHE RUNDSCHAU, V50, P69 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339033000018 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: RAM the PI-BETA, C3PO-what the H-STAR happened to my promotion application? Or: The pros and cons of bibliometric evaluations of researchers Authors: Calver, MC Author Full Names: Calver, Michael C. Edited by: Lunney D; Hutchings P; Recher HF Source: GRUMPY SCIENTISTS: THE ECOLOGICAL CONSCIENCE OF A NATION, 106-121; 10.7882/FS.2013.019 2013 Language: English Document Type: Proceedings Paper Conference Title: Annual Forum on Grumpy Scientists: the Ecological Conscience of a Nation Conference Date: NOV 03, 2012 Conference Location: Sydney, AUSTRALIA Conference Sponsors: Royal Zoolog Soc New S Wales Conference Host: Council Royal Zoolog Soc Author Keywords: Journal Impact Factor, Hirsch index, citation, bibliometrics KeyWords Plus: RESEARCH ASSESSMENT EXERCISES; WEB-OF-SCIENCE; IMPACT-FACTOR; GOOGLE-SCHOLAR; CONSERVATION-BIOLOGY; CITATION ANALYSIS; JOURNAL RANKINGS; INDEX; PUBLICATION; SCIENTISTS Abstract: Bibliometrics - methods to quantitatively analyse the quality and impact of scientific or technical literature are now a central part of the management of modern science. Through them, research managers seek to encourage quality and productivity and use scarce research funds effectively. Researchers are ranked on a range of quantitative assessments to measure the quality of their work, and the results influence employment prospects, grants, tenure and promotions. Unfortunately, researchers anxious to maximise their prospects may concentrate on good scores, not good science. This could change what they research, what they publish and where they publish. Natural history, baseline research and research of regional (but not international) significance could be marginalised despite the clear benefits of such research for monitoring, hypothesis generation and local management.These difficulties are compounded by inappropriate applications of common bibliometric statistics, such as the persistence of the discredited views that the quality of a paper may be judged by the journal in which it appears or that a simple citation count alone indicates the merit of a paper or a researcher.This paper takes a role-playing approach, centred on a fictitious interview as part of a promotion application, to explore some of the uses and misuses of bibliometrics and how researchers can present their case honestly, while defending against abuses and championing unfashionable but valuable areas of research. Addresses: Murdoch Univ, Sch Vet & Life Sci, Murdoch, WA 6150, Australia. E-mail Addresses: m.calver at murdoch.edu.au Cited Reference Count: 95 Times Cited: 3 Publisher: ROYAL ZOOLOGICAL SOC NEW SOUTH WALES, TARONGA ZOO MOS, MOSMAN NSW, 2088, AUSTRALIA ISBN: 978-0-9874309-0-8 Web of Science Categories: Ecology; Zoology Research Areas: Environmental Sciences & Ecology; Zoology IDS Number: BA8YU Unique ID: WOS:000339033000018 Cited References: Sampson Kaylene A., 2010, HIGHER EDUCATION RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT, V29, P275 Reuters Thomson, 2011, Completing the research picture, Oswald Andrew J., 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V84, P99 Calver Michael C., 2010, CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, V24, P872 Lawrence P. A, 2009, PLoS Biology, V7, Walters W. H., 2011, Portal, V11, P972 Jacso P, 2005, CURRENT SCIENCE, V89, P1537 Garfield E., 2005, International Congress on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication Chicago, September 16, 2005, Underwood AJ, 1997, Experiments in ecology: their logical design and interpretation using analysis of variance, Butler L, 2007, Science and Public Policy, V34, P565 Ford Hugh A., 2011, Pacific Conservation Biology, V17, P303 MacRoberts MH, 1996, SCIENTOMETRICS, V36, P435 Harzing A. W. K., 2008, Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, V8, P61 OECD, 2010, Performance-based Funding for Public Research in Tertiary Education Institutions: Workshop Proceedings, Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Calver Michael C., 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V95, P243 Calver M. C., 2013, Pacific Conservation Biology, V19, Short Jeff, 2004, Australian Zoologist, V32, P605 Aksnes Dag W., 2009, RESEARCH POLICY, V38, P895 Chang C. L., 2012, V1, P2 Bensman Stephen J., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P263 Brown Hannah, 2007, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V334, P561 Shearer B. L., 1981, Australasian Plant Pathology, V10, P2 Lane Julia, 2011, SCIENCE, V331, P678 Jacso P., 2008, Library Journal, V134, P26 Bloch S, 2001, AUSTRALIAN AND NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY, V35, P563 Buela-Casal Gualberto, 2007, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND HEALTH PSYCHOLOGY, V7, P899 Amancio D. R., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V91, P827 Padial Andre Andrian, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V85, P1 Jacso Peter, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P325 Bollen Johan, 2009, PLOS ONE, V4, Jacso Peter, 2008, LIBRARY TRENDS, V56, P784 Adler Nancy J., 2009, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT LEARNING & EDUCATION, V8, P72 Vanclay Jerome K., 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P211 Watson Roger, 2007, JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING, V16, P1 MacRoberts M. H., 2010, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V61, P1 Abbott I, 1998, FOREST ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT, V109, P175 Lawrence PA, 2002, NATURE, V415, P835 Seglen PO, 1997, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V314, P498 Garcia-Perez Miguel A., 2010, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V61, P2070 Kennedy D, 2003, SCIENCE, V301, P733 Box S., 2010, OECD Performance-based Funding for Public Research in Tertiary Education Institutions: Workshop Proceedings, Lane Julia, 2010, NATURE, V464, P488 Meffe Gary K., 2006, CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, V20, P931 Jain P., 2011, Library Review, V60, Krell F. T., 2012, European Science Editing, V38, P3 Bryant K, 2012, Science under siege, P140 Parker John N., 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V94, P469 Colledge L, 2010, Serials, V23, P215 Ouimet Mathieu, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V88, P91 Li Jiang, 2010, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V4, P554 Buela-Casal Gualberto, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P281 Calver Michael C., 2009, SCIENTOMETRICS, V81, P611 Shewan LG, 2006, MEDICAL JOURNAL OF AUSTRALIA, V184, P463 Witten K., 2010, Kotuitui, V5, P3 Sangwal Keshra, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P643 Butler Linda, 2011, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V5, P693 Adler R., 2008, Citation statistics: A report from the International Mathematical Union (IMU) in cooperation with the International Council of Industrial and Applied Mathematics (ICIAM) and the Institute of Mathematical Statistics (IMS), Gagolewski Marek, 2011, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V5, P678 Steele Colin, 2006, LEARNED PUBLISHING, V19, P277 Schiemenz H, 1969, Faunistische Abhandlungen Staatliches Museum fur Tierkunde in Dresden, V6, P201 Roa Tom, 2009, JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF NEW ZEALAND, V39, P233 Primack Richard B., 2009, BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, V142, P1559 Kohn A., 1993, Punished by rewards: the trouble with gold stars, incentive plans, A's, praise and other bribes, Marsh H., 2012, Australian Universities' Review, V54, P83 Ashkanasy Neal M., 2007, JOURNAL OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR, V28, P643 Northcott Deryl, 2010, AUSTRALIAN ACCOUNTING REVIEW, V20, P38 White Howard D., 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P1083 ZAHAVI A, 1975, JOURNAL OF THEORETICAL BIOLOGY, V53, P205 Torres-Salinas Daniel, 2009, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V3, P9 Corsi Marcella, 2010, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND SOCIOLOGY, V69, P1495 NHMRC, 2007, Australian code for the responsible conduct of research, Erskine A. J., 1994, Editorial. Picoides, V7, P2 Calver M. C., 2012, AUSTRALASIAN PLANT PATHOLOGY, V41, P179 Lawrence PA, 2003, NATURE, V422, P259 Calver M. C., 2008, Pacific Conservation Biology, V14, P285 De Sutter Bjorn, 2012, COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM, V55, P69 Gowrishankar J, 1999, NATURE, V401, P321 Elsevier, 2011, SciVerse Scopus: content coverage guide., Calver Michael, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V85, P387 Shortridge GC, 1909, PROCEEDINGS OF THE ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF LONDON, V1909, P803 Jacso Peter, 2009, ONLINE INFORMATION REVIEW, V33, P1189 HARGENS LL, 1990, SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH, V19, P205 Schuch Sebastian, 2012, BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, V149, P75 Schuch S, 2012, Pacific Conservation Biology, V18, P223 Abramo Giovanni, 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V95, P311 Andersen Hanne, 2009, NTM, V17, P1 Harrison AL, 2006, CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, V20, P652 [Anonymous], 2006, Proceedings CEDI 2005 Symposium, Hodge David R., 2011, JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION, V47, P579 Lawrence P. A., 2007, Current Biology, V17, Holden G, 2005, SOCIAL WORK IN HEALTH CARE, V41, P67 D'Angelo Ciriaco Andrea, 2011, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V62, P257 Rafols Ismael, 2012, RESEARCH POLICY, V41, P1262 Falagas Matthew E., 2008, ARCHIVUM IMMUNOLOGIAE ET THERAPIAE EXPERIMENTALIS, V56, P223 ======================================================================== http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339379600009 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: On the data and analysis of the research output of India and China: India has significantly fallen behind China Authors: Panat, R Author Full Names: Panat, Rahul Source: SCIENTOMETRICS, 100 (2):471-481; 10.1007/s11192-014-1236-4 AUG 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: India, China, World share, Publication productivity, Science indicators, Economic growth, Performance measures KeyWords Plus: SCIENTOMETRICS; INDICATORS; NATIONS; IMPACT Abstract: An analysis of the number of research papers from India and China in the fields of sciences and engineering between the years 1975 and 2012 is presented. The results show that while Indian research output has increased steadily, the Chinese research output has been increasing at a rate far outpacing that of India. The research output of China has been increasing with distinct inflection points that show an acceleration in output growth. The research output for India shows periodic inflection points that show either an acceleration or deceleration in output growth. The possible reasons for the inflection points are discussed. Simple statistical analyses are used to analyze the trends in output. Although multiple factors affect a nation's research output, this paper highlights that the government programs targeted to increase the research output from universities may create inflection points resulting in a rapid increase in the research output. The article also highlights that India has fallen far behind China in terms of scientific and engineering research output, providing important clues for the future growth of the two countries. Addresses: Arizona State Univ, Sch Engn Matter Transport & Energy, Tempe, AZ 85287 USA. E-mail Addresses: rpanat at asu.edu Cited Reference Count: 31 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS ISSN: 0138-9130 eISSN: 1588-2861 Web of Science Categories: Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications; Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Computer Science; Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: AL8HS Unique ID: WOS:000339379600009 Cited References: Madhan M., 2010, Current Science, V99, P1 [Anonymous], 2011, ECONOMIST, May R. M., 1998, Science, V281, P48 Srinivasan T, 2006, Economic and Political Weekly, V41, P3716 Philippe L., 2001, Research and innovation policies in the new global economy: An international comparative analysis, P447 Currie J., 2008, International Education Journal: Comparative Perspectives, V9, P47 CARPENTER MP, 1988, SCIENTOMETRICS, V14, P213 Arunachalam S., 2002, Current Science, V82, P1086 Berry C., 2011, Fixed effects, Huang Y., 2003, Foreign Policy, V137, P74 Tang M., 2011, Technology in Society, V33, P23 Moeh H, 2008, Scientometrics, V74, P153 Altenburg T., 2008, World Development, V36, P244 Adams J., 2013, Building bricks: Exploring the global research and innovation impact of Brazil, Kanhere Dilip G., 2009, CURRENT SCIENCE, V97, P1013 Pandit Kavita, 2012, EURASIAN GEOGRAPHY AND ECONOMICS, V53, P1 Arunachalam S., 2004, Scientometrics, V52, P13 Bhaumik P.K., 2009, Journal of Indian Business Research, V1, King DA, 2004, NATURE, V430, P311 Kumar S, 2005, SCIENTOMETRICS, V64, P121 Wright T., 2012, Wall Street Journal, Cunningham P, 1997, SCIENTOMETRICSProceedings of the Erasmus Workshop on Quantitative Approaches to Science and Technology Studies, MAY 21-24, 1996, AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS, V38, P71 May RM, 1997, SCIENCE, V275, P793 David P., 2008, Paper No. MPRA Paper 12096, Jimenez-Contreras E, 2003, RESEARCH POLICY, V32, P123 Braun T, 1996, SCIENTOMETRICSUNESCO Meeting on Basic Sciences for Development - Subregional Opportunities and Challenges (Central Europe), JAN 18-20, 1996, KESZTHELY, HUNGARY, V36, P145 Abadie A, 2005, REVIEW OF ECONOMIC STUDIES, V72, P1 Leong C., 2013, International Economics and Economic Policy, V10, P549 IMF, 2012, IMF statistics, Garg KC, 2002, SCIENTOMETRICS, V55, P71 Bosworth B., 2007, Working Paper Number 12943, ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339413200014 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Measuring research output and collaboration in South Asian countries Authors: Uddin, A; Singh, VK Author Full Names: Uddin, Ashraf; Singh, Vivek Kumar Source: CURRENT SCIENCE, 107 (1):31-38; JUL 10 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Citation analysis, knowledge creation, research collaboration, research impact, scientometrics KeyWords Plus: PERIOD Abstract: This article presents a scientornetric analysis of academic research output, growth trend, citation & impact, and research collaboration levels in the South Asian region. The analysis is done on several important parameters such as total research production, global share and rank, subject categories, citation impact, in and out-region citation patterns, and inter-country collaborations. The economic indicators relating to higher education and research for the countries in the region are correlated with the analytical results. It also analyses the research growth and maturity levels for the region. In summary, it tries to map the academic research status in the South Asian region, including details about the countries in the region. Addresses: [Uddin, Ashraf; Singh, Vivek Kumar] South Asian Univ, Dept Comp Sci, New Delhi 110021, India. E-mail Addresses: vivekks12 at gmail.com Cited Reference Count: 8 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: AL8TS Unique ID: WOS:000339413200014 Cited References: SCImago, 2007, SJR - SCImago Journal and Country Rank, [Anonymous], 2013, The Economist, Prathap Gangan, 2014, CURRENT SCIENCE, V106, P958 Bilir Selcuk, 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V97, P477 Schubert Andras, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS, V69, P409 Kutlar Aziz, 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V97, P639 Pathak Manohar, 2014, CURRENT SCIENCE, V106, P964 Zhou Ping, 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V97, P267 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339498100011 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: African American Creole, and Other Vernacular Englishes in Education: A *Bibliographic* Resource Authors: Todd, L Author Full Names: Todd, Loreto Source: ENGLISH TODAY, 30 (1):60-61; 10.1017/S0266078413000448 MAR 2014 Language: English Document Type: Book Review Addresses: [Todd, Loreto] Univ Ulster, Coleraine BT52 1SA, Londonderry, North Ireland. E-mail Addresses: loretotodd at aol.com Cited Reference Count: 2 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS, 32 AVENUE OF THE AMERICAS, NEW YORK, NY 10013-2473 USA ISSN: 0266-0784 eISSN: 1474-0567 Web of Science Categories: Linguistics; Language & Linguistics Research Areas: Linguistics IDS Number: AL9XY Unique ID: WOS:000339498100011 Cited References: Wood R. E., 1975, A Bibliography of Pidgin and Creole Languages, RICKFORD JR, 2012, AFRICAN AM CREOLE OT, ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339628200013 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: To what extent do articles published in other than "top *journals*" have impact on marketing? Authors: Haddad, K; Singh, G; Sciglimpaglia, D; Chan, H Author Full Names: Haddad, Kamal; Singh, Gangaram; Sciglimpaglia, Don; Chan, Hung Source: EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF MARKETING, 48 (1-2):271-287; 10.1108/EJM-11-2010-0592 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Citations, Advancing knowledge, Faculty performance evaluation, Marketing journal ranking KeyWords Plus: CITATION ANALYSIS; KNOWLEDGE; RANKINGS; QUALITY; PERSPECTIVE; DISCIPLINE; MANAGEMENT; OMBUDSMAN; FINANCE Abstract: Purpose - The purpose of this study is to examine the relevance and limitations of using a top journal approach as a proxy for an article's value or contribution. Design/methodology/approach - The authors determined the citations for all articles published in 2001 and 2003 in 26 key marketing journals included in the Social Science Citation Index and 50 journals included in Google Scholar to rate the impact of a specific article. They also assessed these articles to examine the source of citations, as a way of measuring impact. Findings - This study indicates that articles published in the journals most often considered the top three or four in marketing are cited by others significantly more often than the ones published in the other journals. However, the authors found substantial misclassification errors from using publications in these "top" journals to infer a top article status across three different criteria for defining a top article. Originality/value - These findings strongly support the need to evaluate each article on its own merits, rather than abdicating this responsibility by using journal ranking as a proxy for an article's value or contribution. Addresses: [Haddad, Kamal; Singh, Gangaram; Sciglimpaglia, Don; Chan, Hung] San Diego State Univ, San Diego, CA 92182 USA. E-mail Addresses: kamal.haddad at sdsu.edu Cited Reference Count: 64 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LIMITED, HOWARD HOUSE, WAGON LANE, BINGLEY BD16 1WA, W YORKSHIRE, ENGLAND ISSN: 0309-0566 eISSN: 1758-7123 Web of Science Categories: Business Research Areas: Business & Economics IDS Number: AM1SI Unique ID: WOS:000339628200013 Cited References: Henthorne TL, 1998, JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING, V27, P53 Van Fleet DD, 2000, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, V26, P839 Hult G. T. M., 1997, Journal of Marketing Education, V19, P37 Zinkhan GM, 1999, JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING, V28, P51 Rosenstreich D., 2005, 30th Annual Macromarketing Seminar, May, P28 Brumbaugh A., 2002, ELMAR, Armstrong J. S., 2004, Australasian Marketing Journal, V12, P62 Chow C. W., 2007, Issues in Accounting Education, V22, P411 Coe R. K., 1983, Journal of Marketing Education, V5, P37 Heischmidt K. A., 1993, Journal of Education for Business, V68, P152 Jarwal D., 2009, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, V31, P289 Pecotich A., 1989, International Journal of Research in Marketing, V6, P199 Svensson G., 2006, European Journal of Marketing, V40, P153 Steward M. D., 2010, Journal of Marketing Education, V32, P75 Koojaroenprasit N., 1998, Marketing Education Review, V8, P95 Summers JO, 2001, JOURNAL OF THE ACADEMY OF MARKETING SCIENCE, V29, P405 Svensson G., 2006, European Business Review, V18, P457 Bauerly RJ, 2005, JOURNAL OF THE ACADEMY OF MARKETING SCIENCE, V33, P313 Babin B. J., 2007, European Business Review, V20, P370 Piercy N., 2002, European Journal of Marketing, V36, P350 TRAHAN EA, 1995, QUARTERLY REVIEW OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE, V35, P73 Baumgartner H, 2003, JOURNAL OF MARKETING, V67, P123 Rose G. M., 2000, Journal of Marketing Education, V22, P99 Theoharakis V, 2002, MARKETING LETTERS, V13, P389 ARMSTRONG JS, 1994, INTERFACES, V24, P13 Reinstein A., 2011, Issues in Accounting Education, V26, P99 Tapp Alan, 2008, EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF MARKETING, V42, P265 AACSB, 1997, Newsline, AACSB - The International Association for Management Education, V28, Easton G., 2003, Journal of Marketing Management, V19, P5 Polonsky M. J., 1993, Asia-Australia Marketing Journal, V1, P61 COTE JA, 1991, JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH, V18, P402 Homburg C, 2003, JOURNAL OF THE ACADEMY OF MARKETING SCIENCE, V31, P348 Czinkota M. R., 2000, European Journal of Marketing, V34, P1305 Wright Malcolm, 2008, INTERFACES, V38, P125 Shugan SM, 2003, MARKETING SCIENCE, V22, P437 Seglen P. O., 1997, British Medical Journal, V314, P497 Childers T. L., 1986, Proceedings of the AMA Summer Educators' Conference, American Marketing Association, Chicago, IL, P149 Smith SD, 2004, FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, V33, P133 Singh Gangaram, 2007, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT INQUIRY, V16, P319 Uncles M. D., 2008, Interfaces, V38, P125 Touzani M., 2010, Marketing Education Review, V20, P229 Mort G. S., 2004, Australasian Marketing Journal, V12, P51 Swanson EP, 2004, CONTEMPORARY ACCOUNTING RESEARCH, V21, P223 Guidry J. A., 2004, Marketing Education Review, V14, P45 Stewart D. W., 2006, European Business Review, V20, P421 Uncles M. D., 2004, Australasian Marketing Journal, V12, P67 Adler Nancy J., 2009, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT LEARNING & EDUCATION, V8, P72 Svensson G., 2005, Marketing Intelligence and Planning, V23, P422 Harzing A.-W., 2007, Journal quality list, Stremersch Stefan, 2007, JOURNAL OF MARKETING, V71, P171 Svensson Goeran, 2007, EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF MARKETING, V41, P419 Yadav Manjit S., 2010, JOURNAL OF MARKETING, V74, P1 Polonsky M. J., 2005, Journal of Marketing Education, V27, P189 Zinkhan GM, 2004, JOURNAL OF THE ACADEMY OF MARKETING SCIENCE, V32, P369 Jobber D., 1988, International Journal of Research in Marketing, V5, P137 Rositer J. R., 2001, Marketing Theory, V1, P9 Kearsley M., 1999, Journal of Marketing Educational, V4, P181 Moussa Salim, 2010, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V4, P107 Chan R. Y. K., 2003, Journal of Marketing Education, V25, P163 Chung E., 2001, Qualitative Market Research, V4, P224 Hawes J. M., 2002, Journal of the Academy of Business Education, V3, P70 Podsakoff M., 2005, Strategic Management Journal, V26, P473 Armstrong JS, 2003, JOURNAL OF BUSINESS RESEARCH, V56, P69 Tapp A., 2005, Marketing Review, V5, P3 =============================================================== -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From christian.schloegl at UNI-GRAZ.AT Sat Aug 23 02:46:28 2014 From: christian.schloegl at UNI-GRAZ.AT (Schloegl, Christian (christian.schloegl@uni-graz.at)) Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2014 08:46:28 +0200 Subject: 1st Call for Papers: ISI 2015 (14th International Symposium of Information Science), May 19 - 21, 2015, Zadar, Croatia Message-ID: Dear colleague, With this email we would like to invite you to contribute to the 14th International Symposium of Information Science (ISI 2015). ISI 2015 is a biannual gathering of scholars, researchers and students from information science from Europe and beyond who share a common interest in critical information issues in contemporary society. The conference series originated in the German-language information science community but has become more and more international in recent years. This time, ISI 2015 will take place in Zadar, Croatia, from May 19 - 21, 2015 and will be co-organized by the Department of Information Sciences at the University of Zadar and the German Academic Association for Information Science (Hochschulverband Informationswissenschaft e. V.), in association with the Association of Information Science and Technology (ASIS&T). Below and at www.isi2015.eu please find more detailed information about the conference. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. We are looking forward your contribution. With kind regards, Franjo Pehar (head of organisation committee) & Christian Schloegl (head of programme committee) --------------------- ISI 2015: CALL FOR CONTRIBUTIONS --------------------- CONFERENCE HOMEPAGE: www.isi2015.eu DATE AND LOCATION: May 19 - 21, 2015 at the University of Zadar, Zadar, Croatia CO-ORGANIZED BY: German Academic Association for Information Science (Hochschulverband Informationswissenschaft e. V.) and Department of Information Sciences at the University of Zadar in association with the Association of Information Science and Technology (ASIS&T) CONFERENCE TOPIC: ?Re:inventing Information Science in the Networked Society? ISI 2015 takes place at a time of ongoing changes in today's networked society. Recent Internet developments have made it possible to access ever rising amounts of data and efficient analysis tools empower users to identify patterns which extend their human mind. Easy-to-use web services also allow users to be producers of information, a development which is subsumed under the term social web. Social tagging systems, for instance, provide users with the opportunity to perform activities which were primarily associated with librarians and information specialists before. Furthermore, science makes extensive use of collaboration, information sharing and information distribution which are available through network technologies (big data). Finally, Digital Humanities has emerged as a new research domain in recent years. These changes have a strong effect on both information science and prac?tice which are to be discussed at ISI 2015. SUBMISSIONS: Particularly desirable are papers that deal with the following topics, although contributions covering other subjects in the wider field of information science and neighbouring disciplines are welcome as well: 1. Information Science - Interdisciplinary Aspects and Cross-disciplinary Fertilization - Information Science: so broad - so small! - Information science vs. Web science - Digital humanities research across disciplines and cultures - LIS schools and digital humanities syllabi - convergence issues in information science education 2. Information Science in Today's Networked Society - Changing face of information science professions - Digital Collections and Connections - Changing Users 3. Information Science and ?Big Society? - Information science vs. data science - Semantic data meets big data - Information retrieval, information discovery, visualizing and mapping tools and approaches - Privacy concerns - the ?vitreous user? - Danger of ?information monopolies? - the winner takes it all? - New required competencies of information specialists 4. Changes in Scholarly Communication - Everything open: access, data, reviewing - New forms of scholarly publishing: blogs, tweets, wikis, crowdsourcing - Use of social media in scholarly communication: social reference management systems, social networking cites, etc. - Altmetrics (readership/bookmarks, mentions, likes, etc.) as alternatives to citations in research evaluation? 5. Decolonizing description: critical approaches and innovations - Description in liminal spaces: subverting systems to liberate description - Moving across diverse standards - Archives, libraries, museums integration through metadata - Decolonising international/national standards - Social tagging and participative metadata practices: alternative and/or welcomed practices and their impact on catalogue/finding aids (authority, trust, authenticity) Submissions can be made in the following forms: (1) Long papers (max. 12 pages) (2) Short papers (max. 5 pages) (3) Posters (max. 2 pages) (4) Panel suggestions (max. 2 pages, incl. naming of a panel chair, participants and a topic plan) (5) Student presentations (6) Doctoral thesis presentations Besides these submission options, there is a special call for the Gerhard Lustig Master Thesis Award. Contributions must be submitted in English and be original work. Proposed submissions will be reviewed by at least two members of the programme committee. Format guidelines for all types of submissions are available at www.isi2015.eu Deadline for submissions: January 10, 2015 Notification of acceptance: beginning of February 2015 Deadline for the submission of revised manuscripts: February 28, 2015 All submissions must be made online at www.isi2015.eu All accepted contributions will be published in a proceedings in print and made available online in digital repositories. PRE- AND POST-CONFERENCE WORKSHOPS: On May 18, 2015, there will be two pre-conference workshops on: (1) Digital Humanities and the technologies of the semantic web organized by Gordon Dunsire (consultant, Edinburgh, UK), Mirna Willer and Marijana Tomic (University of Zadar, Croatia), and Manuel Burghardt (University of Regensburg, Germany) (2) Decolonizing description: critical approaches and innovations organized by Anne J. Gilliland (University of California at Los Angeles), Mirna Willer and Marijana Tomic (University of Zadar, Croatia) After ISI 2015, a workshop will be held by ASIS&T European Chapter in Osijek on May 22nd - 23rd, Bus transfer from Zadar to Osijek will be organised after the end of the conference. FURTHER INFORMATION: For further information concerning the different submission types, please have a look at the conference homepage at www.isi2015.eu From Christina.Pikas at JHUAPL.EDU Mon Aug 25 07:06:26 2014 From: Christina.Pikas at JHUAPL.EDU (Pikas, Christina K.) Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 11:06:26 +0000 Subject: Crowd-Sourced Peer Review: Substitute or Supplement? In-Reply-To: <5DF39F3C-2066-4D49-A7B0-3A5D151904D8@ecs.soton.ac.uk> Message-ID: The part that stood out for me is: "affiliated with an accredited university" . I guess all the industry scientists in petroleum, pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, materials, aerospace... etc., are ineligible? Lovely. From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at listserv.utk.edu] On Behalf Of Stevan Harnad Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 12:02 PM To: SIGMETRICS at listserv.utk.edu Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] Crowd-Sourced Peer Review: Substitute or Supplement? Only Scientific Members who are affiliated with an accredited university and have at least 5 publications assigned to their ORCID account may officially review an article at ScienceOpen. So being affiliated with an accredited university and having at least 5 publications makes anyone a specialist qualified to review anyone's research? The criterion for peership might have to be a trifle more exacting than that even before we raise once again the niggling question of answerability... Harnad, S. (1990) Scholarly Skywriting and the Prepublication Continuum of Scientific Inquiry Psychological Science 1: 342 - 343 (reprinted in Current Contents 45: 9-13, November 11 1991). http://cogprints.org/1581/ Stevan Harnad On Aug 22, 2014, at 4:41 AM, Jennifer Smith > wrote: Hi All As list members probably know, Frontiers In ... have a slightly different method of reviewing than traditional peer review model. I noticed recently another alternative model for reviewing, at ScienceOpen (based on having an academic ID, in this case, ORCiD): "Comments and Reviews require registration via ORCID Everybody can read, download and share your article. Commenting, rating and reviewing, however, requires previous registration via ORCID. Only Scientific Members who are affiliated with an accredited university and have at least 5 publications assigned to their ORCID account may officially review an article at ScienceOpen. Commenting requires at least 1 publication. Please refer to our User Categories for a detailed description. In any case, please consult our Peer Review Guidelines and Guidelines for Commenting before writing a review or commenting on papers." http://about.scienceopen.com/how-does-it-work/#more-9 Interesting times to see what develops and is taken up. Kind regards, Jennifer Jennifer Smith Research Publications Librarian Library Information Services St George's University of London E: jesmith at sgul.ac.uk T: +44 (0)20 8725 5393 From: Repositories discussion list [mailto:JISC-REPOSITORIES at JISCMAIL.AC.UK] On Behalf Of Stevan Harnad Sent: 21 August 2014 20:19 To: JISC-REPOSITORIES at JISCMAIL.AC.UK Subject: Crowd-Sourced Peer Review: Substitute or Supplement? Harnad, S. (2014) Crowd-Sourced Peer Review: Substitute or supplement for the current outdated system? LSE Impact Blog 8/21 EXCERPT: If, as rumoured, google builds a platform for depositing unrefereed research papers for "peer-reviewing" viacrowd-sourcing, can this create a substitute for classical peer-review or will it merely supplement classical peer review with crowd-sourcing? ... no one knows whether crowd-sourced peer-review, even if it could work, would be scaleable or sustainable. The key questions are hence: 1. Would all (most? many?) authors be willing to post their unrefereed papers publicly (and in place of submitting them to journals!)? 2. Would all (most? many?) of the posted papers attract referees? competent experts? 3. Who/what decides whether the refereeing is competent, and whether the author has adequately complied? (Relying on a Wikipedia-style cadre of 2nd-order crowd-sourcers who gain authority recursively in proportion to how much 1st-order crowd-sourcing they have done - rather than on the basis of expertise - sounds like a way to generate Wikipedia quality, but not peer-reviewed quality...) 4. If any of this actually happens on any scale, will it be sustainable? 5. Would this make the landscape (unrefereed preprints, referee comments, revised postprints) as navigable and useful as classical peer review, or not? My own prediction (based on nearly a quarter century of umpiring both classical peer review and open peer commentary) is that crowdsourcing will provide an excellent supplement to classical peer review but not a substitute for it. Radical implementations will simply end up re-inventing classical peer review, but on a much faster and more efficient PostGutenberg platform. We will not realize this, however, until all of the peer-reviewed literature has first been made open access. And for that it is not sufficient for Google merely to provide a platform for authors to put their unrefereed papers, because most authors don't even put their refereed papers in their institutional repositories until it is mandated by their institutions and funders. http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/1121-Crowd-Sourced-Peer-Review-Substitute-or-Supplement.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From chessnic at COMPUSERVE.COM Mon Aug 25 12:34:21 2014 From: chessnic at COMPUSERVE.COM (Al Henderson) Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 12:34:21 -0400 Subject: Crowd-Sourced Peer Review: Substitute or Supplement? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Not to mention scientists working for government agencies, laboratories, associations, foundations ... or even publishers. As I recall, editors of learned periodicals have the power to accept or reject without further consultation. Albert Henderson, former editor Publishing Research Quarterly -----Original Message----- From: Pikas, Christina K. To: SIGMETRICS Sent: Mon, Aug 25, 2014 7:06 am Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] Crowd-Sourced Peer Review: Substitute or Supplement? Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe):http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html The part that stood out for me is: ?affiliated with an accredited university? . I guess all the industry scientists in petroleum, pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, materials, aerospace? etc., are ineligible? Lovely. From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at listserv.utk.edu]On Behalf Of Stevan Harnad Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 12:02 PM To: SIGMETRICS at listserv.utk.edu Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] Crowd-Sourced Peer Review: Substitute or Supplement? Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe):http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html Only Scientific Members who are affiliated with an accredited university and have at least 5 publications assigned to their ORCID account may officially review an article at ScienceOpen. So being affiliated with an accredited university and having at least 5 publications makes anyone a specialist qualified to review anyone's research? The criterion for peership might have to be a trifle more exacting than that even before we raise once again the niggling question of answerability... Harnad, S. (1990) Scholarly Skywriting and the Prepublication Continuum of Scientific Inquiry Psychological Science 1: 342 - 343 (reprinted in Current Contents 45: 9-13, November 11 1991). http://cogprints.org/1581/ Stevan Harnad On Aug 22, 2014, at 4:41 AM, Jennifer Smith wrote: Hi All As list members probably know, Frontiers In ? have a slightly different method of reviewing than traditional peer review model. I noticed recently another alternative model for reviewing, at ScienceOpen (based on having an academic ID, in this case, ORCiD): ?Comments and Reviews require registration via ORCID Everybody can read, download and share your article. Commenting, rating and reviewing, however, requires previous registration via ORCID. Only Scientific Members who are affiliated with an accredited university and have at least 5 publications assigned to their ORCID account may officially review an article at ScienceOpen. Commenting requires at least 1 publication. Please refer to our User Categories for a detailed description. In any case, please consult our Peer Review Guidelines and Guidelines for Commenting before writing a review or commenting on papers.? http://about.scienceopen.com/how-does-it-work/#more-9 Interesting times to see what develops and is taken up. Kind regards, Jennifer Jennifer Smith Research Publications Librarian Library Information Services St George's University of London E: jesmith at sgul.ac.uk T: +44 (0)20 8725 5393 From: Repositories discussion list [mailto:JISC-REPOSITORIES at JISCMAIL.AC.UK] On Behalf Of Stevan Harnad Sent: 21 August 2014 20:19 To: JISC-REPOSITORIES at JISCMAIL.AC.UK Subject: Crowd-Sourced Peer Review: Substitute or Supplement? Harnad, S. (2014) Crowd-Sourced Peer Review: Substitute or supplement for the current outdated system? LSE Impact Blog 8/21 EXCERPT: If, as rumoured, google builds a platform for depositing unrefereed research papers for ?peer-reviewing? viacrowd-sourcing, can this create a substitute for classical peer-review or will it merely supplement classical peer review with crowd-sourcing? ... no one knows whether crowd-sourced peer-review, even if it could work, would be scaleable or sustainable. The key questions are hence: 1. Would all (most? many?) authors be willing to post their unrefereed papers publicly (and in place of submitting them to journals!)? 2. Would all (most? many?) of the posted papers attract referees? competent experts? 3. Who/what decides whether the refereeing is competent, and whether the author has adequately complied? (Relying on a Wikipedia-style cadre of 2nd-order crowd-sourcers who gain authority recursively in proportion to how much 1st-order crowd-sourcing they have done ? rather than on the basis of expertise ? sounds like a way to generate Wikipedia quality, but not peer-reviewed quality?) 4. If any of this actually happens on any scale, will it be sustainable? 5. Would this make the landscape (unrefereed preprints, referee comments, revised postprints) as navigable and useful as classical peer review, or not? My own prediction (based on nearly a quarter century of umpiring both classical peer review and open peer commentary) is that crowdsourcing will provide an excellent supplement to classical peer review but not a substitute for it. Radical implementations will simply end up re-inventing classical peer review, but on a much faster and more efficient PostGutenberg platform. We will not realize this, however, until all of the peer-reviewed literature has first been made open access. And for that it is not sufficient for Google merely to provide a platform for authors to put their unrefereed papers, because most authors don?t even put their refereed papers in their institutional repositories until it is mandated by their institutions and funders. http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/1121-Crowd-Sourced-Peer-Review-Substitute-or-Supplement.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isidro.aguillo at CCHS.CSIC.ES Wed Aug 27 07:16:04 2014 From: isidro.aguillo at CCHS.CSIC.ES (Isidro F. Aguillo) Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2014 13:16:04 +0200 Subject: Rankings of Universities and Research Centers Message-ID: The new editions of the Rankings Web of Universities (now in its 11th year) and Research Centers have been published with data collected during July 2014. The rankings consist now of close to 22000 Higher Education Institutions and 8000 Research Centers with their own independent web presence. http://www.webometrics.info/ http://research.webometrics.info/ Ranking is built combining the following variables: Web presence, including general information, structure and organization, governance and transparency related documents, learning supporting items, technology transfer or community engagement among other webpages; Visibility, a virtual referendum about the global impact of such web contents; Openness, the commitment of the University to the open access initiatives through its institutional repository, portal of academic journals and availability of the full texts papers in the personal pages of their authors and Excellence, the number of highly cited papers (top 10% most cited) in 21 disciplines by is faculty members. In the current edition the top ranked universities are: 1. Harvard University 2. MIT 3. Stanford University 4. Cornell University 5. University of Michigan 6. University of California Berkeley 7= Columbia University 8= University of Washington 9. University of Minnesota 10. University of Pennsylvania Countries with Universities in the Top Hundred USA 66 Canada 7 UK 4 Germany 3 China 3 Japan 2 Switzerland 2 Netherlands 1 Australia 1 Italy 1 South Korea 1 Taiwan 1 Belgium 1 Hong Kong 1 Brazil 1 Austria 1 Czech Republic 1 Singapore 1 Mexico 1 The Top Ranked in Region are: USA Harvard Canada Toronto Latin America Sao Paulo Caribbean University of the West Indies Europe Oxford Russia Lomonosov MSU Africa University of Cape Town Asia Seoul National University China Peking Japan Tokyo South Asia IIT Bombay Southeast Asia National University of Singapore Middle East Hebrew University of Jerusalem Arab World King Saud University Oceania Melbourne BRICS Sao Paulo -- ************************************ 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 Wed Aug 27 09:45:26 2014 From: notsjb at LSU.EDU (Stephen J Bensman) Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2014 13:45:26 +0000 Subject: Rankings of Universities and Research Centers In-Reply-To: <53FDBDF4.1060306@cchs.csic.es> Message-ID: Isidoro, I hate to rain on your little parade, but--what the hell--I will. The first ranking of American universities was done by James McKeen Cattell in 1906 in the following article: Cattell, James McKeen. (1906) A statistical study of American men of science, the selection of a group of one thousand scientific men. Science, 24, 658-665, 699-707, 732-742. Your rankings are basically the same as his. Plus ca change, plus ca la meme chose, Needless to say, Cattell was a eugenicist, and this is where all this academic ranking hysteria originates. To make my point, I have attached a pdf of that part of his article, in which he presents his university and institutional rankings. See in particular Tables III-IV on pp. 739-740. They will look somewhat familiar to you. The available evidence is that these rankings are not random but the result of some process of "preferential attachment" to what institutions leading scientists adhere for study, teaching, and research, leading to high stability over time. To beat upon another of my little drums, it seems strangely similar to how the WWW and Google PageRank operates. That does not leave much hope for those trying to blast their way to the top. It seems set in concrete. Respectfully, Stephen J. Bensman, Ph.D. LSU Librairies Louisiana State University Baton Rouge, LA USA PS I was in the Cal Band (Berkeley), and we used to call Stanford the "Leland Stanford Junior High," and that was before the days of mooning the crowd. -----Original Message----- From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Isidro F. Aguillo Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 6:16 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: [SIGMETRICS] Rankings of Universities and Research Centers Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html The new editions of the Rankings Web of Universities (now in its 11th year) and Research Centers have been published with data collected during July 2014. The rankings consist now of close to 22000 Higher Education Institutions and 8000 Research Centers with their own independent web presence. http://www.webometrics.info/ http://research.webometrics.info/ Ranking is built combining the following variables: Web presence, including general information, structure and organization, governance and transparency related documents, learning supporting items, technology transfer or community engagement among other webpages; Visibility, a virtual referendum about the global impact of such web contents; Openness, the commitment of the University to the open access initiatives through its institutional repository, portal of academic journals and availability of the full texts papers in the personal pages of their authors and Excellence, the number of highly cited papers (top 10% most cited) in 21 disciplines by is faculty members. In the current edition the top ranked universities are: 1. Harvard University 2. MIT 3. Stanford University 4. Cornell University 5. University of Michigan 6. University of California Berkeley 7= Columbia University 8= University of Washington 9. University of Minnesota 10. University of Pennsylvania Countries with Universities in the Top Hundred USA 66 Canada 7 UK 4 Germany 3 China 3 Japan 2 Switzerland 2 Netherlands 1 Australia 1 Italy 1 South Korea 1 Taiwan 1 Belgium 1 Hong Kong 1 Brazil 1 Austria 1 Czech Republic 1 Singapore 1 Mexico 1 The Top Ranked in Region are: USA Harvard Canada Toronto Latin America Sao Paulo Caribbean University of the West Indies Europe Oxford Russia Lomonosov MSU Africa University of Cape Town Asia Seoul National University China Peking Japan Tokyo South Asia IIT Bombay Southeast Asia National University of Singapore Middle East Hebrew University of Jerusalem Arab World King Saud University Oceania Melbourne BRICS Sao Paulo -- ************************************ 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 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: CattellRankings.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 1896250 bytes Desc: CattellRankings.pdf URL: From isidro.aguillo at CCHS.CSIC.ES Wed Aug 27 10:58:46 2014 From: isidro.aguillo at CCHS.CSIC.ES (Isidro F. Aguillo) Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2014 16:58:46 +0200 Subject: Rankings of Universities and Research Centers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear Stephen, Thank you for your input, historical perspective is always welcomed. And sorry for the parade, just coming back after summer holidays. For the readers of this list perhaps it can be interesting to point about a few facts I realized after 11 years of ranking experience (shared with 20 years of belonging to metrics -biblio, webo, alt- community). My major surprise was how much bibliometrics was unknown in many universities around the world (yes, even in Europe!). Everybody talked about impact factor but citation analysis was nowhere. Then, suddenly in 2003 it was the publication of the Shanghai Ranking and its shocking success even after bibliometric 'leaders' immediately rejected it due to strong theoretical and technical limitations. More rankings, most of them giving large weights to bibliometric indicators, were published in the following years by people not belonging to the metrics community. The composite indicators they introduced were frequently built by combining highly correlated bibliometric variables. In several cases, although these models were never presented in international conferences or formally published in referred journals, they were granted enormous popularity. Even today, the CWTS Leiden Ranking, a far more rigorous and orthodox approach is not being considered among the "top 3 more prestigious" rankings. A few months ago I asked Paul Wouters if the success of the rankings does not mean in some way the failure of bibliometricians (not the bibliometry)? Open floor ... See all of you attending STI2014 conference at Leiden next week, On 27/08/2014 15:45, Stephen J Bensman wrote: > Isidoro, > > I hate to rain on your little parade, but--what the hell--I will. The first ranking of American universities was done by James McKeen Cattell in 1906 in the following article: > > Cattell, James McKeen. (1906) A statistical study of American men of science, the selection of a group of one thousand scientific men. Science, 24, 658-665, 699-707, 732-742. > > Your rankings are basically the same as his. Plus ca change, plus ca la meme chose, Needless to say, Cattell was a eugenicist, and this is where all this academic ranking hysteria originates. To make my point, I have attached a pdf of that part of his article, in which he presents his university and institutional rankings. See in particular Tables III-IV on pp. 739-740. They will look somewhat familiar to you. The available evidence is that these rankings are not random but the result of some process of "preferential attachment" to what institutions leading scientists adhere for study, teaching, and research, leading to high stability over time. To beat upon another of my little drums, it seems strangely similar to how the WWW and Google PageRank operates. That does not leave much hope for those trying to blast their way to the top. It seems set in concrete. > > Respectfully, > > Stephen J. Bensman, Ph.D. > LSU Librairies > Louisiana State University > Baton Rouge, LA USA > > PS I was in the Cal Band (Berkeley), and we used to call Stanford the "Leland Stanford Junior High," and that was before the days of mooning the crowd. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Isidro F. Aguillo > Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 6:16 AM > To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU > Subject: [SIGMETRICS] Rankings of Universities and Research Centers > > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > The new editions of the Rankings Web of Universities (now in its 11th > year) and Research Centers have been published with data collected during July 2014. The rankings consist now of close to 22000 Higher Education Institutions and 8000 Research Centers with their own independent web presence. > > http://www.webometrics.info/ > http://research.webometrics.info/ > > Ranking is built combining the following variables: Web presence, including general information, structure and organization, governance and transparency related documents, learning supporting items, technology transfer or community engagement among other webpages; Visibility, a virtual referendum about the global impact of such web contents; Openness, the commitment of the University to the open access initiatives through its institutional repository, portal of academic journals and availability of the full texts papers in the personal pages of their authors and Excellence, the number of highly cited papers (top 10% most cited) in 21 disciplines by is faculty members. > > In the current edition the top ranked universities are: > > 1. Harvard University > 2. MIT > 3. Stanford University > 4. Cornell University > 5. University of Michigan > 6. University of California Berkeley > 7= Columbia University > 8= University of Washington > 9. University of Minnesota > 10. University of Pennsylvania > > Countries with Universities in the Top Hundred > > USA 66 > Canada 7 > UK 4 > Germany 3 > China 3 > Japan 2 > Switzerland 2 > Netherlands 1 > Australia 1 > Italy 1 > South Korea 1 > Taiwan 1 > Belgium 1 > Hong Kong 1 > Brazil 1 > Austria 1 > Czech Republic 1 > Singapore 1 > Mexico 1 > > The Top Ranked in Region are: > > USA Harvard > Canada Toronto > Latin America Sao Paulo > Caribbean University of the West Indies > Europe Oxford > Russia Lomonosov MSU > Africa University of Cape Town > Asia Seoul National University > China Peking > Japan Tokyo > South Asia IIT Bombay > Southeast Asia National University of Singapore > Middle East Hebrew University of Jerusalem > Arab World King Saud University > Oceania Melbourne > BRICS Sao Paulo > -- ************************************ 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 Wed Aug 27 12:22:46 2014 From: notsjb at LSU.EDU (Stephen J Bensman) Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2014 16:22:46 +0000 Subject: Rankings of Universities and Research Centers In-Reply-To: <53FDF226.6060901@cchs.csic.es> Message-ID: Isidoro, In the US institutional rankings have taken a different course. As long as they were done in a simple way that everybody could understand--basically peer ratings as Cattell did--these ratings were well known, taken into account, and important. However, everything began to change as soon as bibliometrics/scientometrics were added to the mix. The ratings became increasingly complex and difficult to understand. The data became organized so that different facets could be measured, and different conclusions, drawn. The last ratings were so complex that they landed with a thud, and nobody paid attention to them. If you want a simple insight into the mess, go to the URLs below: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_National_Research_Council_rankings http://www.nap.edu/rdp/ The Wikipedia article gives you a short, sharp summary of its faults. It is obvious that the people producing the ratings found the politics so awful that they punted and refused to take a clear position. The Dean of the College of Humanities and Social Sciences once asked me to write a report on LSU's position in the rankings. I took one look at the data, and my eyes crossed. I simply told him that these is not your father's ratings, and I could not summarize it in a simple manner that he could understand and present to the faculty. No policy could be based on them. The data contained all the counterarguments. However, if you go back to peer ratings and simple, understandable bibliometric/scientometric measures, you get the same results as Cattell did over one hundred years ago. For my part, I find that all these so-called new "metrics" are so complex and contradictory that the only way I can judge them is to test how well they correlate with peer ratings. I have gone back to Cattell, and I will not study anything unless there is some form of expert, subjective judgment. That is why I concentrate on prize winners. But then I am an old man and a traditionalist by nature. I cling to Keynes' criticism of "algebraic logic" that judges on mathematical models not representative of reality. Respectfully, Stephen J. Bensman, Ph.D. LSU Libraries Louisiana State University Baton Rouge, LA USA , -----Original Message----- From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Isidro F. Aguillo Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 9:59 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] Rankings of Universities and Research Centers Dear Stephen, Thank you for your input, historical perspective is always welcomed. And sorry for the parade, just coming back after summer holidays. For the readers of this list perhaps it can be interesting to point about a few facts I realized after 11 years of ranking experience (shared with 20 years of belonging to metrics -biblio, webo, alt- community). My major surprise was how much bibliometrics was unknown in many universities around the world (yes, even in Europe!). Everybody talked about impact factor but citation analysis was nowhere. Then, suddenly in 2003 it was the publication of the Shanghai Ranking and its shocking success even after bibliometric 'leaders' immediately rejected it due to strong theoretical and technical limitations. More rankings, most of them giving large weights to bibliometric indicators, were published in the following years by people not belonging to the metrics community. The composite indicators they introduced were frequently built by combining highly correlated bibliometric variables. In several cases, although these models were never presented in international conferences or formally published in referred journals, they were granted enormous popularity. Even today, the CWTS Leiden Ranking, a far more rigorous and orthodox approach is not being considered among the "top 3 more prestigious" rankings. A few months ago I asked Paul Wouters if the success of the rankings does not mean in some way the failure of bibliometricians (not the bibliometry)? Open floor ... See all of you attending STI2014 conference at Leiden next week, On 27/08/2014 15:45, Stephen J Bensman wrote: > Isidoro, > > I hate to rain on your little parade, but--what the hell--I will. The first ranking of American universities was done by James McKeen Cattell in 1906 in the following article: > > Cattell, James McKeen. (1906) A statistical study of American men of science, the selection of a group of one thousand scientific men. Science, 24, 658-665, 699-707, 732-742. > > Your rankings are basically the same as his. Plus ca change, plus ca la meme chose, Needless to say, Cattell was a eugenicist, and this is where all this academic ranking hysteria originates. To make my point, I have attached a pdf of that part of his article, in which he presents his university and institutional rankings. See in particular Tables III-IV on pp. 739-740. They will look somewhat familiar to you. The available evidence is that these rankings are not random but the result of some process of "preferential attachment" to what institutions leading scientists adhere for study, teaching, and research, leading to high stability over time. To beat upon another of my little drums, it seems strangely similar to how the WWW and Google PageRank operates. That does not leave much hope for those trying to blast their way to the top. It seems set in concrete. > > Respectfully, > > Stephen J. Bensman, Ph.D. > LSU Librairies > Louisiana State University > Baton Rouge, LA USA > > PS I was in the Cal Band (Berkeley), and we used to call Stanford the "Leland Stanford Junior High," and that was before the days of mooning the crowd. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics > [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Isidro F. Aguillo > Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 6:16 AM > To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU > Subject: [SIGMETRICS] Rankings of Universities and Research Centers > > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > The new editions of the Rankings Web of Universities (now in its 11th > year) and Research Centers have been published with data collected during July 2014. The rankings consist now of close to 22000 Higher Education Institutions and 8000 Research Centers with their own independent web presence. > > http://www.webometrics.info/ > http://research.webometrics.info/ > > Ranking is built combining the following variables: Web presence, including general information, structure and organization, governance and transparency related documents, learning supporting items, technology transfer or community engagement among other webpages; Visibility, a virtual referendum about the global impact of such web contents; Openness, the commitment of the University to the open access initiatives through its institutional repository, portal of academic journals and availability of the full texts papers in the personal pages of their authors and Excellence, the number of highly cited papers (top 10% most cited) in 21 disciplines by is faculty members. > > In the current edition the top ranked universities are: > > 1. Harvard University > 2. MIT > 3. Stanford University > 4. Cornell University > 5. University of Michigan > 6. University of California Berkeley > 7= Columbia University > 8= University of Washington > 9. University of Minnesota > 10. University of Pennsylvania > > Countries with Universities in the Top Hundred > > USA 66 > Canada 7 > UK 4 > Germany 3 > China 3 > Japan 2 > Switzerland 2 > Netherlands 1 > Australia 1 > Italy 1 > South Korea 1 > Taiwan 1 > Belgium 1 > Hong Kong 1 > Brazil 1 > Austria 1 > Czech Republic 1 > Singapore 1 > Mexico 1 > > The Top Ranked in Region are: > > USA Harvard > Canada Toronto > Latin America Sao Paulo > Caribbean University of the West Indies > Europe Oxford > Russia Lomonosov MSU > Africa University of Cape Town > Asia Seoul National University > China Peking > Japan Tokyo > South Asia IIT Bombay > Southeast Asia National University of Singapore > Middle East Hebrew University of Jerusalem > Arab World King Saud University > Oceania Melbourne > BRICS Sao Paulo > -- ************************************ 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 ismaelrafols at GMAIL.COM Wed Aug 27 20:21:14 2014 From: ismaelrafols at GMAIL.COM (Ismael Rafols) Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 02:21:14 +0200 Subject: STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators Message-ID: With apologies for cross-posting) Dear all, to warm up forweek in the ST Indicators Conference in Leiden, let us share the topic of a debate: *Quality standards for evaluation indicators: Any chance for the dream to come true?* *Special session at the STI-ENID conference in Leiden, 3 September 2014, 16-17.30h * *Organisers*: Ismael Rafols (INGENIO & SPRU), Paul Wouters (CWTS, Leiden University), Sarah de Rijcke (CWTS, Leiden University) *Location*: Aalmarkt-hall, Stadsgehoorzaal Leiden There is a growing realization in the scientometrics community of the need to offer clearer guidance to users and further develop standards for professional use of bibliometrics in research evaluations. Indeed the STI-ENID Conference 2014 has the telling sub-title ?Context Matters?. This session continues from the 2013 ISSI and STI conferences in Vienna and Berlin, where full plenary sessions were convened on the need for standards in evaluative bibliometrics, and the ethical and policy implications of individual-level bibliometrics. The need to debate these issues has come to the forefront in light of reports that uses of certain easy-to-use metrics for evaluative purposes have become a routine part of academic life, despite misgivings within the profession itself about its validity. Very recently high-profile movements against certain metric indicators (e.g. the DORA declaration about the Journal Impact Factor) have brought possible misuses of metrics further to the center of attention. There may be a growing need for standards ? also to promote for accountability of scientometricians as experts. Indeed the relationship between scientometricians and end-users has been changing over the years due to factors like: 1. Increasing demands for bibliometric services in research management at various levels of aggregation, 2. New capacities and demands for performance information through the greater availability of new research technologies and their applications, and 3. The emergence of ?citizen bibliometrics? (i.e. bibliometrics carried out by non-expert end-users) due to larger availability of data and indicators. Some of these developments may result in new opportunities for research contributions and information-use, and may increase effectiveness of bibliometrics due to more advanced indicators and increased availability of data sets (including web data). Yet some innovations also risk bypassing the quality control mechanisms of fields like scientometrics and the standards they promote. The implications of this increasing scope and intensity of bibliometric practices requires a concerted response from scientometrics to produce more explicit guidelines and expert advice on good scientometric practices for specific evaluative practices such as recruitment, grant awards, institutional or national benchmarking. This special session will bring together scientometric experts, representatives of funding agencies, policy makers and opinion leaders on the role of metrics in research assessment to discuss the extent to which moving towards clearer, standardised guidelines over usage and consultancy can be achieved, both technically and strategically, and what the guidelines should look like concretely. --- *Background material*: - Report on International workshop "Guidelines and good practices on quantitative assessments of research" (OST, Paris, 12 May 2014): http://www.obs-ost.fr/fractivit%C3%A9s/workshop_international - Blogposts Paul Wouters on previous debates at the ISSI and STI conferences in 2013, and on the DORA declaration: http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/07/29/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers/ http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/10/03/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers-the-debate-in-berlin/ http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/dora-a-stimulus-for-a-new-evaluation-culture-in-science/ - Information on the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) "Independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment" + SPRU response http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2014/05/02/metrics-in-research-assessment-under-review/ http://www.hefce.ac.uk/whatwedo/rsrch/howfundr/metrics/ https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=spru-response-final.pdf&site=25 - Opinion article for JASIST by Sarah de Rijcke and Alex Rushforth "To intervene, or not to intervene; is that the question? On the role of scientometrics in research evaluation." https://citationculture.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/de-rijcke_rushforth_jasist_preprint2014.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET Thu Aug 28 02:29:12 2014 From: loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET (Loet Leydesdorff) Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 08:29:12 +0200 Subject: STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear Ismael, It seems to me that we know from the innovation-science literature that standards are to the interests of incumbent firms. In this context, one can expect process innovation more than product innovations. The further development of the field, in my opinion, needs the fluidity of intellectual exchanges and the space to propose new variants. Perhaps, as an intellectual community we have increasingly interests different from the professional practices of (quasi)industries on a market of evaluation studies that one may wish to certify ( and thus to shield the market against ?amateurs?; our PhD students?). Let me quote from a recent text (that I coauthored for other reasons): ?There exists a professional community with experts in bibliometrics who develop advanced bibliometric indicators for productivity and citation impact measurements (see an overview in Vinkler, 2010). Only experts from this community should undertake a bibliometric study. These centres of professional expertise can be found, for example, at the Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS, Leiden) or the Centre for Research & Development Monitoring (ECOOM, Leuven).? Is this the dream to come through? Or do we hear institutional interests? Perhaps, we need smaller dreams J Best, Loet _____ Loet Leydesdorff University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of Sussex; Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ. , Hangzhou; 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 Ismael Rafols Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 2:21 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators With apologies for cross-posting) Dear all, to warm up forweek in the ST Indicators Conference in Leiden, let us share the topic of a debate: Quality standards for evaluation indicators: Any chance for the dream to come true? Special session at the STI-ENID conference in Leiden, 3 September 2014, 16-17.30h Organisers: Ismael Rafols (INGENIO & SPRU), Paul Wouters (CWTS, Leiden University), Sarah de Rijcke (CWTS, Leiden University) Location: Aalmarkt-hall, Stadsgehoorzaal Leiden There is a growing realization in the scientometrics community of the need to offer clearer guidance to users and further develop standards for professional use of bibliometrics in research evaluations. Indeed the STI-ENID Conference 2014 has the telling sub-title ?Context Matters?. This session continues from the 2013 ISSI and STI conferences in Vienna and Berlin, where full plenary sessions were convened on the need for standards in evaluative bibliometrics, and the ethical and policy implications of individual-level bibliometrics. The need to debate these issues has come to the forefront in light of reports that uses of certain easy-to-use metrics for evaluative purposes have become a routine part of academic life, despite misgivings within the profession itself about its validity. Very recently high-profile movements against certain metric indicators (e.g. the DORA declaration about the Journal Impact Factor) have brought possible misuses of metrics further to the center of attention. There may be a growing need for standards ? also to promote for accountability of scientometricians as experts. Indeed the relationship between scientometricians and end-users has been changing over the years due to factors like: 1. Increasing demands for bibliometric services in research management at various levels of aggregation, 2. New capacities and demands for performance information through the greater availability of new research technologies and their applications, and 3. The emergence of ?citizen bibliometrics? (i.e. bibliometrics carried out by non-expert end-users) due to larger availability of data and indicators. Some of these developments may result in new opportunities for research contributions and information-use, and may increase effectiveness of bibliometrics due to more advanced indicators and increased availability of data sets (including web data). Yet some innovations also risk bypassing the quality control mechanisms of fields like scientometrics and the standards they promote. The implications of this increasing scope and intensity of bibliometric practices requires a concerted response from scientometrics to produce more explicit guidelines and expert advice on good scientometric practices for specific evaluative practices such as recruitment, grant awards, institutional or national benchmarking. This special session will bring together scientometric experts, representatives of funding agencies, policy makers and opinion leaders on the role of metrics in research assessment to discuss the extent to which moving towards clearer, standardised guidelines over usage and consultancy can be achieved, both technically and strategically, and what the guidelines should look like concretely. --- Background material: - Report on International workshop "Guidelines and good practices on quantitative assessments of research" (OST, Paris, 12 May 2014): http://www.obs-ost.fr/fractivit%C3%A9s/workshop_international - Blogposts Paul Wouters on previous debates at the ISSI and STI conferences in 2013, and on the DORA declaration: http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/07/29/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers/ http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/10/03/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers-the-debate-in-berlin/ http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/dora-a-stimulus-for-a-new-evaluation-culture-in-science/ - Information on the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) "Independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment" + SPRU response http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2014/05/02/metrics-in-research-assessment-under-review/ http://www.hefce.ac.uk/whatwedo/rsrch/howfundr/metrics/ https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=spru-response-final.pdf&site=25 - Opinion article for JASIST by Sarah de Rijcke and Alex Rushforth "To intervene, or not to intervene; is that the question? On the role of scientometrics in research evaluation." https://citationculture.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/de-rijcke_rushforth_jasist_preprint2014.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lutz.bornmann at GV.MPG.DE Thu Aug 28 02:48:46 2014 From: lutz.bornmann at GV.MPG.DE (Bornmann, Lutz) Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 06:48:46 +0000 Subject: STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators In-Reply-To: <000001cfc289$62b8a590$2829f0b0$@leydesdorff.net> Message-ID: Hi Loet, I think we can share our manuscript which you quoted in your email and which will be published in a similar form in EMBO Reports, since it is relevant in the context of standards in scientometrics. Best, Lutz From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Loet Leydesdorff Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 8:29 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html Dear Ismael, It seems to me that we know from the innovation-science literature that standards are to the interests of incumbent firms. In this context, one can expect process innovation more than product innovations. The further development of the field, in my opinion, needs the fluidity of intellectual exchanges and the space to propose new variants. Perhaps, as an intellectual community we have increasingly interests different from the professional practices of (quasi)industries on a market of evaluation studies that one may wish to certify ( and thus to shield the market against ?amateurs?; our PhD students?). Let me quote from a recent text (that I coauthored for other reasons): ?There exists a professional community with experts in bibliometrics who develop advanced bibliometric indicators for productivity and citation impact measurements (see an overview in Vinkler, 2010). Only experts from this community should undertake a bibliometric study. These centres of professional expertise can be found, for example, at the Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS, Leiden) or the Centre for Research & Development Monitoring (ECOOM, Leuven).? Is this the dream to come through? Or do we hear institutional interests? Perhaps, we need smaller dreams ? Best, Loet ________________________________ Loet Leydesdorff University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of Sussex; Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ., Hangzhou; 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 Ismael Rafols Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 2:21 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html With apologies for cross-posting) Dear all, to warm up forweek in the ST Indicators Conference in Leiden, let us share the topic of a debate: Quality standards for evaluation indicators: Any chance for the dream to come true? Special session at the STI-ENID conference in Leiden, 3 September 2014, 16-17.30h Organisers: Ismael Rafols (INGENIO & SPRU), Paul Wouters (CWTS, Leiden University), Sarah de Rijcke (CWTS, Leiden University) Location: Aalmarkt-hall, Stadsgehoorzaal Leiden There is a growing realization in the scientometrics community of the need to offer clearer guidance to users and further develop standards for professional use of bibliometrics in research evaluations. Indeed the STI-ENID Conference 2014 has the telling sub-title ?Context Matters?. This session continues from the 2013 ISSI and STI conferences in Vienna and Berlin, where full plenary sessions were convened on the need for standards in evaluative bibliometrics, and the ethical and policy implications of individual-level bibliometrics. The need to debate these issues has come to the forefront in light of reports that uses of certain easy-to-use metrics for evaluative purposes have become a routine part of academic life, despite misgivings within the profession itself about its validity. Very recently high-profile movements against certain metric indicators (e.g. the DORA declaration about the Journal Impact Factor) have brought possible misuses of metrics further to the center of attention. There may be a growing need for standards ? also to promote for accountability of scientometricians as experts. Indeed the relationship between scientometricians and end-users has been changing over the years due to factors like: 1. Increasing demands for bibliometric services in research management at various levels of aggregation, 2. New capacities and demands for performance information through the greater availability of new research technologies and their applications, and 3. The emergence of ?citizen bibliometrics? (i.e. bibliometrics carried out by non-expert end-users) due to larger availability of data and indicators. Some of these developments may result in new opportunities for research contributions and information-use, and may increase effectiveness of bibliometrics due to more advanced indicators and increased availability of data sets (including web data). Yet some innovations also risk bypassing the quality control mechanisms of fields like scientometrics and the standards they promote. The implications of this increasing scope and intensity of bibliometric practices requires a concerted response from scientometrics to produce more explicit guidelines and expert advice on good scientometric practices for specific evaluative practices such as recruitment, grant awards, institutional or national benchmarking. This special session will bring together scientometric experts, representatives of funding agencies, policy makers and opinion leaders on the role of metrics in research assessment to discuss the extent to which moving towards clearer, standardised guidelines over usage and consultancy can be achieved, both technically and strategically, and what the guidelines should look like concretely. --- Background material: - Report on International workshop "Guidelines and good practices on quantitative assessments of research" (OST, Paris, 12 May 2014): http://www.obs-ost.fr/fractivit%C3%A9s/workshop_international - Blogposts Paul Wouters on previous debates at the ISSI and STI conferences in 2013, and on the DORA declaration: http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/07/29/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers/ http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/10/03/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers-the-debate-in-berlin/ http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/dora-a-stimulus-for-a-new-evaluation-culture-in-science/ - Information on the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) "Independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment" + SPRU response http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2014/05/02/metrics-in-research-assessment-under-review/ http://www.hefce.ac.uk/whatwedo/rsrch/howfundr/metrics/ https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=spru-response-final.pdf&site=25 - Opinion article for JASIST by Sarah de Rijcke and Alex Rushforth "To intervene, or not to intervene; is that the question? On the role of scientometrics in research evaluation." https://citationculture.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/de-rijcke_rushforth_jasist_preprint2014.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: EMBOReports.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 131404 bytes Desc: EMBOReports.pdf URL: From p.f.wouters at CWTS.LEIDENUNIV.NL Thu Aug 28 04:12:14 2014 From: p.f.wouters at CWTS.LEIDENUNIV.NL (Paul Wouters) Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 10:12:14 +0200 Subject: STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators In-Reply-To: <000001cfc289$62b8a590$2829f0b0$@leydesdorff.net> Message-ID: Dear Loet and Lutz, Many thanks for this contribution. The motivation for the discussion about standards, as far as I am concerned, is the need to protect research groups and researchers against sloppy or damaging evaluation practices. I agree with Loet that standards are often a powerful competition weapon to protect industry interests. It is certainly not the motivation for this panel, but it may end up like that if the process of standard setting, and the sociological interpretation of those standards, is not taken into account carefully. In my view the STI conference is the best place to have this discussion, because it is a meeting place between metrics experts and policy experts. In my view, this does not lead to the question whether or not one should have some quality control process of evaluation processes, but what kind of quality control we need and what kind of standards with respect to data and indicators can play a role in this. In other words, you have raised a crucial point for the panel discussion next week. Regards, Paul Wouters Professor of Scientometrics Director Centre for Science and Technology Studies Leiden University PS: I am pleased to announce the release of our completely renewed CWTS website: cwts.nl - all information now easily available! Visiting address: Willem Einthoven Building Wassenaarseweg 62A 2333 AL Leiden Mail address: P.O. Box 905 2300 AX Leiden T: +31 71 5273909 (secr.) F: +31 71 5273911 E: p.f.wouters at cwts.leidenuniv.nl CWTS home page: www.cwts.nl Blog about Citation Cultures: http://citationculture.wordpress.com/ Research Dreams: www.researchdreams.nl On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Loet Leydesdorff wrote: > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > Dear Ismael, > > > > It seems to me that we know from the innovation-science literature that > standards are to the interests of incumbent firms. In this context, one can > expect process innovation more than product innovations. The further > development of the field, in my opinion, needs the fluidity of intellectual > exchanges and the space to propose new variants. > > > > Perhaps, as an intellectual community we have increasingly interests > different from the professional practices of (quasi)industries on a market > of evaluation studies that one may wish to certify ( and thus to shield the > market against ?amateurs?; our PhD students?). > > > > Let me quote from a recent text (that I coauthored for other reasons): > > > > ?There exists a professional community with experts in bibliometrics who > develop advanced bibliometric indicators for productivity and citation > impact measurements (see an overview in Vinkler, 2010). Only experts from > this community should undertake a bibliometric study. These centres of > professional expertise can be found, for example, at the Centre for Science > and Technology Studies (CWTS, Leiden) or the Centre for Research & > Development Monitoring (ECOOM, Leuven).? > > > > Is this the dream to come through? Or do we hear institutional interests? > Perhaps, we need smaller dreams J > > > > Best, > > Loet > > > ------------------------------ > > Loet Leydesdorff > > University of Amsterdam > Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) > > loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ > Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of > Sussex; > > Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ. , > Hangzhou; 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 *Ismael Rafols > *Sent:* Thursday, August 28, 2014 2:21 AM > *To:* SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU > *Subject:* [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for > evaluation indicators > > > > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > With apologies for cross-posting) > > Dear all, > to warm up forweek in the ST Indicators Conference in Leiden, let us share > the topic of a debate: > > *Quality standards for evaluation indicators: Any chance for the dream to > come true?* > > *Special session at the STI-ENID conference in Leiden, 3 September > 2014, 16-17.30h * > > *Organisers*: Ismael Rafols (INGENIO & SPRU), Paul Wouters (CWTS, Leiden > University), Sarah de Rijcke (CWTS, Leiden University) > > *Location*: Aalmarkt-hall, Stadsgehoorzaal Leiden > > > > There is a growing realization in the scientometrics community of the need > to offer clearer guidance to users and further develop standards for > professional use of bibliometrics in research evaluations. Indeed the > STI-ENID Conference 2014 has the telling sub-title ?Context Matters?. This > session continues from the 2013 ISSI and STI conferences in Vienna and > Berlin, where full plenary sessions were convened on the need for standards > in evaluative bibliometrics, and the ethical and policy implications of > individual-level bibliometrics. The need to debate these issues has come to > the forefront in light of reports that uses of certain easy-to-use metrics > for evaluative purposes have become a routine part of academic life, > despite misgivings within the profession itself about its validity. Very > recently high-profile movements against certain metric indicators (e.g. the > DORA declaration about the Journal Impact Factor) have brought possible > misuses of metrics further to the center of attention. There may be a > growing need for standards ? also to promote for accountability of > scientometricians as experts. > > > > Indeed the relationship between scientometricians and end-users has been > changing over the years due to factors like: 1. Increasing demands for > bibliometric services in research management at various levels of > aggregation, 2. New capacities and demands for performance information > through the greater availability of new research technologies and their > applications, and 3. The emergence of ?citizen bibliometrics? (i.e. > bibliometrics carried out by non-expert end-users) due to larger > availability of data and indicators. Some of these developments may result > in new opportunities for research contributions and information-use, and > may increase effectiveness of bibliometrics due to more advanced indicators > and increased availability of data sets (including web data). Yet some > innovations also risk bypassing the quality control mechanisms of fields > like scientometrics and the standards they promote. The implications of > this increasing scope and intensity of bibliometric practices requires a > concerted response from scientometrics to produce more explicit guidelines > and expert advice on good scientometric practices for specific evaluative > practices such as recruitment, grant awards, institutional or national > benchmarking. > > > > This special session will bring together scientometric experts, > representatives of funding agencies, policy makers and opinion leaders on > the role of metrics in research assessment to discuss the extent to which > moving towards clearer, standardised guidelines over usage and consultancy > can be achieved, both technically and strategically, and what the > guidelines should look like concretely. > > > > --- > > *Background material*: > > - Report on International workshop "Guidelines and good practices on > quantitative assessments of research" (OST, Paris, 12 May 2014): > http://www.obs-ost.fr/fractivit%C3%A9s/workshop_international > > > - Blogposts Paul Wouters on previous debates at the ISSI and STI > conferences in 2013, and on the DORA declaration: > > > http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/07/29/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers/ > > > > http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/10/03/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers-the-debate-in-berlin/ > > > > http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/dora-a-stimulus-for-a-new-evaluation-culture-in-science/ > > > - Information on the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) > "Independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment" + SPRU > response > > > http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2014/05/02/metrics-in-research-assessment-under-review/ > > > http://www.hefce.ac.uk/whatwedo/rsrch/howfundr/metrics/ > > > > https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=spru-response-final.pdf&site=25 > > > - Opinion article for JASIST by Sarah de Rijcke and Alex Rushforth "To > intervene, or not to intervene; is that the question? On the role of > scientometrics in research evaluation." > > > https://citationculture.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/de-rijcke_rushforth_jasist_preprint2014.pdf > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ismaelrafols at GMAIL.COM Thu Aug 28 04:21:34 2014 From: ismaelrafols at GMAIL.COM (Ismael Rafols) Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 10:21:34 +0200 Subject: STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Thanks Loet, the role of professional standards is indeed to certify good practices and this may not have neutral effects --notice that I say "professional" standards. The debate is precisely (thanks for stressing it!) WHICH form of standardisation is desirable given that there is discontent among users about the proliferations of metrics (some of dubious reliability), and there are initiatives setting de facto standards ( http://www.snowballmetrics.com/) without wider stakeholder engagement. As Jochen Gl?ser pointed out last year, one may want to distinguish professional practices -offered to users, which have professional repercussions and can do good or harm-- from from scientometric research. Just the same way that you distinguish between medical practices with patients from experimentation with mice in the lab. Medical standards do not suppress research in the lab --though do pose ethical questions on how research is conducted. We look forward to the discussion next week! Ismael 2014-08-28 10:12 GMT+02:00 Paul Wouters : > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > Dear Loet and Lutz, > > Many thanks for this contribution. The motivation for the discussion about > standards, as far as I am concerned, is the need to protect research groups > and researchers against sloppy or damaging evaluation practices. I agree > with Loet that standards are often a powerful competition weapon to protect > industry interests. It is certainly not the motivation for this panel, but > it may end up like that if the process of standard setting, and the > sociological interpretation of those standards, is not taken into account > carefully. In my view the STI conference is the best place to have this > discussion, because it is a meeting place between metrics experts and > policy experts. In my view, this does not lead to the question whether or > not one should have some quality control process of evaluation processes, > but what kind of quality control we need and what kind of standards with > respect to data and indicators can play a role in this. > > In other words, you have raised a crucial point for the panel discussion > next week. > > Regards, > > > Paul Wouters > Professor of Scientometrics > Director Centre for Science and Technology Studies > Leiden University > > PS: I am pleased to announce the release of our completely renewed CWTS > website: > cwts.nl - all information now easily available! > > Visiting address: > Willem Einthoven Building > Wassenaarseweg 62A > 2333 AL Leiden > Mail address: P.O. Box 905 > 2300 AX Leiden > T: +31 71 5273909 (secr.) > F: +31 71 5273911 > E: p.f.wouters at cwts.leidenuniv.nl > > CWTS home page: www.cwts.nl > Blog about Citation Cultures: http://citationculture.wordpress.com/ > Research Dreams: www.researchdreams.nl > > > On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Loet Leydesdorff > wrote: > >> Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): >> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html >> >> Dear Ismael, >> >> >> >> It seems to me that we know from the innovation-science literature that >> standards are to the interests of incumbent firms. In this context, one can >> expect process innovation more than product innovations. The further >> development of the field, in my opinion, needs the fluidity of intellectual >> exchanges and the space to propose new variants. >> >> >> >> Perhaps, as an intellectual community we have increasingly interests >> different from the professional practices of (quasi)industries on a market >> of evaluation studies that one may wish to certify ( and thus to shield the >> market against ?amateurs?; our PhD students?). >> >> >> >> Let me quote from a recent text (that I coauthored for other reasons): >> >> >> >> ?There exists a professional community with experts in bibliometrics who >> develop advanced bibliometric indicators for productivity and citation >> impact measurements (see an overview in Vinkler, 2010). Only experts >> from this community should undertake a bibliometric study. These centres of >> professional expertise can be found, for example, at the Centre for Science >> and Technology Studies (CWTS, Leiden) or the Centre for Research & >> Development Monitoring (ECOOM, Leuven).? >> >> >> >> Is this the dream to come through? Or do we hear institutional interests? >> Perhaps, we need smaller dreams J >> >> >> >> Best, >> >> Loet >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Loet Leydesdorff >> >> University of Amsterdam >> Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) >> >> loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ >> Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of >> Sussex; >> >> Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ. , >> Hangzhou; 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 *Ismael Rafols >> *Sent:* Thursday, August 28, 2014 2:21 AM >> *To:* SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU >> *Subject:* [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for >> evaluation indicators >> >> >> >> Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): >> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html >> >> With apologies for cross-posting) >> >> Dear all, >> to warm up forweek in the ST Indicators Conference in Leiden, let us >> share the topic of a debate: >> >> *Quality standards for evaluation indicators: Any chance for the dream to >> come true?* >> >> *Special session at the STI-ENID conference in Leiden, 3 September >> 2014, 16-17.30h * >> >> *Organisers*: Ismael Rafols (INGENIO & SPRU), Paul Wouters (CWTS, Leiden >> University), Sarah de Rijcke (CWTS, Leiden University) >> >> *Location*: Aalmarkt-hall, Stadsgehoorzaal Leiden >> >> >> >> There is a growing realization in the scientometrics community of the >> need to offer clearer guidance to users and further develop standards for >> professional use of bibliometrics in research evaluations. Indeed the >> STI-ENID Conference 2014 has the telling sub-title ?Context Matters?. This >> session continues from the 2013 ISSI and STI conferences in Vienna and >> Berlin, where full plenary sessions were convened on the need for standards >> in evaluative bibliometrics, and the ethical and policy implications of >> individual-level bibliometrics. The need to debate these issues has come to >> the forefront in light of reports that uses of certain easy-to-use metrics >> for evaluative purposes have become a routine part of academic life, >> despite misgivings within the profession itself about its validity. Very >> recently high-profile movements against certain metric indicators (e.g. the >> DORA declaration about the Journal Impact Factor) have brought possible >> misuses of metrics further to the center of attention. There may be a >> growing need for standards ? also to promote for accountability of >> scientometricians as experts. >> >> >> >> Indeed the relationship between scientometricians and end-users has been >> changing over the years due to factors like: 1. Increasing demands for >> bibliometric services in research management at various levels of >> aggregation, 2. New capacities and demands for performance information >> through the greater availability of new research technologies and their >> applications, and 3. The emergence of ?citizen bibliometrics? (i.e. >> bibliometrics carried out by non-expert end-users) due to larger >> availability of data and indicators. Some of these developments may result >> in new opportunities for research contributions and information-use, and >> may increase effectiveness of bibliometrics due to more advanced indicators >> and increased availability of data sets (including web data). Yet some >> innovations also risk bypassing the quality control mechanisms of fields >> like scientometrics and the standards they promote. The implications of >> this increasing scope and intensity of bibliometric practices requires a >> concerted response from scientometrics to produce more explicit guidelines >> and expert advice on good scientometric practices for specific evaluative >> practices such as recruitment, grant awards, institutional or national >> benchmarking. >> >> >> >> This special session will bring together scientometric experts, >> representatives of funding agencies, policy makers and opinion leaders on >> the role of metrics in research assessment to discuss the extent to which >> moving towards clearer, standardised guidelines over usage and consultancy >> can be achieved, both technically and strategically, and what the >> guidelines should look like concretely. >> >> >> >> --- >> >> *Background material*: >> >> - Report on International workshop "Guidelines and good practices on >> quantitative assessments of research" (OST, Paris, 12 May 2014): >> http://www.obs-ost.fr/fractivit%C3%A9s/workshop_international >> >> >> - Blogposts Paul Wouters on previous debates at the ISSI and STI >> conferences in 2013, and on the DORA declaration: >> >> >> http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/07/29/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers/ >> >> >> >> http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/10/03/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers-the-debate-in-berlin/ >> >> >> >> http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/dora-a-stimulus-for-a-new-evaluation-culture-in-science/ >> >> >> - Information on the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) >> "Independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment" + SPRU >> response >> >> >> http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2014/05/02/metrics-in-research-assessment-under-review/ >> >> >> http://www.hefce.ac.uk/whatwedo/rsrch/howfundr/metrics/ >> >> >> >> https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=spru-response-final.pdf&site=25 >> >> >> - Opinion article for JASIST by Sarah de Rijcke and Alex Rushforth "To >> intervene, or not to intervene; is that the question? On the role of >> scientometrics in research evaluation." >> >> >> https://citationculture.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/de-rijcke_rushforth_jasist_preprint2014.pdf >> >> >> >> > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET Thu Aug 28 04:18:21 2014 From: loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET (Loet Leydesdorff) Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 10:18:21 +0200 Subject: STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators In-Reply-To: <26D4503C9B0C8B43A20B92EF238B98AE18B3D577@UM-EXCDAG-A04.um.gwdg.de> Message-ID: Dear Lutz, Let me provide an example of a standard that has been enshrined in the professional practices -- but which should be abandoned sooner or later -- the use of WoS subject categories for the normalization of the citations. See for the critique: Loet Leydesdorff and Lutz Bornmann, The Operationalization of "Fields" as WoS Subject Categories (WCs) in Evaluative Bibliometrics: The cases of "Library and Information Science" and "Science & Technology Studies", Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (in press); http://arxiv.org/abs/1407.7849 Best, Loet _____ Loet Leydesdorff University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of Sussex; Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ. , Hangzhou; 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 Bornmann, Lutz Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 8:49 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators Hi Loet, I think we can share our manuscript which you quoted in your email and which will be published in a similar form in EMBO Reports, since it is relevant in the context of standards in scientometrics. Best, Lutz From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Loet Leydesdorff Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 8:29 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html Dear Ismael, It seems to me that we know from the innovation-science literature that standards are to the interests of incumbent firms. In this context, one can expect process innovation more than product innovations. The further development of the field, in my opinion, needs the fluidity of intellectual exchanges and the space to propose new variants. Perhaps, as an intellectual community we have increasingly interests different from the professional practices of (quasi)industries on a market of evaluation studies that one may wish to certify ( and thus to shield the market against ?amateurs?; our PhD students?). Let me quote from a recent text (that I coauthored for other reasons): ?There exists a professional community with experts in bibliometrics who develop advanced bibliometric indicators for productivity and citation impact measurements (see an overview in Vinkler, 2010). Only experts from this community should undertake a bibliometric study. These centres of professional expertise can be found, for example, at the Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS, Leiden) or the Centre for Research & Development Monitoring (ECOOM, Leuven).? Is this the dream to come through? Or do we hear institutional interests? Perhaps, we need smaller dreams J Best, Loet _____ Loet Leydesdorff University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of Sussex; Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ. , Hangzhou; 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 Ismael Rafols Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 2:21 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators With apologies for cross-posting) Dear all, to warm up forweek in the ST Indicators Conference in Leiden, let us share the topic of a debate: Quality standards for evaluation indicators: Any chance for the dream to come true? Special session at the STI-ENID conference in Leiden, 3 September 2014, 16-17.30h Organisers: Ismael Rafols (INGENIO & SPRU), Paul Wouters (CWTS, Leiden University), Sarah de Rijcke (CWTS, Leiden University) Location: Aalmarkt-hall, Stadsgehoorzaal Leiden There is a growing realization in the scientometrics community of the need to offer clearer guidance to users and further develop standards for professional use of bibliometrics in research evaluations. Indeed the STI-ENID Conference 2014 has the telling sub-title ?Context Matters?. This session continues from the 2013 ISSI and STI conferences in Vienna and Berlin, where full plenary sessions were convened on the need for standards in evaluative bibliometrics, and the ethical and policy implications of individual-level bibliometrics. The need to debate these issues has come to the forefront in light of reports that uses of certain easy-to-use metrics for evaluative purposes have become a routine part of academic life, despite misgivings within the profession itself about its validity. Very recently high-profile movements against certain metric indicators (e.g. the DORA declaration about the Journal Impact Factor) have brought possible misuses of metrics further to the center of attention. There may be a growing need for standards ? also to promote for accountability of scientometricians as experts. Indeed the relationship between scientometricians and end-users has been changing over the years due to factors like: 1. Increasing demands for bibliometric services in research management at various levels of aggregation, 2. New capacities and demands for performance information through the greater availability of new research technologies and their applications, and 3. The emergence of ?citizen bibliometrics? (i.e. bibliometrics carried out by non-expert end-users) due to larger availability of data and indicators. Some of these developments may result in new opportunities for research contributions and information-use, and may increase effectiveness of bibliometrics due to more advanced indicators and increased availability of data sets (including web data). Yet some innovations also risk bypassing the quality control mechanisms of fields like scientometrics and the standards they promote. The implications of this increasing scope and intensity of bibliometric practices requires a concerted response from scientometrics to produce more explicit guidelines and expert advice on good scientometric practices for specific evaluative practices such as recruitment, grant awards, institutional or national benchmarking. This special session will bring together scientometric experts, representatives of funding agencies, policy makers and opinion leaders on the role of metrics in research assessment to discuss the extent to which moving towards clearer, standardised guidelines over usage and consultancy can be achieved, both technically and strategically, and what the guidelines should look like concretely. --- Background material: - Report on International workshop "Guidelines and good practices on quantitative assessments of research" (OST, Paris, 12 May 2014): http://www.obs-ost.fr/fractivit%C3%A9s/workshop_international - Blogposts Paul Wouters on previous debates at the ISSI and STI conferences in 2013, and on the DORA declaration: http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/07/29/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers/ http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/10/03/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers-the-debate-in-berlin/ http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/dora-a-stimulus-for-a-new-evaluation-culture-in-science/ - Information on the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) "Independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment" + SPRU response http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2014/05/02/metrics-in-research-assessment-under-review/ http://www.hefce.ac.uk/whatwedo/rsrch/howfundr/metrics/ https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=spru-response-final.pdf&site=25 - Opinion article for JASIST by Sarah de Rijcke and Alex Rushforth "To intervene, or not to intervene; is that the question? On the role of scientometrics in research evaluation." https://citationculture.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/de-rijcke_rushforth_jasist_preprint2014.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lutz.bornmann at GV.MPG.DE Thu Aug 28 04:38:17 2014 From: lutz.bornmann at GV.MPG.DE (Bornmann, Lutz) Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 08:38:17 +0000 Subject: STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear Ismael, Since it is very difficult to formulate standards to which all experts agree, one could formulate as standard that bibliometric evaluations should be done by an expert in bibliometrics. There are a lot of problems with a standardized practice (which should be followed by a non-expert): For example, the advanced bibliometric indicators are so complex now that they cannot be understand (not to mentioned used) by non-experts. Standards change over time and one has to be up-to-date. Furthermore, there are different standards for different contexts necessary. Best, Lutz From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Ismael Rafols Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 10:22 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html Thanks Loet, the role of professional standards is indeed to certify good practices and this may not have neutral effects --notice that I say "professional" standards. The debate is precisely (thanks for stressing it!) WHICH form of standardisation is desirable given that there is discontent among users about the proliferations of metrics (some of dubious reliability), and there are initiatives setting de facto standards (http://www.snowballmetrics.com/) without wider stakeholder engagement. As Jochen Gl?ser pointed out last year, one may want to distinguish professional practices -offered to users, which have professional repercussions and can do good or harm-- from from scientometric research. Just the same way that you distinguish between medical practices with patients from experimentation with mice in the lab. Medical standards do not suppress research in the lab --though do pose ethical questions on how research is conducted. We look forward to the discussion next week! Ismael 2014-08-28 10:12 GMT+02:00 Paul Wouters >: Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html Dear Loet and Lutz, Many thanks for this contribution. The motivation for the discussion about standards, as far as I am concerned, is the need to protect research groups and researchers against sloppy or damaging evaluation practices. I agree with Loet that standards are often a powerful competition weapon to protect industry interests. It is certainly not the motivation for this panel, but it may end up like that if the process of standard setting, and the sociological interpretation of those standards, is not taken into account carefully. In my view the STI conference is the best place to have this discussion, because it is a meeting place between metrics experts and policy experts. In my view, this does not lead to the question whether or not one should have some quality control process of evaluation processes, but what kind of quality control we need and what kind of standards with respect to data and indicators can play a role in this. In other words, you have raised a crucial point for the panel discussion next week. Regards, Paul Wouters Professor of Scientometrics Director Centre for Science and Technology Studies Leiden University PS: I am pleased to announce the release of our completely renewed CWTS website: cwts.nl - all information now easily available! Visiting address: Willem Einthoven Building Wassenaarseweg 62A 2333 AL Leiden Mail address: P.O. Box 905 2300 AX Leiden T: +31 71 5273909 (secr.) F: +31 71 5273911 E: p.f.wouters at cwts.leidenuniv.nl CWTS home page: www.cwts.nl Blog about Citation Cultures: http://citationculture.wordpress.com/ Research Dreams: www.researchdreams.nl On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Loet Leydesdorff > wrote: Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html Dear Ismael, It seems to me that we know from the innovation-science literature that standards are to the interests of incumbent firms. In this context, one can expect process innovation more than product innovations. The further development of the field, in my opinion, needs the fluidity of intellectual exchanges and the space to propose new variants. Perhaps, as an intellectual community we have increasingly interests different from the professional practices of (quasi)industries on a market of evaluation studies that one may wish to certify ( and thus to shield the market against ?amateurs?; our PhD students?). Let me quote from a recent text (that I coauthored for other reasons): ?There exists a professional community with experts in bibliometrics who develop advanced bibliometric indicators for productivity and citation impact measurements (see an overview in Vinkler, 2010). Only experts from this community should undertake a bibliometric study. These centres of professional expertise can be found, for example, at the Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS, Leiden) or the Centre for Research & Development Monitoring (ECOOM, Leuven).? Is this the dream to come through? Or do we hear institutional interests? Perhaps, we need smaller dreams ? Best, Loet ________________________________ Loet Leydesdorff University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of Sussex; Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ., Hangzhou; 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 Ismael Rafols Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 2:21 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html With apologies for cross-posting) Dear all, to warm up forweek in the ST Indicators Conference in Leiden, let us share the topic of a debate: Quality standards for evaluation indicators: Any chance for the dream to come true? Special session at the STI-ENID conference in Leiden, 3 September 2014, 16-17.30h Organisers: Ismael Rafols (INGENIO & SPRU), Paul Wouters (CWTS, Leiden University), Sarah de Rijcke (CWTS, Leiden University) Location: Aalmarkt-hall, Stadsgehoorzaal Leiden There is a growing realization in the scientometrics community of the need to offer clearer guidance to users and further develop standards for professional use of bibliometrics in research evaluations. Indeed the STI-ENID Conference 2014 has the telling sub-title ?Context Matters?. This session continues from the 2013 ISSI and STI conferences in Vienna and Berlin, where full plenary sessions were convened on the need for standards in evaluative bibliometrics, and the ethical and policy implications of individual-level bibliometrics. The need to debate these issues has come to the forefront in light of reports that uses of certain easy-to-use metrics for evaluative purposes have become a routine part of academic life, despite misgivings within the profession itself about its validity. Very recently high-profile movements against certain metric indicators (e.g. the DORA declaration about the Journal Impact Factor) have brought possible misuses of metrics further to the center of attention. There may be a growing need for standards ? also to promote for accountability of scientometricians as experts. Indeed the relationship between scientometricians and end-users has been changing over the years due to factors like: 1. Increasing demands for bibliometric services in research management at various levels of aggregation, 2. New capacities and demands for performance information through the greater availability of new research technologies and their applications, and 3. The emergence of ?citizen bibliometrics? (i.e. bibliometrics carried out by non-expert end-users) due to larger availability of data and indicators. Some of these developments may result in new opportunities for research contributions and information-use, and may increase effectiveness of bibliometrics due to more advanced indicators and increased availability of data sets (including web data). Yet some innovations also risk bypassing the quality control mechanisms of fields like scientometrics and the standards they promote. The implications of this increasing scope and intensity of bibliometric practices requires a concerted response from scientometrics to produce more explicit guidelines and expert advice on good scientometric practices for specific evaluative practices such as recruitment, grant awards, institutional or national benchmarking. This special session will bring together scientometric experts, representatives of funding agencies, policy makers and opinion leaders on the role of metrics in research assessment to discuss the extent to which moving towards clearer, standardised guidelines over usage and consultancy can be achieved, both technically and strategically, and what the guidelines should look like concretely. --- Background material: - Report on International workshop "Guidelines and good practices on quantitative assessments of research" (OST, Paris, 12 May 2014): http://www.obs-ost.fr/fractivit%C3%A9s/workshop_international - Blogposts Paul Wouters on previous debates at the ISSI and STI conferences in 2013, and on the DORA declaration: http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/07/29/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers/ http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/10/03/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers-the-debate-in-berlin/ http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/dora-a-stimulus-for-a-new-evaluation-culture-in-science/ - Information on the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) "Independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment" + SPRU response http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2014/05/02/metrics-in-research-assessment-under-review/ http://www.hefce.ac.uk/whatwedo/rsrch/howfundr/metrics/ https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=spru-response-final.pdf&site=25 - Opinion article for JASIST by Sarah de Rijcke and Alex Rushforth "To intervene, or not to intervene; is that the question? On the role of scientometrics in research evaluation." https://citationculture.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/de-rijcke_rushforth_jasist_preprint2014.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET Thu Aug 28 04:33:14 2014 From: loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET (Loet Leydesdorff) Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 10:33:14 +0200 Subject: STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear Paul, It seems to me that one can distinguish different stakeholders. Professional centers may wish to exploit their competitive advantages and produce ?revised SNIP indicators? and ?new Leiden Rankings? from time to time. (For example, the Leiden Ranking 2014 has a base for the normalization different from the Leiden Ranking 2013.) The critique and deconstruction/reconstruction of these indicators and their use is very legitimate in academia. PhD students, for example, in a remote university are not able to normalize citation rates using sophisticated standards that may be company property. Should their efforts (e.g., using Publish or Perish) be considered as amateurish a priori (and thus be rejected)? The criteria, in my opinion, have to be intellectual: do we gain new (theoretical) insights from the critique? Of course, we need also up-to-date methods. Best, Loet _____ Loet Leydesdorff University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of Sussex; Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ. , Hangzhou; 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 Paul Wouters Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 10:12 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators Dear Loet and Lutz, Many thanks for this contribution. The motivation for the discussion about standards, as far as I am concerned, is the need to protect research groups and researchers against sloppy or damaging evaluation practices. I agree with Loet that standards are often a powerful competition weapon to protect industry interests. It is certainly not the motivation for this panel, but it may end up like that if the process of standard setting, and the sociological interpretation of those standards, is not taken into account carefully. In my view the STI conference is the best place to have this discussion, because it is a meeting place between metrics experts and policy experts. In my view, this does not lead to the question whether or not one should have some quality control process of evaluation processes, but what kind of quality control we need and what kind of standards with respect to data and indicators can play a role in this. In other words, you have raised a crucial point for the panel discussion next week. Regards, Paul Wouters Professor of Scientometrics Director Centre for Science and Technology Studies Leiden University PS: I am pleased to announce the release of our completely renewed CWTS website: cwts.nl - all information now easily available! Visiting address: Willem Einthoven Building Wassenaarseweg 62A 2333 AL Leiden Mail address: P.O. Box 905 2300 AX Leiden T: +31 71 5273909 (secr.) F: +31 71 5273911 E: p.f.wouters at cwts.leidenuniv.nl CWTS home page: www.cwts.nl Blog about Citation Cultures: http://citationculture.wordpress.com/ Research Dreams: www.researchdreams.nl On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Loet Leydesdorff wrote: Dear Ismael, It seems to me that we know from the innovation-science literature that standards are to the interests of incumbent firms. In this context, one can expect process innovation more than product innovations. The further development of the field, in my opinion, needs the fluidity of intellectual exchanges and the space to propose new variants. Perhaps, as an intellectual community we have increasingly interests different from the professional practices of (quasi)industries on a market of evaluation studies that one may wish to certify ( and thus to shield the market against ?amateurs?; our PhD students?). Let me quote from a recent text (that I coauthored for other reasons): ?There exists a professional community with experts in bibliometrics who develop advanced bibliometric indicators for productivity and citation impact measurements (see an overview in Vinkler, 2010). Only experts from this community should undertake a bibliometric study. These centres of professional expertise can be found, for example, at the Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS, Leiden) or the Centre for Research & Development Monitoring (ECOOM, Leuven).? Is this the dream to come through? Or do we hear institutional interests? Perhaps, we need smaller dreams J Best, Loet _____ Loet Leydesdorff University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of Sussex; Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ. , Hangzhou; 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 Ismael Rafols Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 2:21 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators With apologies for cross-posting) Dear all, to warm up forweek in the ST Indicators Conference in Leiden, let us share the topic of a debate: Quality standards for evaluation indicators: Any chance for the dream to come true? Special session at the STI-ENID conference in Leiden, 3 September 2014, 16-17.30h Organisers: Ismael Rafols (INGENIO & SPRU), Paul Wouters (CWTS, Leiden University), Sarah de Rijcke (CWTS, Leiden University) Location: Aalmarkt-hall, Stadsgehoorzaal Leiden There is a growing realization in the scientometrics community of the need to offer clearer guidance to users and further develop standards for professional use of bibliometrics in research evaluations. Indeed the STI-ENID Conference 2014 has the telling sub-title ?Context Matters?. This session continues from the 2013 ISSI and STI conferences in Vienna and Berlin, where full plenary sessions were convened on the need for standards in evaluative bibliometrics, and the ethical and policy implications of individual-level bibliometrics. The need to debate these issues has come to the forefront in light of reports that uses of certain easy-to-use metrics for evaluative purposes have become a routine part of academic life, despite misgivings within the profession itself about its validity. Very recently high-profile movements against certain metric indicators (e.g. the DORA declaration about the Journal Impact Factor) have brought possible misuses of metrics further to the center of attention. There may be a growing need for standards ? also to promote for accountability of scientometricians as experts. Indeed the relationship between scientometricians and end-users has been changing over the years due to factors like: 1. Increasing demands for bibliometric services in research management at various levels of aggregation, 2. New capacities and demands for performance information through the greater availability of new research technologies and their applications, and 3. The emergence of ?citizen bibliometrics? (i.e. bibliometrics carried out by non-expert end-users) due to larger availability of data and indicators. Some of these developments may result in new opportunities for research contributions and information-use, and may increase effectiveness of bibliometrics due to more advanced indicators and increased availability of data sets (including web data). Yet some innovations also risk bypassing the quality control mechanisms of fields like scientometrics and the standards they promote. The implications of this increasing scope and intensity of bibliometric practices requires a concerted response from scientometrics to produce more explicit guidelines and expert advice on good scientometric practices for specific evaluative practices such as recruitment, grant awards, institutional or national benchmarking. This special session will bring together scientometric experts, representatives of funding agencies, policy makers and opinion leaders on the role of metrics in research assessment to discuss the extent to which moving towards clearer, standardised guidelines over usage and consultancy can be achieved, both technically and strategically, and what the guidelines should look like concretely. --- Background material: - Report on International workshop "Guidelines and good practices on quantitative assessments of research" (OST, Paris, 12 May 2014): http://www.obs-ost.fr/fractivit%C3%A9s/workshop_international - Blogposts Paul Wouters on previous debates at the ISSI and STI conferences in 2013, and on the DORA declaration: http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/07/29/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers/ http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/10/03/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers-the-debate-in-berlin/ http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/dora-a-stimulus-for-a-new-evaluation-culture-in-science/ - Information on the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) "Independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment" + SPRU response http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2014/05/02/metrics-in-research-assessment-under-review/ http://www.hefce.ac.uk/whatwedo/rsrch/howfundr/metrics/ https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=spru-response-final.pdf&site=25 - Opinion article for JASIST by Sarah de Rijcke and Alex Rushforth "To intervene, or not to intervene; is that the question? On the role of scientometrics in research evaluation." https://citationculture.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/de-rijcke_rushforth_jasist_preprint2014.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From j.adams at DIGITAL-SCIENCE.COM Thu Aug 28 05:11:07 2014 From: j.adams at DIGITAL-SCIENCE.COM (Jonathan Adams) Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 10:11:07 +0100 Subject: STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators In-Reply-To: <006601cfc29a$b6a8c660$23fa5320$@leydesdorff.net> Message-ID: I agree with the thrust of Loet's argument. It is dangerous for any self-appointed group to think that it can set a particular set of standards. This is surely more risky in an area with a healthy research and innovation culture that has advanced scientometric thinking and practice significantly over recent decades. However, Isidro Aguillo recently reminded us that there is still surprisingly widespread ignorance of what good practice in scientometrics looks like, hence recourse by too many research managers to weak indicators of performance like the Journal Impact factor. For this reason, the development of reference points for good (and bad) practice may be valuable and therefore worthwhile. These should not be constraining, except where they point out what should not be done. At the same time, we are few and they (research managers and bureaucrats) are many. If we are to be effective then what we say needs to be short and simple: not a handbook (or a cook-book). And it has to reach the right audience, not just other scientometricians. On 28 August 2014 09:33, Loet Leydesdorff wrote: > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > Dear Paul, > > > > It seems to me that one can distinguish different stakeholders. > Professional centers may wish to exploit their competitive advantages and > produce ?revised SNIP indicators? and ?new Leiden Rankings? from time to > time. (For example, the Leiden Ranking 2014 has a base for the > normalization different from the Leiden Ranking 2013.) The critique and > deconstruction/reconstruction of these indicators and their use is very > legitimate in academia. > > > > PhD students, for example, in a remote university are not able to > normalize citation rates using sophisticated standards that may be company > property. Should their efforts (e.g., using Publish or Perish) be > considered as amateurish a priori (and thus be rejected)? The criteria, in > my opinion, have to be intellectual: do we gain new (theoretical) insights > from the critique? Of course, we need also up-to-date methods. > > > > Best, > > Loet > > > ------------------------------ > > Loet Leydesdorff > > University of Amsterdam > Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) > > loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ > Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of > Sussex; > > Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ. , > Hangzhou; 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 *Paul Wouters > *Sent:* Thursday, August 28, 2014 10:12 AM > *To:* SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU > *Subject:* Re: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for > evaluation indicators > > > > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > Dear Loet and Lutz, > > > > Many thanks for this contribution. The motivation for the discussion about > standards, as far as I am concerned, is the need to protect research groups > and researchers against sloppy or damaging evaluation practices. I agree > with Loet that standards are often a powerful competition weapon to protect > industry interests. It is certainly not the motivation for this panel, but > it may end up like that if the process of standard setting, and the > sociological interpretation of those standards, is not taken into account > carefully. In my view the STI conference is the best place to have this > discussion, because it is a meeting place between metrics experts and > policy experts. In my view, this does not lead to the question whether or > not one should have some quality control process of evaluation processes, > but what kind of quality control we need and what kind of standards with > respect to data and indicators can play a role in this. > > > > In other words, you have raised a crucial point for the panel discussion > next week. > > > > Regards, > > > > > Paul Wouters > > Professor of Scientometrics > Director Centre for Science and Technology Studies > Leiden University > > > > PS: I am pleased to announce the release of our completely renewed CWTS > website: > > cwts.nl - all information now easily available! > > > > Visiting address: > Willem Einthoven Building > Wassenaarseweg 62A > 2333 AL Leiden > Mail address: P.O. Box 905 > 2300 AX Leiden > T: +31 71 5273909 (secr.) > F: +31 71 5273911 > E: p.f.wouters at cwts.leidenuniv.nl > > CWTS home page: www.cwts.nl > Blog about Citation Cultures: http://citationculture.wordpress.com/ > Research Dreams: www.researchdreams.nl > > > > On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Loet Leydesdorff > wrote: > > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > Dear Ismael, > > > > It seems to me that we know from the innovation-science literature that > standards are to the interests of incumbent firms. In this context, one can > expect process innovation more than product innovations. The further > development of the field, in my opinion, needs the fluidity of intellectual > exchanges and the space to propose new variants. > > > > Perhaps, as an intellectual community we have increasingly interests > different from the professional practices of (quasi)industries on a market > of evaluation studies that one may wish to certify ( and thus to shield the > market against ?amateurs?; our PhD students?). > > > > Let me quote from a recent text (that I coauthored for other reasons): > > > > ?There exists a professional community with experts in bibliometrics who > develop advanced bibliometric indicators for productivity and citation > impact measurements (see an overview in Vinkler, 2010). Only experts from > this community should undertake a bibliometric study. These centres of > professional expertise can be found, for example, at the Centre for Science > and Technology Studies (CWTS, Leiden) or the Centre for Research & > Development Monitoring (ECOOM, Leuven).? > > > > Is this the dream to come through? Or do we hear institutional interests? > Perhaps, we need smaller dreams J > > > > Best, > > Loet > > > ------------------------------ > > Loet Leydesdorff > > University of Amsterdam > Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) > > loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ > Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of > Sussex; > > Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ. , > Hangzhou; 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 *Ismael Rafols > *Sent:* Thursday, August 28, 2014 2:21 AM > *To:* SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU > *Subject:* [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for > evaluation indicators > > > > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > With apologies for cross-posting) > > Dear all, > to warm up forweek in the ST Indicators Conference in Leiden, let us share > the topic of a debate: > > *Quality standards for evaluation indicators: Any chance for the dream to > come true?* > > *Special session at the STI-ENID conference in Leiden, 3 September > 2014, 16-17.30h * > > *Organisers*: Ismael Rafols (INGENIO & SPRU), Paul Wouters (CWTS, Leiden > University), Sarah de Rijcke (CWTS, Leiden University) > > *Location*: Aalmarkt-hall, Stadsgehoorzaal Leiden > > > > There is a growing realization in the scientometrics community of the need > to offer clearer guidance to users and further develop standards for > professional use of bibliometrics in research evaluations. Indeed the > STI-ENID Conference 2014 has the telling sub-title ?Context Matters?. This > session continues from the 2013 ISSI and STI conferences in Vienna and > Berlin, where full plenary sessions were convened on the need for standards > in evaluative bibliometrics, and the ethical and policy implications of > individual-level bibliometrics. The need to debate these issues has come to > the forefront in light of reports that uses of certain easy-to-use metrics > for evaluative purposes have become a routine part of academic life, > despite misgivings within the profession itself about its validity. Very > recently high-profile movements against certain metric indicators (e.g. the > DORA declaration about the Journal Impact Factor) have brought possible > misuses of metrics further to the center of attention. There may be a > growing need for standards ? also to promote for accountability of > scientometricians as experts. > > > > Indeed the relationship between scientometricians and end-users has been > changing over the years due to factors like: 1. Increasing demands for > bibliometric services in research management at various levels of > aggregation, 2. New capacities and demands for performance information > through the greater availability of new research technologies and their > applications, and 3. The emergence of ?citizen bibliometrics? (i.e. > bibliometrics carried out by non-expert end-users) due to larger > availability of data and indicators. Some of these developments may result > in new opportunities for research contributions and information-use, and > may increase effectiveness of bibliometrics due to more advanced indicators > and increased availability of data sets (including web data). Yet some > innovations also risk bypassing the quality control mechanisms of fields > like scientometrics and the standards they promote. The implications of > this increasing scope and intensity of bibliometric practices requires a > concerted response from scientometrics to produce more explicit guidelines > and expert advice on good scientometric practices for specific evaluative > practices such as recruitment, grant awards, institutional or national > benchmarking. > > > > This special session will bring together scientometric experts, > representatives of funding agencies, policy makers and opinion leaders on > the role of metrics in research assessment to discuss the extent to which > moving towards clearer, standardised guidelines over usage and consultancy > can be achieved, both technically and strategically, and what the > guidelines should look like concretely. > > > > --- > > *Background material*: > > - Report on International workshop "Guidelines and good practices on > quantitative assessments of research" (OST, Paris, 12 May 2014): > http://www.obs-ost.fr/fractivit%C3%A9s/workshop_international > > > - Blogposts Paul Wouters on previous debates at the ISSI and STI > conferences in 2013, and on the DORA declaration: > > > http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/07/29/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers/ > > > > http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/10/03/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers-the-debate-in-berlin/ > > > > http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/dora-a-stimulus-for-a-new-evaluation-culture-in-science/ > > > - Information on the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) > "Independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment" + SPRU > response > > > http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2014/05/02/metrics-in-research-assessment-under-review/ > > > http://www.hefce.ac.uk/whatwedo/rsrch/howfundr/metrics/ > > > > https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=spru-response-final.pdf&site=25 > > > - Opinion article for JASIST by Sarah de Rijcke and Alex Rushforth "To > intervene, or not to intervene; is that the question? On the role of > scientometrics in research evaluation." > > > https://citationculture.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/de-rijcke_rushforth_jasist_preprint2014.pdf > > > > > > -- Sincere regards, Dr Jonathan Adams Chief Scientist, Digital Science Visiting Professor, King's College London M/ +44 7964 908449 E/ j.adams at digital-science.com Macmillan Publishers Ltd 4 Crinan Street London N1 9XW, UK http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/news/research/research-intelligence-proof-is-in-the-numbers/411118.article -- ******************************************************************************** DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is confidential and should not be used by anyone who is not the original intended recipient. If you have received this e-mail in error please inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other storage mechanism. Neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents accept liability for any statements made which are clearly the sender's own and not expressly made on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or one of its agents. Please note that neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents accept any responsibility for viruses that may be contained in this e-mail or its attachments and it is your responsibility to scan the e-mail and attachments (if any). No contracts may be concluded on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or its agents by means of e-mail communication. Macmillan Publishers Limited Registered in England and Wales with registered number 785998 Registered Office Brunel Road, Houndmills, Basingstoke RG21 6XS ******************************************************************************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From p.f.wouters at CWTS.LEIDENUNIV.NL Thu Aug 28 05:14:21 2014 From: p.f.wouters at CWTS.LEIDENUNIV.NL (Paul Wouters) Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 11:14:21 +0200 Subject: STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators In-Reply-To: <006601cfc29a$b6a8c660$23fa5320$@leydesdorff.net> Message-ID: My dear Loet, I have the feeling that you are opening doors that are already wide open. Of course work of PhD students on the basis of the data they have available should not be rejected as amateurish! Indeed, only intellectual criteria should be used. I think professional centers are regularly improving their work not only for competitive reasons but also for intellectual reasons. For example, CWTS is (or if one wishes has become) first and foremost an academic research institute that also provides commercial services. But the intellectual agenda is dominant (I am not denying that there are of course tensions between the two missions). The change in the Leiden Ranking re normalization is motivated primarily by the problems with the WoS subject categories that you, as we ourselves and others, have identified. I find it ironic that you see this only as a commercial move! Ludo Waltman wil give a paper on our new classification system at the STI conference next week. Last, I agree with Jonathan's argument about the main direction the initiative re quality checks on evaluation should take. Paul Wouters Professor of Scientometrics Director Centre for Science and Technology Studies Leiden University PS: I am pleased to announce the release of our completely renewed CWTS website: cwts.nl - all information now easily available! Visiting address: Willem Einthoven Building Wassenaarseweg 62A 2333 AL Leiden Mail address: P.O. Box 905 2300 AX Leiden T: +31 71 5273909 (secr.) F: +31 71 5273911 E: p.f.wouters at cwts.leidenuniv.nl CWTS home page: www.cwts.nl Blog about Citation Cultures: http://citationculture.wordpress.com/ Research Dreams: www.researchdreams.nl On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Loet Leydesdorff wrote: > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > Dear Paul, > > > > It seems to me that one can distinguish different stakeholders. > Professional centers may wish to exploit their competitive advantages and > produce ?revised SNIP indicators? and ?new Leiden Rankings? from time to > time. (For example, the Leiden Ranking 2014 has a base for the > normalization different from the Leiden Ranking 2013.) The critique and > deconstruction/reconstruction of these indicators and their use is very > legitimate in academia. > > > > PhD students, for example, in a remote university are not able to > normalize citation rates using sophisticated standards that may be company > property. Should their efforts (e.g., using Publish or Perish) be > considered as amateurish a priori (and thus be rejected)? The criteria, in > my opinion, have to be intellectual: do we gain new (theoretical) insights > from the critique? Of course, we need also up-to-date methods. > > > > Best, > > Loet > > > ------------------------------ > > Loet Leydesdorff > > University of Amsterdam > Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) > > loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ > Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of > Sussex; > > Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ. , > Hangzhou; 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 *Paul Wouters > *Sent:* Thursday, August 28, 2014 10:12 AM > *To:* SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU > *Subject:* Re: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for > evaluation indicators > > > > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > Dear Loet and Lutz, > > > > Many thanks for this contribution. The motivation for the discussion about > standards, as far as I am concerned, is the need to protect research groups > and researchers against sloppy or damaging evaluation practices. I agree > with Loet that standards are often a powerful competition weapon to protect > industry interests. It is certainly not the motivation for this panel, but > it may end up like that if the process of standard setting, and the > sociological interpretation of those standards, is not taken into account > carefully. In my view the STI conference is the best place to have this > discussion, because it is a meeting place between metrics experts and > policy experts. In my view, this does not lead to the question whether or > not one should have some quality control process of evaluation processes, > but what kind of quality control we need and what kind of standards with > respect to data and indicators can play a role in this. > > > > In other words, you have raised a crucial point for the panel discussion > next week. > > > > Regards, > > > > > Paul Wouters > > Professor of Scientometrics > Director Centre for Science and Technology Studies > Leiden University > > > > PS: I am pleased to announce the release of our completely renewed CWTS > website: > > cwts.nl - all information now easily available! > > > > Visiting address: > Willem Einthoven Building > Wassenaarseweg 62A > 2333 AL Leiden > Mail address: P.O. Box 905 > 2300 AX Leiden > T: +31 71 5273909 (secr.) > F: +31 71 5273911 > E: p.f.wouters at cwts.leidenuniv.nl > > CWTS home page: www.cwts.nl > Blog about Citation Cultures: http://citationculture.wordpress.com/ > Research Dreams: www.researchdreams.nl > > > > On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Loet Leydesdorff > wrote: > > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > Dear Ismael, > > > > It seems to me that we know from the innovation-science literature that > standards are to the interests of incumbent firms. In this context, one can > expect process innovation more than product innovations. The further > development of the field, in my opinion, needs the fluidity of intellectual > exchanges and the space to propose new variants. > > > > Perhaps, as an intellectual community we have increasingly interests > different from the professional practices of (quasi)industries on a market > of evaluation studies that one may wish to certify ( and thus to shield the > market against ?amateurs?; our PhD students?). > > > > Let me quote from a recent text (that I coauthored for other reasons): > > > > ?There exists a professional community with experts in bibliometrics who > develop advanced bibliometric indicators for productivity and citation > impact measurements (see an overview in Vinkler, 2010). Only experts from > this community should undertake a bibliometric study. These centres of > professional expertise can be found, for example, at the Centre for Science > and Technology Studies (CWTS, Leiden) or the Centre for Research & > Development Monitoring (ECOOM, Leuven).? > > > > Is this the dream to come through? Or do we hear institutional interests? > Perhaps, we need smaller dreams J > > > > Best, > > Loet > > > ------------------------------ > > Loet Leydesdorff > > University of Amsterdam > Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) > > loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ > Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of > Sussex; > > Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ. , > Hangzhou; 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 *Ismael Rafols > *Sent:* Thursday, August 28, 2014 2:21 AM > *To:* SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU > *Subject:* [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for > evaluation indicators > > > > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > With apologies for cross-posting) > > Dear all, > to warm up forweek in the ST Indicators Conference in Leiden, let us share > the topic of a debate: > > *Quality standards for evaluation indicators: Any chance for the dream to > come true?* > > *Special session at the STI-ENID conference in Leiden, 3 September > 2014, 16-17.30h * > > *Organisers*: Ismael Rafols (INGENIO & SPRU), Paul Wouters (CWTS, Leiden > University), Sarah de Rijcke (CWTS, Leiden University) > > *Location*: Aalmarkt-hall, Stadsgehoorzaal Leiden > > > > There is a growing realization in the scientometrics community of the need > to offer clearer guidance to users and further develop standards for > professional use of bibliometrics in research evaluations. Indeed the > STI-ENID Conference 2014 has the telling sub-title ?Context Matters?. This > session continues from the 2013 ISSI and STI conferences in Vienna and > Berlin, where full plenary sessions were convened on the need for standards > in evaluative bibliometrics, and the ethical and policy implications of > individual-level bibliometrics. The need to debate these issues has come to > the forefront in light of reports that uses of certain easy-to-use metrics > for evaluative purposes have become a routine part of academic life, > despite misgivings within the profession itself about its validity. Very > recently high-profile movements against certain metric indicators (e.g. the > DORA declaration about the Journal Impact Factor) have brought possible > misuses of metrics further to the center of attention. There may be a > growing need for standards ? also to promote for accountability of > scientometricians as experts. > > > > Indeed the relationship between scientometricians and end-users has been > changing over the years due to factors like: 1. Increasing demands for > bibliometric services in research management at various levels of > aggregation, 2. New capacities and demands for performance information > through the greater availability of new research technologies and their > applications, and 3. The emergence of ?citizen bibliometrics? (i.e. > bibliometrics carried out by non-expert end-users) due to larger > availability of data and indicators. Some of these developments may result > in new opportunities for research contributions and information-use, and > may increase effectiveness of bibliometrics due to more advanced indicators > and increased availability of data sets (including web data). Yet some > innovations also risk bypassing the quality control mechanisms of fields > like scientometrics and the standards they promote. The implications of > this increasing scope and intensity of bibliometric practices requires a > concerted response from scientometrics to produce more explicit guidelines > and expert advice on good scientometric practices for specific evaluative > practices such as recruitment, grant awards, institutional or national > benchmarking. > > > > This special session will bring together scientometric experts, > representatives of funding agencies, policy makers and opinion leaders on > the role of metrics in research assessment to discuss the extent to which > moving towards clearer, standardised guidelines over usage and consultancy > can be achieved, both technically and strategically, and what the > guidelines should look like concretely. > > > > --- > > *Background material*: > > - Report on International workshop "Guidelines and good practices on > quantitative assessments of research" (OST, Paris, 12 May 2014): > http://www.obs-ost.fr/fractivit%C3%A9s/workshop_international > > > - Blogposts Paul Wouters on previous debates at the ISSI and STI > conferences in 2013, and on the DORA declaration: > > > http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/07/29/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers/ > > > > http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/10/03/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers-the-debate-in-berlin/ > > > > http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/dora-a-stimulus-for-a-new-evaluation-culture-in-science/ > > > - Information on the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) > "Independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment" + SPRU > response > > > http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2014/05/02/metrics-in-research-assessment-under-review/ > > > http://www.hefce.ac.uk/whatwedo/rsrch/howfundr/metrics/ > > > > https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=spru-response-final.pdf&site=25 > > > - Opinion article for JASIST by Sarah de Rijcke and Alex Rushforth "To > intervene, or not to intervene; is that the question? On the role of > scientometrics in research evaluation." > > > https://citationculture.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/de-rijcke_rushforth_jasist_preprint2014.pdf > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Gemma.Derrick at BRUNEL.AC.UK Thu Aug 28 05:37:57 2014 From: Gemma.Derrick at BRUNEL.AC.UK (Gemma Derrick) Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 09:37:57 +0000 Subject: STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear All, I wholeheartedly agree with Jonathan here. I am a little unnerved at the discussion regarding who is considered amateurish and insinuations about who is to be considered an scientometric expert and therefore has the right to offer advice on standards etc. The popularity of our field by different stakeholder groups is one that is to be celebrated and promoted perhaps through greater engagement of our community members with these stakeholders rather than ringfencing the advances of our field against unstructured or perhaps perceivingly unauthorised use by outsiders. Afterall, a greater level of engagement with our growing list of stakeholders is not asking of us anything more than it is asking of other academic fields of research. Nonetheless, some interesting points to raise next week and a discussion I am very much looking forward to hearing. I am looking forward to seeing everybody there. Sincerely, Gemma Dr Gemma E. Derrick | ESRC Future Research Leader Fellow | HERG | Brunel University London Address: Health Economics Research Group, Brunel University, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UB8 3PH, UK Tel: +44 (0)1895 265454 Fax: +44 (0)1895 269708 E-mail: gemma.derrick at brunel.ac.uk Website: Health Economics Research Group (HERG) ________________________________ From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] on behalf of Jonathan Adams [j.adams at DIGITAL-SCIENCE.COM] Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 10:11 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators I agree with the thrust of Loet's argument. It is dangerous for any self-appointed group to think that it can set a particular set of standards. This is surely more risky in an area with a healthy research and innovation culture that has advanced scientometric thinking and practice significantly over recent decades. However, Isidro Aguillo recently reminded us that there is still surprisingly widespread ignorance of what good practice in scientometrics looks like, hence recourse by too many research managers to weak indicators of performance like the Journal Impact factor. For this reason, the development of reference points for good (and bad) practice may be valuable and therefore worthwhile. These should not be constraining, except where they point out what should not be done. At the same time, we are few and they (research managers and bureaucrats) are many. If we are to be effective then what we say needs to be short and simple: not a handbook (or a cook-book). And it has to reach the right audience, not just other scientometricians. On 28 August 2014 09:33, Loet Leydesdorff > wrote: Dear Paul, It seems to me that one can distinguish different stakeholders. Professional centers may wish to exploit their competitive advantages and produce ?revised SNIP indicators? and ?new Leiden Rankings? from time to time. (For example, the Leiden Ranking 2014 has a base for the normalization different from the Leiden Ranking 2013.) The critique and deconstruction/reconstruction of these indicators and their use is very legitimate in academia. PhD students, for example, in a remote university are not able to normalize citation rates using sophisticated standards that may be company property. Should their efforts (e.g., using Publish or Perish) be considered as amateurish a priori (and thus be rejected)? The criteria, in my opinion, have to be intellectual: do we gain new (theoretical) insights from the critique? Of course, we need also up-to-date methods. Best, Loet ________________________________ Loet Leydesdorff University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of Sussex; Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ., Hangzhou; 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 Paul Wouters Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 10:12 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators Dear Loet and Lutz, Many thanks for this contribution. The motivation for the discussion about standards, as far as I am concerned, is the need to protect research groups and researchers against sloppy or damaging evaluation practices. I agree with Loet that standards are often a powerful competition weapon to protect industry interests. It is certainly not the motivation for this panel, but it may end up like that if the process of standard setting, and the sociological interpretation of those standards, is not taken into account carefully. In my view the STI conference is the best place to have this discussion, because it is a meeting place between metrics experts and policy experts. In my view, this does not lead to the question whether or not one should have some quality control process of evaluation processes, but what kind of quality control we need and what kind of standards with respect to data and indicators can play a role in this. In other words, you have raised a crucial point for the panel discussion next week. Regards, Paul Wouters Professor of Scientometrics Director Centre for Science and Technology Studies Leiden University PS: I am pleased to announce the release of our completely renewed CWTS website: cwts.nl - all information now easily available! Visiting address: Willem Einthoven Building Wassenaarseweg 62A 2333 AL Leiden Mail address: P.O. Box 905 2300 AX Leiden T: +31 71 5273909 (secr.) F: +31 71 5273911 E: p.f.wouters at cwts.leidenuniv.nl CWTS home page: www.cwts.nl Blog about Citation Cultures: http://citationculture.wordpress.com/ Research Dreams: www.researchdreams.nl On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Loet Leydesdorff > wrote: Dear Ismael, It seems to me that we know from the innovation-science literature that standards are to the interests of incumbent firms. In this context, one can expect process innovation more than product innovations. The further development of the field, in my opinion, needs the fluidity of intellectual exchanges and the space to propose new variants. Perhaps, as an intellectual community we have increasingly interests different from the professional practices of (quasi)industries on a market of evaluation studies that one may wish to certify ( and thus to shield the market against ?amateurs?; our PhD students?). Let me quote from a recent text (that I coauthored for other reasons): ?There exists a professional community with experts in bibliometrics who develop advanced bibliometric indicators for productivity and citation impact measurements (see an overview in Vinkler, 2010). Only experts from this community should undertake a bibliometric study. These centres of professional expertise can be found, for example, at the Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS, Leiden) or the Centre for Research & Development Monitoring (ECOOM, Leuven).? Is this the dream to come through? Or do we hear institutional interests? Perhaps, we need smaller dreams :) Best, Loet ________________________________ Loet Leydesdorff University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of Sussex; Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ., Hangzhou; 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 Ismael Rafols Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 2:21 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators With apologies for cross-posting) Dear all, to warm up forweek in the ST Indicators Conference in Leiden, let us share the topic of a debate: Quality standards for evaluation indicators: Any chance for the dream to come true? Special session at the STI-ENID conference in Leiden, 3 September 2014, 16-17.30h Organisers: Ismael Rafols (INGENIO & SPRU), Paul Wouters (CWTS, Leiden University), Sarah de Rijcke (CWTS, Leiden University) Location: Aalmarkt-hall, Stadsgehoorzaal Leiden There is a growing realization in the scientometrics community of the need to offer clearer guidance to users and further develop standards for professional use of bibliometrics in research evaluations. Indeed the STI-ENID Conference 2014 has the telling sub-title ?Context Matters?. This session continues from the 2013 ISSI and STI conferences in Vienna and Berlin, where full plenary sessions were convened on the need for standards in evaluative bibliometrics, and the ethical and policy implications of individual-level bibliometrics. The need to debate these issues has come to the forefront in light of reports that uses of certain easy-to-use metrics for evaluative purposes have become a routine part of academic life, despite misgivings within the profession itself about its validity. Very recently high-profile movements against certain metric indicators (e.g. the DORA declaration about the Journal Impact Factor) have brought possible misuses of metrics further to the center of attention. There may be a growing need for standards ? also to promote for accountability of scientometricians as experts. Indeed the relationship between scientometricians and end-users has been changing over the years due to factors like: 1. Increasing demands for bibliometric services in research management at various levels of aggregation, 2. New capacities and demands for performance information through the greater availability of new research technologies and their applications, and 3. The emergence of ?citizen bibliometrics? (i.e. bibliometrics carried out by non-expert end-users) due to larger availability of data and indicators. Some of these developments may result in new opportunities for research contributions and information-use, and may increase effectiveness of bibliometrics due to more advanced indicators and increased availability of data sets (including web data). Yet some innovations also risk bypassing the quality control mechanisms of fields like scientometrics and the standards they promote. The implications of this increasing scope and intensity of bibliometric practices requires a concerted response from scientometrics to produce more explicit guidelines and expert advice on good scientometric practices for specific evaluative practices such as recruitment, grant awards, institutional or national benchmarking. This special session will bring together scientometric experts, representatives of funding agencies, policy makers and opinion leaders on the role of metrics in research assessment to discuss the extent to which moving towards clearer, standardised guidelines over usage and consultancy can be achieved, both technically and strategically, and what the guidelines should look like concretely. --- Background material: - Report on International workshop "Guidelines and good practices on quantitative assessments of research" (OST, Paris, 12 May 2014): MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "agenda.upv.es" claiming to be http://www.obs-ost.fr/fractivit%C3%A9s/workshop_international - Blogposts Paul Wouters on previous debates at the ISSI and STI conferences in 2013, and on the DORA declaration: MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "agenda.upv.es" claiming to be http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/07/29/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers/ MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "agenda.upv.es" claiming to be http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/10/03/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers-the-debate-in-berlin/ MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "agenda.upv.es" claiming to be http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/dora-a-stimulus-for-a-new-evaluation-culture-in-science/ - Information on the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) "Independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment" + SPRU response MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "agenda.upv.es" claiming to be http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2014/05/02/metrics-in-research-assessment-under-review/ MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "agenda.upv.es" claiming to be http://www.hefce.ac.uk/whatwedo/rsrch/howfundr/metrics/ MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "agenda.upv.es" claiming to be https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=spru-response-final.pdf&site=25 - Opinion article for JASIST by Sarah de Rijcke and Alex Rushforth "To intervene, or not to intervene; is that the question? On the role of scientometrics in research evaluation." MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "agenda.upv.es" claiming to be https://citationculture.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/de-rijcke_rushforth_jasist_preprint2014.pdf -- Sincere regards, Dr Jonathan Adams Chief Scientist, Digital Science Visiting Professor, King's College London M/ +44 7964 908449 E/ j.adams at digital-science.com Macmillan Publishers Ltd 4 Crinan Street London N1 9XW, UK http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/news/research/research-intelligence-proof-is-in-the-numbers/411118.article ******************************************************************************** DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is confidential and should not be used by anyone who is not the original intended recipient. If you have received this e-mail in error please inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other storage mechanism. Neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents accept liability for any statements made which are clearly the sender's own and not expressly made on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or one of its agents. Please note that neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents accept any responsibility for viruses that may be contained in this e-mail or its attachments and it is your responsibility to scan the e-mail and attachments (if any). No contracts may be concluded on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or its agents by means of e-mail communication. Macmillan Publishers Limited Registered in England and Wales with registered number 785998 Registered Office Brunel Road, Houndmills, Basingstoke RG21 6XS ******************************************************************************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From j.s.katz at SUSSEX.AC.UK Thu Aug 28 07:32:38 2014 From: j.s.katz at SUSSEX.AC.UK (Sylvan Katz) Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 05:32:38 -0600 Subject: STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Just a reminder that there was a workshop on "Bibliometric Standards" held in River Forest, 11 July, 1995, has been organized by the Research Association for Science Communication and Information as a satellite event to the 5th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics. About 60 bibliometricians from five continents attended the workshop which focussed on the need for the development of both conceptual and technical standards in bibliometric research and technology. Some of the presentations were printed in Scientometrics with a preface Gl?nzel, W., Katz, S., Moed, H., Schoepflin, U. (1996). "Preface." Scientometrics 35(2): 165-166. And my paper Katz, J. S. (1996). "Bibliometric standards: Personal experience and lessons learned." Scientometrics V35(2): 193-197 "Bibliometric standards are essential for comparative research. However, these standards can not be set by committee but must evolve through an on-going debate. Perhaps, the Scientometric community needs a refereed forum more dedicated to methodological issues than policy matters in which the standards debate can proceed in a focused and professional manner." -- Sylvan Katz Visiting Research Fellow http://www.sussex.ac.uk/Users/sylvank/ From loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET Thu Aug 28 08:18:57 2014 From: loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET (Loet Leydesdorff) Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 14:18:57 +0200 Subject: STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear Paul, I did not want to hurt anybody; I continuously study the papers from your excellent center and use the tools in my own research. I look forward to the meeting next week. The contribution was meant analytically: we are in the middle of a tension between professional practices that need standards (and standards to be further developed), and an academic environment in which novelty is crucial. One can analyze this in terms of stakeholders, value systems, or ? more our approach ?? differently codified (yet blurring) discourses. Best, Loet _____ Loet Leydesdorff University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of Sussex; Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ. , Hangzhou; 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 Paul Wouters Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 11:14 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators My dear Loet, I have the feeling that you are opening doors that are already wide open. Of course work of PhD students on the basis of the data they have available should not be rejected as amateurish! Indeed, only intellectual criteria should be used. I think professional centers are regularly improving their work not only for competitive reasons but also for intellectual reasons. For example, CWTS is (or if one wishes has become) first and foremost an academic research institute that also provides commercial services. But the intellectual agenda is dominant (I am not denying that there are of course tensions between the two missions). The change in the Leiden Ranking re normalization is motivated primarily by the problems with the WoS subject categories that you, as we ourselves and others, have identified. I find it ironic that you see this only as a commercial move! Ludo Waltman wil give a paper on our new classification system at the STI conference next week. Last, I agree with Jonathan's argument about the main direction the initiative re quality checks on evaluation should take. Paul Wouters Professor of Scientometrics Director Centre for Science and Technology Studies Leiden University PS: I am pleased to announce the release of our completely renewed CWTS website: cwts.nl - all information now easily available! Visiting address: Willem Einthoven Building Wassenaarseweg 62A 2333 AL Leiden Mail address: P.O. Box 905 2300 AX Leiden T: +31 71 5273909 (secr.) F: +31 71 5273911 E: p.f.wouters at cwts.leidenuniv.nl CWTS home page: www.cwts.nl Blog about Citation Cultures: http://citationculture.wordpress.com/ Research Dreams: www.researchdreams.nl On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Loet Leydesdorff wrote: Dear Paul, It seems to me that one can distinguish different stakeholders. Professional centers may wish to exploit their competitive advantages and produce ?revised SNIP indicators? and ?new Leiden Rankings? from time to time. (For example, the Leiden Ranking 2014 has a base for the normalization different from the Leiden Ranking 2013.) The critique and deconstruction/reconstruction of these indicators and their use is very legitimate in academia. PhD students, for example, in a remote university are not able to normalize citation rates using sophisticated standards that may be company property. Should their efforts (e.g., using Publish or Perish) be considered as amateurish a priori (and thus be rejected)? The criteria, in my opinion, have to be intellectual: do we gain new (theoretical) insights from the critique? Of course, we need also up-to-date methods. Best, Loet _____ Loet Leydesdorff University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of Sussex; Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ. , Hangzhou; 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 Paul Wouters Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 10:12 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators Dear Loet and Lutz, Many thanks for this contribution. The motivation for the discussion about standards, as far as I am concerned, is the need to protect research groups and researchers against sloppy or damaging evaluation practices. I agree with Loet that standards are often a powerful competition weapon to protect industry interests. It is certainly not the motivation for this panel, but it may end up like that if the process of standard setting, and the sociological interpretation of those standards, is not taken into account carefully. In my view the STI conference is the best place to have this discussion, because it is a meeting place between metrics experts and policy experts. In my view, this does not lead to the question whether or not one should have some quality control process of evaluation processes, but what kind of quality control we need and what kind of standards with respect to data and indicators can play a role in this. In other words, you have raised a crucial point for the panel discussion next week. Regards, Paul Wouters Professor of Scientometrics Director Centre for Science and Technology Studies Leiden University PS: I am pleased to announce the release of our completely renewed CWTS website: cwts.nl - all information now easily available! Visiting address: Willem Einthoven Building Wassenaarseweg 62A 2333 AL Leiden Mail address: P.O. Box 905 2300 AX Leiden T: +31 71 5273909 (secr.) F: +31 71 5273911 E: p.f.wouters at cwts.leidenuniv.nl CWTS home page: www.cwts.nl Blog about Citation Cultures: http://citationculture.wordpress.com/ Research Dreams: www.researchdreams.nl On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Loet Leydesdorff wrote: Dear Ismael, It seems to me that we know from the innovation-science literature that standards are to the interests of incumbent firms. In this context, one can expect process innovation more than product innovations. The further development of the field, in my opinion, needs the fluidity of intellectual exchanges and the space to propose new variants. Perhaps, as an intellectual community we have increasingly interests different from the professional practices of (quasi)industries on a market of evaluation studies that one may wish to certify ( and thus to shield the market against ?amateurs?; our PhD students?). Let me quote from a recent text (that I coauthored for other reasons): ?There exists a professional community with experts in bibliometrics who develop advanced bibliometric indicators for productivity and citation impact measurements (see an overview in Vinkler, 2010). Only experts from this community should undertake a bibliometric study. These centres of professional expertise can be found, for example, at the Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS, Leiden) or the Centre for Research & Development Monitoring (ECOOM, Leuven).? Is this the dream to come through? Or do we hear institutional interests? Perhaps, we need smaller dreams J Best, Loet _____ Loet Leydesdorff University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of Sussex; Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ. , Hangzhou; 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 Ismael Rafols Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 2:21 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators With apologies for cross-posting) Dear all, to warm up forweek in the ST Indicators Conference in Leiden, let us share the topic of a debate: Quality standards for evaluation indicators: Any chance for the dream to come true? Special session at the STI-ENID conference in Leiden, 3 September 2014, 16-17.30h Organisers: Ismael Rafols (INGENIO & SPRU), Paul Wouters (CWTS, Leiden University), Sarah de Rijcke (CWTS, Leiden University) Location: Aalmarkt-hall, Stadsgehoorzaal Leiden There is a growing realization in the scientometrics community of the need to offer clearer guidance to users and further develop standards for professional use of bibliometrics in research evaluations. Indeed the STI-ENID Conference 2014 has the telling sub-title ?Context Matters?. This session continues from the 2013 ISSI and STI conferences in Vienna and Berlin, where full plenary sessions were convened on the need for standards in evaluative bibliometrics, and the ethical and policy implications of individual-level bibliometrics. The need to debate these issues has come to the forefront in light of reports that uses of certain easy-to-use metrics for evaluative purposes have become a routine part of academic life, despite misgivings within the profession itself about its validity. Very recently high-profile movements against certain metric indicators (e.g. the DORA declaration about the Journal Impact Factor) have brought possible misuses of metrics further to the center of attention. There may be a growing need for standards ? also to promote for accountability of scientometricians as experts. Indeed the relationship between scientometricians and end-users has been changing over the years due to factors like: 1. Increasing demands for bibliometric services in research management at various levels of aggregation, 2. New capacities and demands for performance information through the greater availability of new research technologies and their applications, and 3. The emergence of ?citizen bibliometrics? (i.e. bibliometrics carried out by non-expert end-users) due to larger availability of data and indicators. Some of these developments may result in new opportunities for research contributions and information-use, and may increase effectiveness of bibliometrics due to more advanced indicators and increased availability of data sets (including web data). Yet some innovations also risk bypassing the quality control mechanisms of fields like scientometrics and the standards they promote. The implications of this increasing scope and intensity of bibliometric practices requires a concerted response from scientometrics to produce more explicit guidelines and expert advice on good scientometric practices for specific evaluative practices such as recruitment, grant awards, institutional or national benchmarking. This special session will bring together scientometric experts, representatives of funding agencies, policy makers and opinion leaders on the role of metrics in research assessment to discuss the extent to which moving towards clearer, standardised guidelines over usage and consultancy can be achieved, both technically and strategically, and what the guidelines should look like concretely. --- Background material: - Report on International workshop "Guidelines and good practices on quantitative assessments of research" (OST, Paris, 12 May 2014): http://www.obs-ost.fr/fractivit%C3%A9s/workshop_international - Blogposts Paul Wouters on previous debates at the ISSI and STI conferences in 2013, and on the DORA declaration: http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/07/29/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers/ http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/10/03/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers-the-debate-in-berlin/ http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/dora-a-stimulus-for-a-new-evaluation-culture-in-science/ - Information on the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) "Independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment" + SPRU response http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2014/05/02/metrics-in-research-assessment-under-review/ http://www.hefce.ac.uk/whatwedo/rsrch/howfundr/metrics/ https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=spru-response-final.pdf&site=25 - Opinion article for JASIST by Sarah de Rijcke and Alex Rushforth "To intervene, or not to intervene; is that the question? On the role of scientometrics in research evaluation." https://citationculture.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/de-rijcke_rushforth_jasist_preprint2014.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From p.f.wouters at CWTS.LEIDENUNIV.NL Thu Aug 28 08:40:46 2014 From: p.f.wouters at CWTS.LEIDENUNIV.NL (Paul Wouters) Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 14:40:46 +0200 Subject: STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators In-Reply-To: <004901cfc2ba$3fc5d8b0$bf518a10$@leydesdorff.net> Message-ID: Dear Loet, we clearly agree on the existence of this tension. I think, this discussion thread is an excellent starting point to further explore next week! With regards, Paul Wouters Professor of Scientometrics Director Centre for Science and Technology Studies Leiden University PS: I am pleased to announce the release of our completely renewed CWTS website: cwts.nl - all information now easily available! Visiting address: Willem Einthoven Building Wassenaarseweg 62A 2333 AL Leiden Mail address: P.O. Box 905 2300 AX Leiden T: +31 71 5273909 (secr.) F: +31 71 5273911 E: p.f.wouters at cwts.leidenuniv.nl CWTS home page: www.cwts.nl Blog about Citation Cultures: http://citationculture.wordpress.com/ Research Dreams: www.researchdreams.nl On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 2:18 PM, Loet Leydesdorff wrote: > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > Dear Paul, > > > > I did not want to hurt anybody; I continuously study the papers from your > excellent center and use the tools in my own research. I look forward to > the meeting next week. > > > > The contribution was meant analytically: we are in the middle of a tension > between professional practices that need standards (and standards to be > further developed), and an academic environment in which novelty is > crucial. One can analyze this in terms of stakeholders, value systems, or ? > more our approach ?? differently codified (yet blurring) discourses. > > > > Best, > > Loet > > > ------------------------------ > > Loet Leydesdorff > > University of Amsterdam > Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) > > loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ > Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of > Sussex; > > Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ. , > Hangzhou; 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 *Paul Wouters > *Sent:* Thursday, August 28, 2014 11:14 AM > > *To:* SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU > *Subject:* Re: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for > evaluation indicators > > > > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > My dear Loet, I have the feeling that you are opening doors that are > already wide open. Of course work of PhD students on the basis of the data > they have available should not be rejected as amateurish! Indeed, only > intellectual criteria should be used. > > > > I think professional centers are regularly improving their work not only > for competitive reasons but also for intellectual reasons. For example, > CWTS is (or if one wishes has become) first and foremost an academic > research institute that also provides commercial services. But the > intellectual agenda is dominant (I am not denying that there are of course > tensions between the two missions). The change in the Leiden Ranking re > normalization is motivated primarily by the problems with the WoS subject > categories that you, as we ourselves and others, have identified. I find it > ironic that you see this only as a commercial move! Ludo Waltman wil give a > paper on our new classification system at the STI conference next week. > > > > Last, I agree with Jonathan's argument about the main direction the > initiative re quality checks on evaluation should take. > > > > > Paul Wouters > > Professor of Scientometrics > Director Centre for Science and Technology Studies > Leiden University > > > > PS: I am pleased to announce the release of our completely renewed CWTS > website: > > cwts.nl - all information now easily available! > > > > Visiting address: > Willem Einthoven Building > Wassenaarseweg 62A > 2333 AL Leiden > Mail address: P.O. Box 905 > 2300 AX Leiden > T: +31 71 5273909 (secr.) > F: +31 71 5273911 > E: p.f.wouters at cwts.leidenuniv.nl > > CWTS home page: www.cwts.nl > Blog about Citation Cultures: http://citationculture.wordpress.com/ > Research Dreams: www.researchdreams.nl > > > > On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Loet Leydesdorff > wrote: > > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > Dear Paul, > > > > It seems to me that one can distinguish different stakeholders. > Professional centers may wish to exploit their competitive advantages and > produce ?revised SNIP indicators? and ?new Leiden Rankings? from time to > time. (For example, the Leiden Ranking 2014 has a base for the > normalization different from the Leiden Ranking 2013.) The critique and > deconstruction/reconstruction of these indicators and their use is very > legitimate in academia. > > > > PhD students, for example, in a remote university are not able to > normalize citation rates using sophisticated standards that may be company > property. Should their efforts (e.g., using Publish or Perish) be > considered as amateurish a priori (and thus be rejected)? The criteria, in > my opinion, have to be intellectual: do we gain new (theoretical) insights > from the critique? Of course, we need also up-to-date methods. > > > > Best, > > Loet > > > ------------------------------ > > Loet Leydesdorff > > University of Amsterdam > Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) > > loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ > Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of > Sussex; > > Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ. , > Hangzhou; 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 *Paul Wouters > *Sent:* Thursday, August 28, 2014 10:12 AM > *To:* SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU > *Subject:* Re: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for > evaluation indicators > > > > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > Dear Loet and Lutz, > > > > Many thanks for this contribution. The motivation for the discussion about > standards, as far as I am concerned, is the need to protect research groups > and researchers against sloppy or damaging evaluation practices. I agree > with Loet that standards are often a powerful competition weapon to protect > industry interests. It is certainly not the motivation for this panel, but > it may end up like that if the process of standard setting, and the > sociological interpretation of those standards, is not taken into account > carefully. In my view the STI conference is the best place to have this > discussion, because it is a meeting place between metrics experts and > policy experts. In my view, this does not lead to the question whether or > not one should have some quality control process of evaluation processes, > but what kind of quality control we need and what kind of standards with > respect to data and indicators can play a role in this. > > > > In other words, you have raised a crucial point for the panel discussion > next week. > > > > Regards, > > > > > Paul Wouters > > Professor of Scientometrics > Director Centre for Science and Technology Studies > Leiden University > > > > PS: I am pleased to announce the release of our completely renewed CWTS > website: > > cwts.nl - all information now easily available! > > > > Visiting address: > Willem Einthoven Building > Wassenaarseweg 62A > 2333 AL Leiden > Mail address: P.O. Box 905 > 2300 AX Leiden > T: +31 71 5273909 (secr.) > F: +31 71 5273911 > E: p.f.wouters at cwts.leidenuniv.nl > > CWTS home page: www.cwts.nl > Blog about Citation Cultures: http://citationculture.wordpress.com/ > Research Dreams: www.researchdreams.nl > > > > On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Loet Leydesdorff > wrote: > > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > Dear Ismael, > > > > It seems to me that we know from the innovation-science literature that > standards are to the interests of incumbent firms. In this context, one can > expect process innovation more than product innovations. The further > development of the field, in my opinion, needs the fluidity of intellectual > exchanges and the space to propose new variants. > > > > Perhaps, as an intellectual community we have increasingly interests > different from the professional practices of (quasi)industries on a market > of evaluation studies that one may wish to certify ( and thus to shield the > market against ?amateurs?; our PhD students?). > > > > Let me quote from a recent text (that I coauthored for other reasons): > > > > ?There exists a professional community with experts in bibliometrics who > develop advanced bibliometric indicators for productivity and citation > impact measurements (see an overview in Vinkler, 2010). Only experts from > this community should undertake a bibliometric study. These centres of > professional expertise can be found, for example, at the Centre for Science > and Technology Studies (CWTS, Leiden) or the Centre for Research & > Development Monitoring (ECOOM, Leuven).? > > > > Is this the dream to come through? Or do we hear institutional interests? > Perhaps, we need smaller dreams J > > > > Best, > > Loet > > > ------------------------------ > > Loet Leydesdorff > > University of Amsterdam > Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) > > loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ > Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of > Sussex; > > Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ. , > Hangzhou; 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 *Ismael Rafols > *Sent:* Thursday, August 28, 2014 2:21 AM > *To:* SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU > *Subject:* [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for > evaluation indicators > > > > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > > With apologies for cross-posting) > > Dear all, > to warm up forweek in the ST Indicators Conference in Leiden, let us share > the topic of a debate: > > *Quality standards for evaluation indicators: Any chance for the dream to > come true?* > > *Special session at the STI-ENID conference in Leiden, 3 September > 2014, 16-17.30h * > > *Organisers*: Ismael Rafols (INGENIO & SPRU), Paul Wouters (CWTS, Leiden > University), Sarah de Rijcke (CWTS, Leiden University) > > *Location*: Aalmarkt-hall, Stadsgehoorzaal Leiden > > > > There is a growing realization in the scientometrics community of the need > to offer clearer guidance to users and further develop standards for > professional use of bibliometrics in research evaluations. Indeed the > STI-ENID Conference 2014 has the telling sub-title ?Context Matters?. This > session continues from the 2013 ISSI and STI conferences in Vienna and > Berlin, where full plenary sessions were convened on the need for standards > in evaluative bibliometrics, and the ethical and policy implications of > individual-level bibliometrics. The need to debate these issues has come to > the forefront in light of reports that uses of certain easy-to-use metrics > for evaluative purposes have become a routine part of academic life, > despite misgivings within the profession itself about its validity. Very > recently high-profile movements against certain metric indicators (e.g. the > DORA declaration about the Journal Impact Factor) have brought possible > misuses of metrics further to the center of attention. There may be a > growing need for standards ? also to promote for accountability of > scientometricians as experts. > > > > Indeed the relationship between scientometricians and end-users has been > changing over the years due to factors like: 1. Increasing demands for > bibliometric services in research management at various levels of > aggregation, 2. New capacities and demands for performance information > through the greater availability of new research technologies and their > applications, and 3. The emergence of ?citizen bibliometrics? (i.e. > bibliometrics carried out by non-expert end-users) due to larger > availability of data and indicators. Some of these developments may result > in new opportunities for research contributions and information-use, and > may increase effectiveness of bibliometrics due to more advanced indicators > and increased availability of data sets (including web data). Yet some > innovations also risk bypassing the quality control mechanisms of fields > like scientometrics and the standards they promote. The implications of > this increasing scope and intensity of bibliometric practices requires a > concerted response from scientometrics to produce more explicit guidelines > and expert advice on good scientometric practices for specific evaluative > practices such as recruitment, grant awards, institutional or national > benchmarking. > > > > This special session will bring together scientometric experts, > representatives of funding agencies, policy makers and opinion leaders on > the role of metrics in research assessment to discuss the extent to which > moving towards clearer, standardised guidelines over usage and consultancy > can be achieved, both technically and strategically, and what the > guidelines should look like concretely. > > > > --- > > *Background material*: > > - Report on International workshop "Guidelines and good practices on > quantitative assessments of research" (OST, Paris, 12 May 2014): > http://www.obs-ost.fr/fractivit%C3%A9s/workshop_international > > > - Blogposts Paul Wouters on previous debates at the ISSI and STI > conferences in 2013, and on the DORA declaration: > > > http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/07/29/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers/ > > > > http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/10/03/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers-the-debate-in-berlin/ > > > > http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/dora-a-stimulus-for-a-new-evaluation-culture-in-science/ > > > - Information on the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) > "Independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment" + SPRU > response > > > http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2014/05/02/metrics-in-research-assessment-under-review/ > > > http://www.hefce.ac.uk/whatwedo/rsrch/howfundr/metrics/ > > > > https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=spru-response-final.pdf&site=25 > > > - Opinion article for JASIST by Sarah de Rijcke and Alex Rushforth "To > intervene, or not to intervene; is that the question? On the role of > scientometrics in research evaluation." > > > https://citationculture.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/de-rijcke_rushforth_jasist_preprint2014.pdf > > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From s.de.rijcke at CWTS.LEIDENUNIV.NL Thu Aug 28 09:14:21 2014 From: s.de.rijcke at CWTS.LEIDENUNIV.NL (Rijcke, S. de) Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 13:14:21 +0000 Subject: STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators In-Reply-To: <004901cfc2ba$3fc5d8b0$bf518a10$@leydesdorff.net> Message-ID: Dear all, I'm happy to see that the discussion has already taken off. Following up on Loet's last remark: I am attaching a pre-print of an opinion piece for JASIST I wrote with Alex Rushforth, in which we argue that scientometricians seem caught in an unproductive model for negotiating dilemmas of being a 'regulatory science', as well as an academic one. There seems to be an emerging distancing between the increasingly professionalized research community and ?on?the-ground? research evaluation practices. In the article we first describe how the landscape in which scientometrics operates has rapidly changed, becoming much more polyvocal. Inevitably this means more open competition for the attention space of users, and as a worst-case scenario the expertise of scientometrics risks being relegated to but one voice in a crowded marketplace. We then problematize how the community has often managed this relationship. We argue that the recourse taken thus far is towards an upstream solution, framed in terms that reinforce one?s own epistemic capabilities and professional position. This kind of boundary drawing between professional scientometrics and that of its intended audiences has contradictory effects, because it reproduces the gap between scientometric expertise and the practice level that the community is trying to bridge. Improving validity and reliability and standards development are useful endeavors, but if scientometricians draw the line of intervention here they risk - at best - maintaining the status quo in terms of how bibliometric products get (mis-) used in practice. The community can potentially draw on a large technical and social-scientific knowledge base, making them well placed to help analyze and change the ranges of conceivable types of actions and norms in current practices of research evaluation. The role of ?objective outsiders? who produce measures and standards but take no part in their intervention is no longer credible as a normative stance. In that particular arrangement the field situates itself almost entirely outside the practices of which scientometricians are also inherently part. Thanks to all of you for this ?pre-conference? debate on the list. I?m looking forward to the plenary session next week! Cheers, Sarah Dr. Sarah de Rijcke Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS) Leiden University PO Box 905 2300 AX Leiden, The Netherlands +31 71 527 6853 https://leidenuniv.academia.edu/SdeRijcke Visiting Address Willem Einthoven Building Wassenaarseweg 62A 2333 AL Leiden The Netherlands On 28 Aug 2014, at 14:18, Loet Leydesdorff > wrote: Dear Paul, I did not want to hurt anybody; I continuously study the papers from your excellent center and use the tools in my own research. I look forward to the meeting next week. The contribution was meant analytically: we are in the middle of a tension between professional practices that need standards (and standards to be further developed), and an academic environment in which novelty is crucial. One can analyze this in terms of stakeholders, value systems, or ? more our approach ?? differently codified (yet blurring) discourses. Best, Loet ________________________________ Loet Leydesdorff University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of Sussex; Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ., Hangzhou; 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 Paul Wouters Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 11:14 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators My dear Loet, I have the feeling that you are opening doors that are already wide open. Of course work of PhD students on the basis of the data they have available should not be rejected as amateurish! Indeed, only intellectual criteria should be used. I think professional centers are regularly improving their work not only for competitive reasons but also for intellectual reasons. For example, CWTS is (or if one wishes has become) first and foremost an academic research institute that also provides commercial services. But the intellectual agenda is dominant (I am not denying that there are of course tensions between the two missions). The change in the Leiden Ranking re normalization is motivated primarily by the problems with the WoS subject categories that you, as we ourselves and others, have identified. I find it ironic that you see this only as a commercial move! Ludo Waltman wil give a paper on our new classification system at the STI conference next week. Last, I agree with Jonathan's argument about the main direction the initiative re quality checks on evaluation should take. Paul Wouters Professor of Scientometrics Director Centre for Science and Technology Studies Leiden University PS: I am pleased to announce the release of our completely renewed CWTS website: cwts.nl - all information now easily available! Visiting address: Willem Einthoven Building Wassenaarseweg 62A 2333 AL Leiden Mail address: P.O. Box 905 2300 AX Leiden T: +31 71 5273909 (secr.) F: +31 71 5273911 E: p.f.wouters at cwts.leidenuniv.nl CWTS home page: www.cwts.nl Blog about Citation Cultures: http://citationculture.wordpress.com/ Research Dreams: www.researchdreams.nl On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Loet Leydesdorff > wrote: Dear Paul, It seems to me that one can distinguish different stakeholders. Professional centers may wish to exploit their competitive advantages and produce ?revised SNIP indicators? and ?new Leiden Rankings? from time to time. (For example, the Leiden Ranking 2014 has a base for the normalization different from the Leiden Ranking 2013.) The critique and deconstruction/reconstruction of these indicators and their use is very legitimate in academia. PhD students, for example, in a remote university are not able to normalize citation rates using sophisticated standards that may be company property. Should their efforts (e.g., using Publish or Perish) be considered as amateurish a priori (and thus be rejected)? The criteria, in my opinion, have to be intellectual: do we gain new (theoretical) insights from the critique? Of course, we need also up-to-date methods. Best, Loet ________________________________ Loet Leydesdorff University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of Sussex; Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ., Hangzhou; 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 Paul Wouters Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 10:12 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators Dear Loet and Lutz, Many thanks for this contribution. The motivation for the discussion about standards, as far as I am concerned, is the need to protect research groups and researchers against sloppy or damaging evaluation practices. I agree with Loet that standards are often a powerful competition weapon to protect industry interests. It is certainly not the motivation for this panel, but it may end up like that if the process of standard setting, and the sociological interpretation of those standards, is not taken into account carefully. In my view the STI conference is the best place to have this discussion, because it is a meeting place between metrics experts and policy experts. In my view, this does not lead to the question whether or not one should have some quality control process of evaluation processes, but what kind of quality control we need and what kind of standards with respect to data and indicators can play a role in this. In other words, you have raised a crucial point for the panel discussion next week. Regards, Paul Wouters Professor of Scientometrics Director Centre for Science and Technology Studies Leiden University PS: I am pleased to announce the release of our completely renewed CWTS website: cwts.nl - all information now easily available! Visiting address: Willem Einthoven Building Wassenaarseweg 62A 2333 AL Leiden Mail address: P.O. Box 905 2300 AX Leiden T: +31 71 5273909 (secr.) F: +31 71 5273911 E: p.f.wouters at cwts.leidenuniv.nl CWTS home page: www.cwts.nl Blog about Citation Cultures: http://citationculture.wordpress.com/ Research Dreams: www.researchdreams.nl On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Loet Leydesdorff > wrote: Dear Ismael, It seems to me that we know from the innovation-science literature that standards are to the interests of incumbent firms. In this context, one can expect process innovation more than product innovations. The further development of the field, in my opinion, needs the fluidity of intellectual exchanges and the space to propose new variants. Perhaps, as an intellectual community we have increasingly interests different from the professional practices of (quasi)industries on a market of evaluation studies that one may wish to certify ( and thus to shield the market against ?amateurs?; our PhD students?). Let me quote from a recent text (that I coauthored for other reasons): ?There exists a professional community with experts in bibliometrics who develop advanced bibliometric indicators for productivity and citation impact measurements (see an overview in Vinkler, 2010). Only experts from this community should undertake a bibliometric study. These centres of professional expertise can be found, for example, at the Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS, Leiden) or the Centre for Research & Development Monitoring (ECOOM, Leuven).? Is this the dream to come through? Or do we hear institutional interests? Perhaps, we need smaller dreams :) Best, Loet ________________________________ Loet Leydesdorff University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of Sussex; Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ., Hangzhou; 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 Ismael Rafols Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 2:21 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators With apologies for cross-posting) Dear all, to warm up forweek in the ST Indicators Conference in Leiden, let us share the topic of a debate: Quality standards for evaluation indicators: Any chance for the dream to come true? Special session at the STI-ENID conference in Leiden, 3 September 2014, 16-17.30h Organisers: Ismael Rafols (INGENIO & SPRU), Paul Wouters (CWTS, Leiden University), Sarah de Rijcke (CWTS, Leiden University) Location: Aalmarkt-hall, Stadsgehoorzaal Leiden There is a growing realization in the scientometrics community of the need to offer clearer guidance to users and further develop standards for professional use of bibliometrics in research evaluations. Indeed the STI-ENID Conference 2014 has the telling sub-title ?Context Matters?. This session continues from the 2013 ISSI and STI conferences in Vienna and Berlin, where full plenary sessions were convened on the need for standards in evaluative bibliometrics, and the ethical and policy implications of individual-level bibliometrics. The need to debate these issues has come to the forefront in light of reports that uses of certain easy-to-use metrics for evaluative purposes have become a routine part of academic life, despite misgivings within the profession itself about its validity. Very recently high-profile movements against certain metric indicators (e.g. the DORA declaration about the Journal Impact Factor) have brought possible misuses of metrics further to the center of attention. There may be a growing need for standards ? also to promote for accountability of scientometricians as experts. Indeed the relationship between scientometricians and end-users has been changing over the years due to factors like: 1. Increasing demands for bibliometric services in research management at various levels of aggregation, 2. New capacities and demands for performance information through the greater availability of new research technologies and their applications, and 3. The emergence of ?citizen bibliometrics? (i.e. bibliometrics carried out by non-expert end-users) due to larger availability of data and indicators. Some of these developments may result in new opportunities for research contributions and information-use, and may increase effectiveness of bibliometrics due to more advanced indicators and increased availability of data sets (including web data). Yet some innovations also risk bypassing the quality control mechanisms of fields like scientometrics and the standards they promote. The implications of this increasing scope and intensity of bibliometric practices requires a concerted response from scientometrics to produce more explicit guidelines and expert advice on good scientometric practices for specific evaluative practices such as recruitment, grant awards, institutional or national benchmarking. This special session will bring together scientometric experts, representatives of funding agencies, policy makers and opinion leaders on the role of metrics in research assessment to discuss the extent to which moving towards clearer, standardised guidelines over usage and consultancy can be achieved, both technically and strategically, and what the guidelines should look like concretely. --- Background material: - Report on International workshop "Guidelines and good practices on quantitative assessments of research" (OST, Paris, 12 May 2014): http://www.obs-ost.fr/fractivit%C3%A9s/workshop_international - Blogposts Paul Wouters on previous debates at the ISSI and STI conferences in 2013, and on the DORA declaration: http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/07/29/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers/ http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/10/03/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers-the-debate-in-berlin/ http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/dora-a-stimulus-for-a-new-evaluation-culture-in-science/ - Information on the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) "Independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment" + SPRU response http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2014/05/02/metrics-in-research-assessment-under-review/ http://www.hefce.ac.uk/whatwedo/rsrch/howfundr/metrics/ https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=spru-response-final.pdf&site=25 - Opinion article for JASIST by Sarah de Rijcke and Alex Rushforth "To intervene, or not to intervene; is that the question? On the role of scientometrics in research evaluation." https://citationculture.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/de-rijcke_rushforth_jasist_preprint2014.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: De Rijcke_Rushforth_JASIST_Preprint2014.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 382846 bytes Desc: De Rijcke_Rushforth_JASIST_Preprint2014.pdf URL: From gingras.yves at UQAM.CA Thu Aug 28 10:43:51 2014 From: gingras.yves at UQAM.CA (Yves Gingras) Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 10:43:51 -0400 Subject: STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hello all Here is an importnt document about good and bad indicators to add up to the discussion on research evaluation: http://www.scienceadvice.ca/en/assessments/completed/science-performance.asp x The whole report is free in pdf. Best regards Yves Gingras Le 27/08/14 20:21, ??Ismael Rafols?? a ?crit?: > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): > http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > With apologies for cross-posting) > > Dear all, > to warm up forweek in the ST Indicators Conference in Leiden, let us share the > topic of a debate: > > Quality standards for evaluation indicators:?Any chance for the dream to come > true? > Special session at the?STI-ENID conference in Leiden,?3 September > 2014,?16-17.30h? > Organisers: Ismael Rafols (INGENIO & SPRU), Paul Wouters (CWTS, Leiden > University), Sarah de Rijcke (CWTS, Leiden University) > Location: ?Aalmarkt-hall,?Stadsgehoorzaal Leiden > > There is a growing realization in the scientometrics community of the need to > offer clearer guidance to users and further develop standards for professional > use of bibliometrics in research evaluations. Indeed the STI-ENID Conference > 2014 has the telling sub-title ?Context Matters?. This session continues from > the 2013 ISSI and STI conferences in Vienna and Berlin, where full plenary > sessions were convened on the need for standards in evaluative bibliometrics, > and the ethical and policy implications of individual-level bibliometrics. The > need to debate these issues has come to the forefront in light of reports that > uses of certain easy-to-use metrics for evaluative purposes have become a > routine part of academic life, despite misgivings within the profession itself > about its validity. Very recently high-profile movements against certain > metric indicators (e.g. the DORA declaration about the Journal Impact Factor) > have brought possible misuses of metrics further to the center of attention. > There may be a growing need for standards ? also to promote for accountability > of scientometricians as experts. > > Indeed the relationship between scientometricians and end-users has been > changing over the years due to factors like: 1. Increasing demands for > bibliometric services in research management at various levels of aggregation, > 2. New capacities and demands for performance information through the greater > availability of new research technologies and their applications, and 3. The > emergence of ?citizen bibliometrics? (i.e. bibliometrics carried out by > non-expert end-users) due to larger availability of data and indicators. Some > of these developments may result in new opportunities for research > contributions and information-use, and may increase effectiveness of > bibliometrics due to more advanced indicators and increased availability of > data sets (including web data). Yet some innovations also risk bypassing the > quality control mechanisms of fields like scientometrics and the standards > they promote. The implications of this increasing scope and intensity of > bibliometric practices requires a concerted response from scientometrics to > produce more explicit guidelines and expert advice on good scientometric > practices for specific evaluative practices such as recruitment, grant awards, > institutional or national benchmarking.? > > This special session will bring together scientometric experts, > representatives of funding agencies, policy makers and opinion leaders on the > role of metrics in research assessment to discuss the extent to which moving > towards clearer, standardised guidelines over usage and consultancy can be > achieved, both technically and strategically, and what the guidelines should > look like concretely. > > --- > Background material: > - Report on International workshop "Guidelines and good practices on > quantitative assessments of research" (OST, Paris, 12 May 2014): > ?http://www.obs-ost.fr/fractivit%C3%A9s/workshop_international > RL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.obs-ost.fr%2ffractivit%25C3%25A9s%2fworkshop_international > > > - Blogposts Paul Wouters on previous debates at the ISSI and STI conferences > in 2013, and on the DORA declaration: > http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/07/29/bibliometrics-of-individual-re > searchers/ > RL=http%3a%2f%2fcitationculture.wordpress.com%2f2013%2f07%2f29%2fbibliometrics > -of-individual-researchers%2f> > http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/10/03/bibliometrics-of-individual-re > searchers-the-debate-in-berlin/ > RL=http%3a%2f%2fcitationculture.wordpress.com%2f2013%2f10%2f03%2fbibliometrics > -of-individual-researchers-the-debate-in-berlin%2f> > http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/dora-a-stimulus-for-a-new-eval > uation-culture-in-science/ > RL=http%3a%2f%2fcitationculture.wordpress.com%2f2013%2f05%2f23%2fdora-a-stimul > us-for-a-new-evaluation-culture-in-science%2f> > - Information on the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) > "Independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment" + SPRU > response > http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2014/05/02/metrics-in-research-assessment > -under-review/ > RL=http%3a%2f%2fcitationculture.wordpress.com%2f2014%2f05%2f02%2fmetrics-in-re > search-assessment-under-review%2f> > http://www.hefce.ac.uk/whatwedo/rsrch/howfundr/metrics/ > RL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.hefce.ac.uk%2fwhatwedo%2frsrch%2fhowfundr%2fmetrics%2f> > https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=spru-response-final.pdf > &site=25 > RL=https%3a%2f%2fwww.sussex.ac.uk%2fwebteam%2fgateway%2ffile.php%3fname%3dspru > -response-final.pdf%26site%3d25> > - Opinion article for JASIST by Sarah de Rijcke and Alex Rushforth "To > intervene, or not to intervene; is that the question? On the role of > scientometrics in research evaluation." > https://citationculture.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/de-rijcke_rushforth_jasist > _preprint2014.pdf > RL=https%3a%2f%2fcitationculture.files.wordpress.com%2f2014%2f08%2fde-rijcke_r > ushforth_jasist_preprint2014.pdf> > > Yves Gingras Professeur D?partement d'histoire Centre interuniversitaire de recherche sur la science et la technologie (CIRST) Chaire de recherche du Canada en histoire et sociologie des sciences Observatoire des sciences et des technologies (OST) UQAM C.P. 8888, Succ. Centre-Ville Montr?al, Qu?bec Canada, H3C 3P8 Tel: (514)-987-3000-7053 Fax: (514)-987-7726 http://www.chss.uqam.ca http://www.cirst.uqam.ca http://www.ost.uqam.ca -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET Thu Aug 28 11:25:02 2014 From: loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET (Loet Leydesdorff) Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 17:25:02 +0200 Subject: STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Very interesting is also the following page: http://www.academicanalytics.com/Public/WhatWeDo Many US universities use these services. Best, Loet _____ Loet Leydesdorff University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of Sussex; Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ. , Hangzhou; 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 Yves Gingras Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 4:44 PM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators Hello all Here is an importnt document about good and bad indicators to add up to the discussion on research evaluation: http://www.scienceadvice.ca/en/assessments/completed/science-performance.asp x The whole report is free in pdf. Best regards Yves Gingras Le 27/08/14 20:21, ? Ismael Rafols ? a ?crit : With apologies for cross-posting) Dear all, to warm up forweek in the ST Indicators Conference in Leiden, let us share the topic of a debate: Quality standards for evaluation indicators: Any chance for the dream to come true? Special session at the STI-ENID conference in Leiden, 3 September 2014, 16-17.30h Organisers: Ismael Rafols (INGENIO & SPRU), Paul Wouters (CWTS, Leiden University), Sarah de Rijcke (CWTS, Leiden University) Location: Aalmarkt-hall, Stadsgehoorzaal Leiden There is a growing realization in the scientometrics community of the need to offer clearer guidance to users and further develop standards for professional use of bibliometrics in research evaluations. Indeed the STI-ENID Conference 2014 has the telling sub-title ?Context Matters?. This session continues from the 2013 ISSI and STI conferences in Vienna and Berlin, where full plenary sessions were convened on the need for standards in evaluative bibliometrics, and the ethical and policy implications of individual-level bibliometrics. The need to debate these issues has come to the forefront in light of reports that uses of certain easy-to-use metrics for evaluative purposes have become a routine part of academic life, despite misgivings within the profession itself about its validity. Very recently high-profile movements against certain metric indicators (e.g. the DORA declaration about the Journal Impact Factor) have brought possible misuses of metrics further to the center of attention. There may be a growing need for standards ? also to promote for accountability of scientometricians as experts. Indeed the relationship between scientometricians and end-users has been changing over the years due to factors like: 1. Increasing demands for bibliometric services in research management at various levels of aggregation, 2. New capacities and demands for performance information through the greater availability of new research technologies and their applications, and 3. The emergence of ?citizen bibliometrics? (i.e. bibliometrics carried out by non-expert end-users) due to larger availability of data and indicators. Some of these developments may result in new opportunities for research contributions and information-use, and may increase effectiveness of bibliometrics due to more advanced indicators and increased availability of data sets (including web data). Yet some innovations also risk bypassing the quality control mechanisms of fields like scientometrics and the standards they promote. The implications of this increasing scope and intensity of bibliometric practices requires a concerted response from scientometrics to produce more explicit guidelines and expert advice on good scientometric practices for specific evaluative practices such as recruitment, grant awards, institutional or national benchmarking. This special session will bring together scientometric experts, representatives of funding agencies, policy makers and opinion leaders on the role of metrics in research assessment to discuss the extent to which moving towards clearer, standardised guidelines over usage and consultancy can be achieved, both technically and strategically, and what the guidelines should look like concretely. --- Background material: - Report on International workshop "Guidelines and good practices on quantitative assessments of research" (OST, Paris, 12 May 2014): http://www.obs-ost.fr/fractivit%C3%A9s/workshop_international &URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.obs-ost.fr%2ffractivit%25C3%25A9s%2fworkshop_inter national> - Blogposts Paul Wouters on previous debates at the ISSI and STI conferences in 2013, and on the DORA declaration: http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/07/29/bibliometrics-of-individual- researchers/ &URL=http%3a%2f%2fcitationculture.wordpress.com%2f2013%2f07%2f29%2fbibli ometrics-of-individual-researchers%2f> http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/10/03/bibliometrics-of-individual- researchers-the-debate-in-berlin/ &URL=http%3a%2f%2fcitationculture.wordpress.com%2f2013%2f10%2f03%2fbibli ometrics-of-individual-researchers-the-debate-in-berlin%2f> http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/dora-a-stimulus-for-a-new-ev aluation-culture-in-science/ &URL=http%3a%2f%2fcitationculture.wordpress.com%2f2013%2f05%2f23%2fdora- a-stimulus-for-a-new-evaluation-culture-in-science%2f> - Information on the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) "Independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment" + SPRU response http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2014/05/02/metrics-in-research-assessme nt-under-review/ &URL=http%3a%2f%2fcitationculture.wordpress.com%2f2014%2f05%2f02%2fmetri cs-in-research-assessment-under-review%2f> http://www.hefce.ac.uk/whatwedo/rsrch/howfundr/metrics/ &URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.hefce.ac.uk%2fwhatwedo%2frsrch%2fhowfundr%2fmetric s%2f> https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=spru-response-final.p df &site=25 &URL=https%3a%2f%2fwww.sussex.ac.uk%2fwebteam%2fgateway%2ffile.php%3fnam e%3dspru-response-final.pdf%26site%3d25> - Opinion article for JASIST by Sarah de Rijcke and Alex Rushforth "To intervene, or not to intervene; is that the question? On the role of scientometrics in research evaluation." https://citationculture.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/de-rijcke_rushforth_jasi st_preprint2014.pdf &URL=https%3a%2f%2fcitationculture.files.wordpress.com%2f2014%2f08%2fde- rijcke_rushforth_jasist_preprint2014.pdf> Yves Gingras Professeur D?partement d'histoire Centre interuniversitaire de recherche sur la science et la technologie (CIRST) Chaire de recherche du Canada en histoire et sociologie des sciences Observatoire des sciences et des technologies (OST) UQAM C.P. 8888, Succ. Centre-Ville Montr?al, Qu?bec Canada, H3C 3P8 Tel: (514)-987-3000-7053 Fax: (514)-987-7726 http://www.chss.uqam.ca http://www.cirst.uqam.ca http://www.ost.uqam.ca -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From notsjb at LSU.EDU Thu Aug 28 12:48:52 2014 From: notsjb at LSU.EDU (Stephen J Bensman) Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 16:48:52 +0000 Subject: STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators In-Reply-To: <008401cfc2d4$3e55a810$bb00f830$@leydesdorff.net> Message-ID: Loet, Thank you very much for information about this site. The fact that many US universities are utilizing this site is further testimony of the failure of the last ratings done by the US National Research Council. These used to be authoritative and done every ten years. Discussions were always carried out within the parameters marked out by this agency and predecessor ones such as the American Council on Education. University administrations used to announce the rankings. But-interestingly enough-the attention was always focused on the traditional peer rating rankings. The bibliometric indicators were either ignored or used to dispute the peer rating rankings. University administrations are somewhat handicapped in these matters, because they are statistically stupid and do not understand things like standardized scores. On top of that, it was discovered that major mistakes were being made. The most major one was to confuse departmental organizations with disciplinary categories. This most affected biological disciplines, because: 1) some universities have medical schools, some do not; some universities have colleges of agriculture, some do not; some schools have vet schools, some do not. It was then decided that the ratings, etc., could not be based on departments but subject categories. This opened an entirely different can of worms-proper subject taxonomy. It seems to me that Lutz and you have recently submitted a paper on this problem. ;-) For some odd reason, I have become considered the local expert on university rankings-me, a dumb librarian of all things-and am frequently consulted by the university administrators on these matters. I was even asked by the NRC to test the database it created for the previous ratings. Having studied the problem and made my own horrendous mistakes, I have come to come to these conclusions: 1) A university like LSU has no chance in hell of breaking into the top general rankings. The system is set in concrete and highly stable, and Louisiana does not have the money to compete at this level. 2) Therefore, LSU must carefully select the taxonomic ground on which it will fight. LSU has certain natural advantages: coastal preservation, wetlands, petroleum, chemistry, fisheries, Southern history, Southern literature, etc. It is in these categories that LSU can make its major contributions and be at the top. 3) LSU must reform its administrative structure to match its taxonomic goals, integrating the medical schools, vet school, college of agriculture, etc. etc. This must be done, because size counts, and you must enlarge the size of the taxonomic categories, in which you will choose to compete, as much as possible. LSU had been ranked very low in biology, but-when the medical schools, vet school, college of agriculture, etc., were combined-we ranked quite highly. This matches the history of the state, which has been a pioneer in health care. I hope that I have not bored you with this, but this is my practitioner advice on the discussions recently taking place on this listserv. In military terms, the high ground is already occupied, and do not make any frontal assaults there. Concentrate on defining your taxonomic goals and throw as much weight as possible in terms of faculty, money, etc., into these goals. I think that this is a good way to approach these problems for most institutions-taxonomic category by selected taxonomic category. Take your measures by these. Respectfully, Stephen J. Bensman, Ph.D. LSU Libraries Louisiana State University Baton Rouge, LA USA From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Loet Leydesdorff Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 10:25 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators Very interesting is also the following page: http://www.academicanalytics.com/Public/WhatWeDo Many US universities use these services. Best, Loet ________________________________ Loet Leydesdorff University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of Sussex; Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ., Hangzhou; 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 Yves Gingras Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 4:44 PM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators Hello all Here is an importnt document about good and bad indicators to add up to the discussion on research evaluation: http://www.scienceadvice.ca/en/assessments/completed/science-performance.aspx The whole report is free in pdf. Best regards Yves Gingras Le 27/08/14 20:21, ? Ismael Rafols ? > a ?crit : With apologies for cross-posting) Dear all, to warm up forweek in the ST Indicators Conference in Leiden, let us share the topic of a debate: Quality standards for evaluation indicators: Any chance for the dream to come true? Special session at the STI-ENID conference in Leiden, 3 September 2014, 16-17.30h Organisers: Ismael Rafols (INGENIO & SPRU), Paul Wouters (CWTS, Leiden University), Sarah de Rijcke (CWTS, Leiden University) Location: Aalmarkt-hall, Stadsgehoorzaal Leiden There is a growing realization in the scientometrics community of the need to offer clearer guidance to users and further develop standards for professional use of bibliometrics in research evaluations. Indeed the STI-ENID Conference 2014 has the telling sub-title 'Context Matters'. This session continues from the 2013 ISSI and STI conferences in Vienna and Berlin, where full plenary sessions were convened on the need for standards in evaluative bibliometrics, and the ethical and policy implications of individual-level bibliometrics. The need to debate these issues has come to the forefront in light of reports that uses of certain easy-to-use metrics for evaluative purposes have become a routine part of academic life, despite misgivings within the profession itself about its validity. Very recently high-profile movements against certain metric indicators (e.g. the DORA declaration about the Journal Impact Factor) have brought possible misuses of metrics further to the center of attention. There may be a growing need for standards - also to promote for accountability of scientometricians as experts. Indeed the relationship between scientometricians and end-users has been changing over the years due to factors like: 1. Increasing demands for bibliometric services in research management at various levels of aggregation, 2. New capacities and demands for performance information through the greater availability of new research technologies and their applications, and 3. The emergence of "citizen bibliometrics" (i.e. bibliometrics carried out by non-expert end-users) due to larger availability of data and indicators. Some of these developments may result in new opportunities for research contributions and information-use, and may increase effectiveness of bibliometrics due to more advanced indicators and increased availability of data sets (including web data). Yet some innovations also risk bypassing the quality control mechanisms of fields like scientometrics and the standards they promote. The implications of this increasing scope and intensity of bibliometric practices requires a concerted response from scientometrics to produce more explicit guidelines and expert advice on good scientometric practices for specific evaluative practices such as recruitment, grant awards, institutional or national benchmarking. This special session will bring together scientometric experts, representatives of funding agencies, policy makers and opinion leaders on the role of metrics in research assessment to discuss the extent to which moving towards clearer, standardised guidelines over usage and consultancy can be achieved, both technically and strategically, and what the guidelines should look like concretely. --- Background material: - Report on International workshop "Guidelines and good practices on quantitative assessments of research" (OST, Paris, 12 May 2014): http://www.obs-ost.fr/fractivit%C3%A9s/workshop_international - Blogposts Paul Wouters on previous debates at the ISSI and STI conferences in 2013, and on the DORA declaration: http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/07/29/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers/ http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/10/03/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers-the-debate-in-berlin/ http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/dora-a-stimulus-for-a-new-evaluation-culture-in-science/ - Information on the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) "Independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment" + SPRU response http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2014/05/02/metrics-in-research-assessment-under-review/ http://www.hefce.ac.uk/whatwedo/rsrch/howfundr/metrics/ https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=spru-response-final.pdf&site=25 - Opinion article for JASIST by Sarah de Rijcke and Alex Rushforth "To intervene, or not to intervene; is that the question? On the role of scientometrics in research evaluation." https://citationculture.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/de-rijcke_rushforth_jasist_preprint2014.pdf Yves Gingras Professeur D?partement d'histoire Centre interuniversitaire de recherche sur la science et la technologie (CIRST) Chaire de recherche du Canada en histoire et sociologie des sciences Observatoire des sciences et des technologies (OST) UQAM C.P. 8888, Succ. Centre-Ville Montr?al, Qu?bec Canada, H3C 3P8 Tel: (514)-987-3000-7053 Fax: (514)-987-7726 http://www.chss.uqam.ca http://www.cirst.uqam.ca http://www.ost.uqam.ca -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET Thu Aug 28 14:38:53 2014 From: loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET (Loet Leydesdorff) Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 20:38:53 +0200 Subject: STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear Stephen, Nowadays, it is not the program, but individual faculty whom are thus assessed. It was mentioned to me by a Vice Provost who was shocked when he found out. Best, Loet _____ Loet Leydesdorff University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of Sussex; Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ. , Hangzhou; 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 Stephen J Bensman Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 6:49 PM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators Loet, Thank you very much for information about this site. The fact that many US universities are utilizing this site is further testimony of the failure of the last ratings done by the US National Research Council. These used to be authoritative and done every ten years. Discussions were always carried out within the parameters marked out by this agency and predecessor ones such as the American Council on Education. University administrations used to announce the rankings. But?interestingly enough?the attention was always focused on the traditional peer rating rankings. The bibliometric indicators were either ignored or used to dispute the peer rating rankings. University administrations are somewhat handicapped in these matters, because they are statistically stupid and do not understand things like standardized scores. On top of that, it was discovered that major mistakes were being made. The most major one was to confuse departmental organizations with disciplinary categories. This most affected biological disciplines, because: 1) some universities have medical schools, some do not; some universities have colleges of agriculture, some do not; some schools have vet schools, some do not. It was then decided that the ratings, etc., could not be based on departments but subject categories. This opened an entirely different can of worms?proper subject taxonomy. It seems to me that Lutz and you have recently submitted a paper on this problem. ;-) For some odd reason, I have become considered the local expert on university rankings?me, a dumb librarian of all things?and am frequently consulted by the university administrators on these matters. I was even asked by the NRC to test the database it created for the previous ratings. Having studied the problem and made my own horrendous mistakes, I have come to come to these conclusions: 1) A university like LSU has no chance in hell of breaking into the top general rankings. The system is set in concrete and highly stable, and Louisiana does not have the money to compete at this level. 2) Therefore, LSU must carefully select the taxonomic ground on which it will fight. LSU has certain natural advantages: coastal preservation, wetlands, petroleum, chemistry, fisheries, Southern history, Southern literature, etc. It is in these categories that LSU can make its major contributions and be at the top. 3) LSU must reform its administrative structure to match its taxonomic goals, integrating the medical schools, vet school, college of agriculture, etc. etc. This must be done, because size counts, and you must enlarge the size of the taxonomic categories, in which you will choose to compete, as much as possible. LSU had been ranked very low in biology, but?when the medical schools, vet school, college of agriculture, etc., were combined?we ranked quite highly. This matches the history of the state, which has been a pioneer in health care. I hope that I have not bored you with this, but this is my practitioner advice on the discussions recently taking place on this listserv. In military terms, the high ground is already occupied, and do not make any frontal assaults there. Concentrate on defining your taxonomic goals and throw as much weight as possible in terms of faculty, money, etc., into these goals. I think that this is a good way to approach these problems for most institutions?taxonomic category by selected taxonomic category. Take your measures by these. Respectfully, Stephen J. Bensman, Ph.D. LSU Libraries Louisiana State University Baton Rouge, LA USA From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Loet Leydesdorff Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 10:25 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators Very interesting is also the following page: http://www.academicanalytics.com/Public/WhatWeDo Many US universities use these services. Best, Loet _____ Loet Leydesdorff University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of Sussex; Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ. , Hangzhou; 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 Yves Gingras Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 4:44 PM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators Hello all Here is an importnt document about good and bad indicators to add up to the discussion on research evaluation: http://www.scienceadvice.ca/en/assessments/completed/science-performance.asp x The whole report is free in pdf. Best regards Yves Gingras Le 27/08/14 20:21, ? Ismael Rafols ? a ?crit : With apologies for cross-posting) Dear all, to warm up forweek in the ST Indicators Conference in Leiden, let us share the topic of a debate: Quality standards for evaluation indicators: Any chance for the dream to come true? Special session at the STI-ENID conference in Leiden, 3 September 2014, 16-17.30h Organisers: Ismael Rafols (INGENIO & SPRU), Paul Wouters (CWTS, Leiden University), Sarah de Rijcke (CWTS, Leiden University) Location: Aalmarkt-hall, Stadsgehoorzaal Leiden There is a growing realization in the scientometrics community of the need to offer clearer guidance to users and further develop standards for professional use of bibliometrics in research evaluations. Indeed the STI-ENID Conference 2014 has the telling sub-title ?Context Matters?. This session continues from the 2013 ISSI and STI conferences in Vienna and Berlin, where full plenary sessions were convened on the need for standards in evaluative bibliometrics, and the ethical and policy implications of individual-level bibliometrics. The need to debate these issues has come to the forefront in light of reports that uses of certain easy-to-use metrics for evaluative purposes have become a routine part of academic life, despite misgivings within the profession itself about its validity. Very recently high-profile movements against certain metric indicators (e.g. the DORA declaration about the Journal Impact Factor) have brought possible misuses of metrics further to the center of attention. There may be a growing need for standards ? also to promote for accountability of scientometricians as experts. Indeed the relationship between scientometricians and end-users has been changing over the years due to factors like: 1. Increasing demands for bibliometric services in research management at various levels of aggregation, 2. New capacities and demands for performance information through the greater availability of new research technologies and their applications, and 3. The emergence of ?citizen bibliometrics? (i.e. bibliometrics carried out by non-expert end-users) due to larger availability of data and indicators. Some of these developments may result in new opportunities for research contributions and information-use, and may increase effectiveness of bibliometrics due to more advanced indicators and increased availability of data sets (including web data). Yet some innovations also risk bypassing the quality control mechanisms of fields like scientometrics and the standards they promote. The implications of this increasing scope and intensity of bibliometric practices requires a concerted response from scientometrics to produce more explicit guidelines and expert advice on good scientometric practices for specific evaluative practices such as recruitment, grant awards, institutional or national benchmarking. This special session will bring together scientometric experts, representatives of funding agencies, policy makers and opinion leaders on the role of metrics in research assessment to discuss the extent to which moving towards clearer, standardised guidelines over usage and consultancy can be achieved, both technically and strategically, and what the guidelines should look like concretely. --- Background material: - Report on International workshop "Guidelines and good practices on quantitative assessments of research" (OST, Paris, 12 May 2014): http://www.obs-ost.fr/fractivit%C3%A9s/workshop_international &URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.obs-ost.fr%2ffractivit%25C3%25A9s%2fworkshop_inter national> - Blogposts Paul Wouters on previous debates at the ISSI and STI conferences in 2013, and on the DORA declaration: http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/07/29/bibliometrics-of-individual- researchers/ &URL=http%3a%2f%2fcitationculture.wordpress.com%2f2013%2f07%2f29%2fbibli ometrics-of-individual-researchers%2f> http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/10/03/bibliometrics-of-individual- researchers-the-debate-in-berlin/ &URL=http%3a%2f%2fcitationculture.wordpress.com%2f2013%2f10%2f03%2fbibli ometrics-of-individual-researchers-the-debate-in-berlin%2f> http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/dora-a-stimulus-for-a-new-ev aluation-culture-in-science/ &URL=http%3a%2f%2fcitationculture.wordpress.com%2f2013%2f05%2f23%2fdora- a-stimulus-for-a-new-evaluation-culture-in-science%2f> - Information on the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) "Independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment" + SPRU response http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2014/05/02/metrics-in-research-assessme nt-under-review/ &URL=http%3a%2f%2fcitationculture.wordpress.com%2f2014%2f05%2f02%2fmetri cs-in-research-assessment-under-review%2f> http://www.hefce.ac.uk/whatwedo/rsrch/howfundr/metrics/ &URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.hefce.ac.uk%2fwhatwedo%2frsrch%2fhowfundr%2fmetric s%2f> https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=spru-response-final.p df &site=25 &URL=https%3a%2f%2fwww.sussex.ac.uk%2fwebteam%2fgateway%2ffile.php%3fnam e%3dspru-response-final.pdf%26site%3d25> - Opinion article for JASIST by Sarah de Rijcke and Alex Rushforth "To intervene, or not to intervene; is that the question? On the role of scientometrics in research evaluation." https://citationculture.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/de-rijcke_rushforth_jasi st_preprint2014.pdf &URL=https%3a%2f%2fcitationculture.files.wordpress.com%2f2014%2f08%2fde- rijcke_rushforth_jasist_preprint2014.pdf> Yves Gingras Professeur D?partement d'histoire Centre interuniversitaire de recherche sur la science et la technologie (CIRST) Chaire de recherche du Canada en histoire et sociologie des sciences Observatoire des sciences et des technologies (OST) UQAM C.P. 8888, Succ. Centre-Ville Montr?al, Qu?bec Canada, H3C 3P8 Tel: (514)-987-3000-7053 Fax: (514)-987-7726 http://www.chss.uqam.ca http://www.cirst.uqam.ca http://www.ost.uqam.ca -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From notsjb at LSU.EDU Thu Aug 28 15:55:27 2014 From: notsjb at LSU.EDU (Stephen J Bensman) Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 19:55:27 +0000 Subject: STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators In-Reply-To: <00d701cfc2ef$527f9920$f77ecb60$@leydesdorff.net> Message-ID: Loet, I am afraid that what is being used more and more in the US for individual evaluations is your Google Scholar Citations (GSC) page. It is easy to use. More and more institutions and people are recommending that you put the URL for your Google Scholar Citations page in your CV and on your Web site. Even Elsevier is recommending this. One argument is that people can easily evaluate departments and institutions if the Google Scholar Citations pages of the faculty are easily available. I know all the arguments against GSC, and most of them are invalid or ISI citations suffer from the same fault. One advantage of GSC is that it captures your altmetrics-a point often used against it. That is one reason we are doing so much analysis of GSC. Our study of economist laureates shows that GSC is highly valid. With them the h-index and the asymptote are contiguous, validating both GSC and the h-index. The extreme outliers at the right are usually works on the topics for which they were awarded the prize. I am sorry, but the hyperlink has replaced the citation as the measure for evaluation purposes. Time marches on, and technology changes. The WWW lacks an authority structure, but so do ISI citations. Respectfully, Stephen J. Bensman, Ph.D. LSU Libraries Louisiana State University Baton Rouge, LA USA From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Loet Leydesdorff Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 1:39 PM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators Dear Stephen, Nowadays, it is not the program, but individual faculty whom are thus assessed. It was mentioned to me by a Vice Provost who was shocked when he found out. Best, Loet ________________________________ Loet Leydesdorff University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of Sussex; Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ., Hangzhou; 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 Stephen J Bensman Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 6:49 PM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators Loet, Thank you very much for information about this site. The fact that many US universities are utilizing this site is further testimony of the failure of the last ratings done by the US National Research Council. These used to be authoritative and done every ten years. Discussions were always carried out within the parameters marked out by this agency and predecessor ones such as the American Council on Education. University administrations used to announce the rankings. But-interestingly enough-the attention was always focused on the traditional peer rating rankings. The bibliometric indicators were either ignored or used to dispute the peer rating rankings. University administrations are somewhat handicapped in these matters, because they are statistically stupid and do not understand things like standardized scores. On top of that, it was discovered that major mistakes were being made. The most major one was to confuse departmental organizations with disciplinary categories. This most affected biological disciplines, because: 1) some universities have medical schools, some do not; some universities have colleges of agriculture, some do not; some schools have vet schools, some do not. It was then decided that the ratings, etc., could not be based on departments but subject categories. This opened an entirely different can of worms-proper subject taxonomy. It seems to me that Lutz and you have recently submitted a paper on this problem. ;-) For some odd reason, I have become considered the local expert on university rankings-me, a dumb librarian of all things-and am frequently consulted by the university administrators on these matters. I was even asked by the NRC to test the database it created for the previous ratings. Having studied the problem and made my own horrendous mistakes, I have come to come to these conclusions: 1) A university like LSU has no chance in hell of breaking into the top general rankings. The system is set in concrete and highly stable, and Louisiana does not have the money to compete at this level. 2) Therefore, LSU must carefully select the taxonomic ground on which it will fight. LSU has certain natural advantages: coastal preservation, wetlands, petroleum, chemistry, fisheries, Southern history, Southern literature, etc. It is in these categories that LSU can make its major contributions and be at the top. 3) LSU must reform its administrative structure to match its taxonomic goals, integrating the medical schools, vet school, college of agriculture, etc. etc. This must be done, because size counts, and you must enlarge the size of the taxonomic categories, in which you will choose to compete, as much as possible. LSU had been ranked very low in biology, but-when the medical schools, vet school, college of agriculture, etc., were combined-we ranked quite highly. This matches the history of the state, which has been a pioneer in health care. I hope that I have not bored you with this, but this is my practitioner advice on the discussions recently taking place on this listserv. In military terms, the high ground is already occupied, and do not make any frontal assaults there. Concentrate on defining your taxonomic goals and throw as much weight as possible in terms of faculty, money, etc., into these goals. I think that this is a good way to approach these problems for most institutions-taxonomic category by selected taxonomic category. Take your measures by these. Respectfully, Stephen J. Bensman, Ph.D. LSU Libraries Louisiana State University Baton Rouge, LA USA From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Loet Leydesdorff Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 10:25 AM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators Very interesting is also the following page: http://www.academicanalytics.com/Public/WhatWeDo Many US universities use these services. Best, Loet ________________________________ Loet Leydesdorff University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) loet at leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Honorary Professor, SPRU, University of Sussex; Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ., Hangzhou; 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 Yves Gingras Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 4:44 PM To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] STI conference Leiden--Quality standards for evaluation indicators Hello all Here is an importnt document about good and bad indicators to add up to the discussion on research evaluation: http://www.scienceadvice.ca/en/assessments/completed/science-performance.aspx The whole report is free in pdf. Best regards Yves Gingras Le 27/08/14 20:21, ? Ismael Rafols ? > a ?crit : With apologies for cross-posting) Dear all, to warm up forweek in the ST Indicators Conference in Leiden, let us share the topic of a debate: Quality standards for evaluation indicators: Any chance for the dream to come true? Special session at the STI-ENID conference in Leiden, 3 September 2014, 16-17.30h Organisers: Ismael Rafols (INGENIO & SPRU), Paul Wouters (CWTS, Leiden University), Sarah de Rijcke (CWTS, Leiden University) Location: Aalmarkt-hall, Stadsgehoorzaal Leiden There is a growing realization in the scientometrics community of the need to offer clearer guidance to users and further develop standards for professional use of bibliometrics in research evaluations. Indeed the STI-ENID Conference 2014 has the telling sub-title 'Context Matters'. This session continues from the 2013 ISSI and STI conferences in Vienna and Berlin, where full plenary sessions were convened on the need for standards in evaluative bibliometrics, and the ethical and policy implications of individual-level bibliometrics. The need to debate these issues has come to the forefront in light of reports that uses of certain easy-to-use metrics for evaluative purposes have become a routine part of academic life, despite misgivings within the profession itself about its validity. Very recently high-profile movements against certain metric indicators (e.g. the DORA declaration about the Journal Impact Factor) have brought possible misuses of metrics further to the center of attention. There may be a growing need for standards - also to promote for accountability of scientometricians as experts. Indeed the relationship between scientometricians and end-users has been changing over the years due to factors like: 1. Increasing demands for bibliometric services in research management at various levels of aggregation, 2. New capacities and demands for performance information through the greater availability of new research technologies and their applications, and 3. The emergence of "citizen bibliometrics" (i.e. bibliometrics carried out by non-expert end-users) due to larger availability of data and indicators. Some of these developments may result in new opportunities for research contributions and information-use, and may increase effectiveness of bibliometrics due to more advanced indicators and increased availability of data sets (including web data). Yet some innovations also risk bypassing the quality control mechanisms of fields like scientometrics and the standards they promote. The implications of this increasing scope and intensity of bibliometric practices requires a concerted response from scientometrics to produce more explicit guidelines and expert advice on good scientometric practices for specific evaluative practices such as recruitment, grant awards, institutional or national benchmarking. This special session will bring together scientometric experts, representatives of funding agencies, policy makers and opinion leaders on the role of metrics in research assessment to discuss the extent to which moving towards clearer, standardised guidelines over usage and consultancy can be achieved, both technically and strategically, and what the guidelines should look like concretely. --- Background material: - Report on International workshop "Guidelines and good practices on quantitative assessments of research" (OST, Paris, 12 May 2014): http://www.obs-ost.fr/fractivit%C3%A9s/workshop_international - Blogposts Paul Wouters on previous debates at the ISSI and STI conferences in 2013, and on the DORA declaration: http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/07/29/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers/ http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/10/03/bibliometrics-of-individual-researchers-the-debate-in-berlin/ http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/dora-a-stimulus-for-a-new-evaluation-culture-in-science/ - Information on the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) "Independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment" + SPRU response http://citationculture.wordpress.com/2014/05/02/metrics-in-research-assessment-under-review/ http://www.hefce.ac.uk/whatwedo/rsrch/howfundr/metrics/ https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=spru-response-final.pdf&site=25 - Opinion article for JASIST by Sarah de Rijcke and Alex Rushforth "To intervene, or not to intervene; is that the question? On the role of scientometrics in research evaluation." https://citationculture.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/de-rijcke_rushforth_jasist_preprint2014.pdf Yves Gingras Professeur D?partement d'histoire Centre interuniversitaire de recherche sur la science et la technologie (CIRST) Chaire de recherche du Canada en histoire et sociologie des sciences Observatoire des sciences et des technologies (OST) UQAM C.P. 8888, Succ. Centre-Ville Montr?al, Qu?bec Canada, H3C 3P8 Tel: (514)-987-3000-7053 Fax: (514)-987-7726 http://www.chss.uqam.ca http://www.cirst.uqam.ca http://www.ost.uqam.ca -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From d.herrmannova at GMAIL.COM Fri Aug 29 09:52:30 2014 From: d.herrmannova at GMAIL.COM (Drahomira Herrmannova) Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 14:52:30 +0100 Subject: Call for participation -- DL 2014: 3rd International Workshop on Mining Scientific Publications Message-ID: CALL FOR PARTICIPATION 3rd International Workshop on Mining Scientific Publications Workshop at Digital Libraries 2014 12th September 2014 -- London, United Kingdom Workshop page: http://core-project.kmi.open.ac.uk/dl2014/ Conference page: http://www.dl2014.org Twitter: https://twitter.com/wosp2014 Dear All, We are pleased to announce the upcoming 3rd International Workshop on Mining Scientific Publications (WOSP 2014), to be held in conjunction with the Conference on Digital Libraries 2014 (DL 2014, http://www.dl2014.org/) in London in September 2014. === Abstract: Digital libraries that store scientific publications are becoming increasingly central to the research process. They are not only used for traditional tasks, such as finding and storing research outputs, but also as a source for discovering new research trends or evaluating research excellence. With the current growth of scientific publications deposited in digital libraries, it is no longer sufficient to provide only access to content. To aid research it is especially important to improve the process of how research is being done. The recent development in natural language processing, information retrieval and the semantic web make it possible to transform the way we work with scientific publications. However, in order to be able to improve these technologies and carry out experiments, researchers need to be able to easily access and use large databases of scientific publications. This workshop aims to bring together people from different backgrounds who: (a) are interested in analysing and mining databases of scientific publications, (b) develop systems that enable such analysis and mining of scientific databases or (c) who develop novel technologies that improve the way research is being done. === The workshop programme includes 14 submissions and 2 keynotes. For details about the programme please visit http://core-project.kmi.open.ac.uk/dl2014/#program. If you would like to attend the workshop, please don't forget to select it at the DL2014 registration page. With kind regards, On behalf of the organising committee Drahomira Herrmannova -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM Fri Aug 29 15:20:28 2014 From: eugene.garfield at THOMSONREUTERS.COM (Eugene Garfield) Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 19:20:28 +0000 Subject: Papers of possible 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:000339996100008 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: *Zipf*'s Law and Criticality in Multivariate Data without Fine-Tuning Authors: Schwab, DJ; Nemenman, I; Mehta, P Author Full Names: Schwab, David J.; Nemenman, Ilya; Mehta, Pankaj Source: PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS, 113 (6):10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.068102 AUG 7 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article KeyWords Plus: STATISTICAL-MECHANICS; DISTRIBUTIONS Abstract: The joint probability distribution of states of many degrees of freedom in biological systems, such as firing patterns in neural networks or antibody sequence compositions, often follows *Zipf*'s law, where a power law is observed on a rank-frequency plot. This behavior has been shown to imply that these systems reside near a unique critical point where the extensive parts of the entropy and energy are exactly equal. Here, we show analytically, and via numerical simulations, that *Zipf-like* probability distributions arise naturally if there is a fluctuating unobserved variable (or variables) that affects the system, such as a common input stimulus that causes individual neurons to fire at time-varying rates. In statistics and machine learning, these are called latent-variable or mixture models. We show that *Zipf*'s law arises generically for large systems, without fine-tuning parameters to a point. Our work gives insight into the ubiquity of *Zipf*'s law in a wide range of systems. Addresses: [Schwab, David J.] Princeton Univ, Dept Phys, Princeton, NJ 08540 USA. [Schwab, David J.] Princeton Univ, Lewis Sigler Inst, Princeton, NJ 08540 USA. [Nemenman, Ilya] Emory Univ, Dept Phys & Biol, Atlanta, GA 30322 USA. [Mehta, Pankaj] Boston Univ, Dept Phys, Boston, MA 02215 USA. E-mail Addresses: dschwab at princeton.edu; ilya.nemenman at emory.edu; pankajm at bu.edu Funding Acknowledgement: NIH [K25 GM098875-02, PHY-0957573]; James S. McDonnell Foundation; Alfred Sloan Fellowship Funding Text: We would like to thank Bill Bialek, Justin Kinney, H. G. E. Hentschel, Thierry Mora, Martin Tchernookov, and an anonymous referee. We thank Robert de Ruyter van Steveninck and Geoff Lewen for providing the data in Fig. 3. The authors were partially supported by NIH Grant No. K25 GM098875-02 and NSF Grant No. PHY-0957573 (D. J. S.), the James S. McDonnell Foundation (I. N.), and the Alfred Sloan Fellowship (P. M.). D. J. S. and I. N. thank the Aspen Center for Physics for their hospitality. Cited Reference Count: 33 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: AMER PHYSICAL SOC, ONE PHYSICS ELLIPSE, COLLEGE PK, MD 20740-3844 USA ISSN: 0031-9007 eISSN: 1079-7114 Article Number: 068102 Web of Science Categories: Physics, Multidisciplinary Research Areas: Physics IDS Number: AM6SV Unique ID: WOS:000339996100008 Cited References: Chialvo Dante R., 2010, NATURE PHYSICS, V6, P744 Bialek W, 2001, NEURAL COMPUTATION, V13, P2409 Hidalgo J., arXiv:1307.4325, Berg H., 2004, E. Coli in Motion, Tkacik G., arXiv:q-bio/0611072, Mastromatteo Iacopo, 2011, JOURNAL OF STATISTICAL MECHANICS-THEORY AND EXPERIMENT, Bialek William, 2012, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V109, P4786 Schneidman E, 2006, NATURE, V440, P1007 Nemenman Ilya, 2008, PLOS COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY, V4, Beggs JM, 2003, JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE, V23, P11167 Mora Thierry, 2010, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V107, P5405 Touchette Hugo, 2009, PHYSICS REPORTS-REVIEW SECTION OF PHYSICS LETTERS, V478, P1 Nemenman I., 2012, Quantitative Biology: From Molecular to Cellular Systems, P73 Tyrcha Joanna, 2013, JOURNAL OF STATISTICAL MECHANICS-THEORY AND EXPERIMENT, LAUGHLIN S, 1981, ZEITSCHRIFT FUR NATURFORSCHUNG C-A JOURNAL OF BIOSCIENCES, V36, P910 van Hemmen J. L., 1991, Collective Phenomena in Neural Networks, Halabi Najeeb, 2009, CELL, V138, P774 Marsili Matteo, 2013, JOURNAL OF STATISTICAL MECHANICS-THEORY AND EXPERIMENT, Newman MEJ, 2005, CONTEMPORARY PHYSICS, V46, P323 Murugan Anand, 2012, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V109, P16161 BAK P, 1988, PHYSICAL REVIEW A, V38, P364 Tkacik Gasper, 2013, JOURNAL OF STATISTICAL MECHANICS-THEORY AND EXPERIMENT, Macke Jakob H., 2011, PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS, V106, DUTTA P, 1981, REVIEWS OF MODERN PHYSICS, V53, P497 Tu YH, 2005, PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS, V94, Brenner N, 2000, NEURON, V26, P695 Nemenman I, 2004, PHYSICAL REVIEW E, V69, Kitzbichler Manfred G., 2009, PLOS COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY, V5, Beggs John M., 2008, PHILOSOPHICAL TRANSACTIONS OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY A-MATHEMATICAL PHYSICAL AND ENGINEERING SCIENCES9th Experimental Chaos Conference, MAY 29-JUN 01, 2006, San Jose dos Campos, BRAZIL, V366, P329 Clauset Aaron, 2009, SIAM REVIEW, V51, P661 Mora Thierry, 2011, JOURNAL OF STATISTICAL PHYSICS, V144, P268 Cocco Simona, 2009, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V106, P14058 Weigt Martin, 2009, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V106, P67 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339893200299 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: THE HUNDRED MOST *CITED* BARIATRIC SURGERY RESEARCH Authors: Ahmed, AR; Ahmad, SS; Ahmad, SS Author Full Names: Ahmed, A. R.; Ahmad, S. S.; Ahmad, S. S. Source: OBESITY SURGERY, 24 (8):1211-1211; AUG 2014 Language: English Document Type: Meeting Abstract Conference Title: 19th World Congress of the International-Federation-for-the-Surgery-of-Obesity-and-Metabolic-Disorders (IFSO) Conference Date: AUG 26-30, 2014 Conference Location: Montreal, CANADA Conference Sponsors: Int Federat Surg Obes & Metab Disorders Addresses: [Ahmad, S. S.] Univ Tubingen, Bonnigheim, Germany. [Ahmad, S. S.] Jordan Hosp, Amman, Jordan. [Ahmed, A. R.] Univ London Imperial Coll Sci Technol & Med, Dept Bariatr & Metab Surg, London, England. Cited Reference Count: 0 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, 233 SPRING ST, NEW YORK, NY 10013 USA ISSN: 0960-8923 eISSN: 1708-0428 Web of Science Categories: Surgery Research Areas: Surgery IDS Number: AM5JI Unique ID: WOS:000339893200299 ======================================================================== 3) *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339890100030 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: The fifty most *cited* Latin-American articles in the orthopaedic literature Authors: Urrutia, J; Zamora, T; Prada, C Author Full Names: Urrutia, Julio; Zamora, Tomas; Prada, Carlos Source: INTERNATIONAL ORTHOPAEDICS, 38 (8):1723-1729; 10.1007/s00264-013-2197-6 AUG 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Orthopaedic literature, Cited articles, Latin-American orthopaedics KeyWords Plus: CITATION-CLASSICS; SURGERY; JOURNALS Abstract: Purpose The number of citations of an article is a marker of its academic influence. Several medical specialties, including orthopaedics, have ranked the articles with more citations. We identified the 50 most cited orthopaedic articles from Latin-America and analyzed the characteristics that made them citable. Methods Science Citation Index Expanded was searched for citations of articles originated in Latin-America, published in any of the 63 journals in the category "Orthopaedics" from 1988 to 2013. We created a list ranking the 50 most commonly *cited articles* and determined the citation density (Citations/years since publication). Information noted for each article included authors, year of publication, country of origin, source journal, article type, and field of research. Results Latin-American countries were the origin of 1 % of orthopaedic articles. The top 50 most *cited articles* had between 29 and 150 citations (mean, 44.48); the citation density ranged from 1.43 to 15.5 citations/years (mean, 5.25). The articles were published in 19 of the 63 journals (11 general and eight sub-specialty journals), and all were published in English. Most articles (n = 29) were published in 2000 or later. The majority were clinical articles (n = 40), and the most common fields were arthroscopy (n = 15) and hip surgery (n = 13). The top 50 articles originated mainly from Brazil (n = 20) and Argentina (n = 15). Conclusions This top 50 list displays articles that have become important references for the orthopaedic scientific community. Researchers may use this work to make their future publications more influential on future investigators. Addresses: [Urrutia, Julio; Zamora, Tomas; Prada, Carlos] Pontificia Univ Catolica Chile, Sch Med, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Santiago, Chile. E-mail Addresses: jurrutia at med.puc.cl Cited Reference Count: 13 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, 233 SPRING ST, NEW YORK, NY 10013 USA ISSN: 0341-2695 eISSN: 1432-5195 Web of Science Categories: Orthopedics Research Areas: Orthopedics IDS Number: AM5II Unique ID: WOS:000339890100030 Cited References: Tsai Yi-Lun, 2006, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, V24, P647 Baldwin Keith D., 2012, JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC ORTHOPAEDICS-PART B, V21, P463 Namdari Surena, 2012, JOURNAL OF SHOULDER AND ELBOW SURGERY, V21, P1796 BROOKES BC, 1969, NATURE, V224, P953 Eberlin Kyle R, 2012, Hand (New York, N.Y.), V7, P157 Heldwein Flavio Lobo, 2010, UROLOGY, V75, P1261 Baltussen A, 2004, ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, V98, P443 Lage LA, 1996, ARTHROSCOPY, V12, P269 Loonen Martijn P. J., 2008, PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, V121, P320E Murray Michael R., 2012, EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, V21, P2059 Quinn Nuala, 2013, PEDIATRICS, V132, P406 Paladugu R, 2002, WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY, V26, P1099 Lefaivre Kelly A., 2011, CLINICAL ORTHOPAEDICS AND RELATED RESEARCH, V469, P1487 ======================================================================== ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339939600001 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: The dynamics of correlated novelties Authors: Tria, F; Loreto, V; Servedio, VDP; Strogatz, SH Author Full Names: Tria, F.; Loreto, V.; Servedio, V. D. P.; Strogatz, S. H. Source: SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 4 10.1038/srep05890 JUL 31 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article KeyWords Plus: SCIENCE Abstract: Novelties are a familiar part of daily life. They are also fundamental to the evolution of biological systems, human society, and technology. By opening new possibilities, one novelty can pave the way for others in a process that Kauffman has called "expanding the adjacent possible''. The dynamics of correlated novelties, however, have yet to be quantified empirically or modeled mathematically. Here we propose a simple mathematical model that mimics the process of exploring a physical, biological, or conceptual space that enlarges whenever a novelty occurs. The model, a generalization of Polya's urn, predicts statistical laws for the rate at which novelties happen (Heaps' law) and for the probability distribution on the space explored (*Zipf*'s law), as well as signatures of the process by which one novelty sets the stage for another. We test these predictions on four data sets of human activity: the edit events of Wikipedia pages, the emergence of tags in annotation systems, the sequence of words in texts, and listening to new songs in online music catalogues. By quantifying the dynamics of correlated novelties, our results provide a starting point for a deeper understanding of the adjacent possible and its role in biological, cultural, and technological evolution. Addresses: [Tria, F.; Loreto, V.] Inst Sci Interchange, I-10126 Turin, Italy. [Loreto, V.; Servedio, V. D. P.] Univ Roma La Sapienza, Dept Phys, I-00185 Rome, Italy. [Servedio, V. D. P.] ISC CNR, Inst Complex Syst, I-00185 Rome, Italy. [Strogatz, S. H.] Cornell Univ, Dept Math, Ithaca, NY 14853 USA. E-mail Addresses: strogatz at cornell.edu Funding Acknowledgement: EU-STREP project EveryAware [265432]; EuroUnderstanding Collaborative Research Projects DRUST - European Science Foundation; Physics Department, Sapienza University of Rome Funding Text: The authors acknowledge support from the EU-STREP project EveryAware (Grant Agreement 265432) and the EuroUnderstanding Collaborative Research Projects DRUST funded by the European Science Foundation. S. H. S. gratefully acknowledges the support and hospitality of the Physics Department, Sapienza University of Rome, where this work was performed. Cited Reference Count: 42 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP, MACMILLAN BUILDING, 4 CRINAN ST, LONDON N1 9XW, ENGLAND ISSN: 2045-2322 Article Number: 5890 Web of Science Categories: Multidisciplinary Sciences Research Areas: Science & Technology - Other Topics IDS Number: AM5ZJ Unique ID: WOS:000339939600001 Cited References: Salganik MJ, 2006, SCIENCE, V311, P854 Newman MEJ, 2005, CONTEMPORARY PHYSICS, V46, P323 ARTHUR WB, 1989, ECONOMIC JOURNAL, V99, P116 Heaps H. S., 1978, Information Retrieval: Computational and Theoretical Aspects, De Morgan A., 1838, An Essay on Probabilities, and Their Application to Life Contingencies and Insurance Offices, Arthur W. B., 2009, The Nature of Technology, Valente T. W., 1995, Network Models of the Diffusion of Innovations, Kauffman S. A., 1996, SFI working papers, Kauffman S. A., 1993, The Origins of Order: Self-Organization and Selection in Evolution, DOSI G, 1994, JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICAL ECONOMICS, V23, P1 BASS FM, 1969, MANAGEMENT SCIENCE SERIES A-THEORY, V15, P215 Simkin M. V., 2011, PHYSICS REPORTS-REVIEW SECTION OF PHYSICS LETTERS, V502, P1 Kauffman SA, 2000, Investigations, Alexander Jason McKenzie, 2012, DYNAMIC GAMES AND APPLICATIONS, V2, P129 O'Brien M. J., 2009, Innovation in Cultural Systems: Contributions from Evolutionary Anthropology, GOULD SJ, 1982, PALEOBIOLOGY, V8, P4 Johnson S., 2010, Where Good Ideas Come From: The Natural History of Innovation, Schumpeter J., 1934, The Theory of Economic Development, Gerlach Martin, 2013, PHYSICAL REVIEW X, V3, Vespignani Alessandro, 2009, SCIENCE, V325, P425 SIMON HA, 1955, BIOMETRIKA, V42, P425 JACOB F, 1977, SCIENCE, V196, P1161 Mahmoud H., 2008, 2000, Technological Innovation as an Evolutionary Process, Wagner Andreas, 2014, JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY INTERFACE, V11, Lazer David, 2009, SCIENCE, V323, P721 Yule U. G., 1925, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Containing Papers of a Biological Character, V213, P21 ZABELL SL, 1992, SYNTHESE, V90, P205 Tettelin Herve, 2008, CURRENT OPINION IN MICROBIOLOGY, V11, P472 2003, Animal Innovation, Johnson N. L., 1977, Urn Models and Their Application: An Approach to Modern Discrete Probability Theory, Sole Ricard V., 2013, COMPLEXITY, V18, P15 Rogers E. M., 2003, Diffusion of Innovations, Cattuto Ciro, 2009, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V106, P10511 HOPPE FM, 1984, JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICAL BIOLOGY, V20, P91 Mitzenmacher M., 2003, Internet Math., V1, P226 Kotz S., 1996, P203 Zipf G. K., 1949, Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort, Celma O, 2010, MUSIC RECOMMENDATION AND DISCOVERY, P1 Angeles Serrano M., 2009, PLOS ONE, V4, Polya G., 1931, Annales de l'Institut Henri Poincare, V1, Lue Linyuan, 2010, PLOS ONE, V5, ======================================================================== ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339635000008 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Collective Philanthropy: Describing and Modeling the Ecology of Giving Authors: Gottesman, WL; Reagan, AJ; Dodds, PS Author Full Names: Gottesman, William L.; Reagan, Andrew James; Dodds, Peter Sheridan Source: PLOS ONE, 9 (7):10.1371/journal.pone.0098876 JUL 1 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article KeyWords Plus: INCOME-DISTRIBUTION; ZIPFS LAW; DISTRIBUTIONS; DONATION Abstract: Reflective of income and wealth distributions, philanthropic gifting appears to follow an approximate power-law size distribution as measured by the size of gifts received by individual institutions. We explore the ecology of gifting by analysing data sets of individual gifts for a diverse group of institutions dedicated to education, medicine, art, public support, and religion. We find that the detailed forms of gift-size distributions differ across but are relatively constant within charity categories. We construct a model for how a donor's income affects their giving preferences in different charity categories, offering a mechanistic explanation for variations in institutional gift-size distributions. We discuss how knowledge of gift-sized distributions may be used to assess an institution's gift-giving profile, to help set fundraising goals, and to design an institution-specific giving pyramid. Addresses: [Reagan, Andrew James; Dodds, Peter Sheridan] Univ Vermont, Dept Math & Stat, Burlington, VT 05405 USA. [Reagan, Andrew James; Dodds, Peter Sheridan] Univ Vermont, Ctr Complex Syst, Burlington, VT USA. [Gottesman, William L.; Reagan, Andrew James; Dodds, Peter Sheridan] Univ Vermont, Computat Story Lab, Burlington, VT 05405 USA. [Reagan, Andrew James; Dodds, Peter Sheridan] Univ Vermont, Vermont Adv Comp Core, Burlington, VT USA. E-mail Addresses: billgottesman at gmail.com; peter.dodds at uvm.edu Funding Acknowledgement: National Science Foundation CAREER Award [0846668]; National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) [NNX 08A096G] Funding Text: PSD was supported by National Science Foundation CAREER Award # 0846668. The authors are grateful for the computational resources provided by the Vermont Advanced Computing Core, which is supported by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) (NNX 08A096G). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Cited Reference Count: 16 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE, 1160 BATTERY STREET, STE 100, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 USA ISSN: 1932-6203 Article Number: e98876 Web of Science Categories: Multidisciplinary Sciences Research Areas: Science & Technology - Other Topics IDS Number: AM1UX Unique ID: WOS:000339635000008 Cited References: Graham Christine, 2011, Personal communication, Chen Q., 2009, EPL, V88, Clauset Aaron, 2009, SIAM REVIEW, V51, P661 Clementi F, 2005, PHYSICA A-STATISTICAL MECHANICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS, V350, P427 Newman MEJ, 2005, CONTEMPORARY PHYSICS, V46, P323 Pierpoint R, 1998, New directions for Philanthropic Fundraising, V21, P61 Giving USA Foundation, 2011, Giving USA 2011: The Annual Report on Philanthropy for the Year 2010, Goldenfeld N, 1992, Lectures on Phase Transitions and the Renormalization Group, V85, Alstott Jeff, 2014, PLOS ONE, V9, Zipf G. K., 1949, Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort, Dove KE, 2000, Conducting a Successful Capital Campaign, P72 Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2007, Patterns of household charitable giving by income group. Prepared for Google, SIMON HA, 1955, BIOMETRIKA, V42, P425 Wu Yajing, 2011, PHYSICA A-STATISTICAL MECHANICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS, V390, P4325 Dodds PS, 2001, JOURNAL OF THEORETICAL BIOLOGY, V209, P9 Nirei Makoto, 2007, REVIEW OF INCOME AND WEALTH, V53, P440 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339480400025 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: A Century of Citation Classics in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery *Journals* Revisited Authors: Coelho, DH; Edelmayer, LW; Fenton, JE Author Full Names: Coelho, Daniel H.; Edelmayer, Luke W.; Fenton, John E. Source: LARYNGOSCOPE, 124 (6):1358-1362; 10.1002/lary.24573 JUN 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Citation analysis, otorhinolaryngology, bibliometrics, citation classics, publication KeyWords Plus: BIAS Abstract: Objectives/Hypothesis: Citation classics have traditionally been defined in the smaller medical specialties as any article published in a peer-reviewed journal that has received 100 or more citations from other articles also published in peer-reviewed journals. This study aimed to determine patterns of citation classics changes in the medical field otorhinolaryngology and head and neck surgery (OHNS) over the past decade and serves as a follow-up to an original study published in 2002, "A Century of Citation Classics in Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery." Study Design: Bibliometric analysis. Methods: Using the Journal Citation Reports and Web of Science, OHNS journals were selected and assessed for the content of citation classics. Results: Nine-hundred five citation classics were found, over 11-fold more than 1 decade prior. Other significant changes were seen in country of origin, decade of publication, number of authors per article, subspecialty of article, and most frequently discussed topics. Conclusions: The dramatic rise in quantity and nature of citation classics in the past decade may be due to unprecedented advancements in information technology and communication, allowing studies and experiments to be performed, written, reviewed, published, and cited at rapid rates. Addresses: [Coelho, Daniel H.; Edelmayer, Luke W.] Virginia Commonwealth Univ, Dept Otolaryngol Head & Neck Surg, Richmond, VA 23298 USA. [Fenton, John E.] Univ Limerick, Univ Hosp Limerick, Dept Otolaryngol Head & Neck Surg, Limerick, Ireland. Univ Limerick, Grad Entry Med Sch, Limerick, Ireland. E-mail Addresses: dcoelho at mcvh-vcu.edu Cited Reference Count: 11 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: WILEY-BLACKWELL, 111 RIVER ST, HOBOKEN 07030-5774, NJ USA ISSN: 0023-852X eISSN: 1531-4995 Web of Science Categories: Medicine, Research & Experimental; Otorhinolaryngology Research Areas: Research & Experimental Medicine; Otorhinolaryngology IDS Number: AL9SF Unique ID: WOS:000339480400025 Cited References: Picknett T, 1999, JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR BIOLOGY, V293, P173 Larsen Peder Olesen, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V84, P575 Fenton JE, 2002, JOURNAL OF LARYNGOLOGY AND OTOLOGY9th Meeting of the British-Society-of-History-of-ENT, SEP, 2001, BIRMINGHAM, ENGLAND, V116, P494 HOUSE JW, 1985, OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD AND NECK SURGERY, V93, P146 Narin F, 1976, Remacle M, 2000, EUROPEAN ARCHIVES OF OTO-RHINO-LARYNGOLOGY, V257, P227 Meltzer EO, 2004, OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD AND NECK SURGERY, V131, PS1 GARFIELD E, 1977, CURRENT CONTENTS, P5 Link AM, 1998, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION3rd International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication, SEP, 1997, PRAGUE, CZECH REPUBLIC, V280, P246 DUBIN D, 1993, ARCHIVES OF DERMATOLOGY, V129, P1121 CAMPBELL FM, 1990, BULLETIN OF THE MEDICAL LIBRARY ASSOCIATION, V78, P376 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000340070300003 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: *Zipf*'s law and L. Levin probability distributions Authors: Manin, YI Author Full Names: Manin, Yuri I. Source: FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS AND ITS APPLICATIONS, 48 (2):116-127; 10.1007/s10688-014-0052-1 APR 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Zipf's law, Kolmogorov complexity Abstract: *Zipf*'s law in its basic incarnation is an empirical probability distribution governing the frequency of usage of words in a language. As Terence Tao recently remarked, it still lacks a convincing and satisfactory mathematical explanation. In this paper I suggest that, at least in certain situations, *Zipf*'s law can be explained as a special case of the a priori distribution introduced and studied by L. Levin. The *Zipf* ranking corresponding to diminishing probability appears then as the ordering by growing Kolmogorov complexity. One argument justifying this assertion is the appeal to a recent interpretation by Yu. Manin and M. Marcolli of asymptotic bounds for error-correcting codes in terms of phase transition. In the respective partition function, the Kolmogorov complexity of a code plays the role of its energy. Addresses: Max Planck Inst Math, D-53111 Bonn, Germany. E-mail Addresses: manin at mpim-bonn.mpg.de Cited Reference Count: 26 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: MAIK NAUKA/INTERPERIODICA/SPRINGER, 233 SPRING ST, NEW YORK, NY 10013-1578 USA ISSN: 0016-2663 eISSN: 1573-8485 Web of Science Categories: Mathematics, Applied; Mathematics Research Areas: Mathematics IDS Number: AM7SZ Unique ID: WOS:000340070300003 Cited References: Zvonkin A. K., 1970, Uspekhi Mat. NaukRussian Math. Surveys, V25, P85 Nabutovsky A, 2003, GEOMETRIAE DEDICATA, V101, P1 Manin Yuri I., 2012, MATHEMATICAL STRUCTURES IN COMPUTER SCIENCE, V22, P729 Dehaene S., 1997, The Number Sense. How the Mind Creates Mathematics, Delahaye J.-P., 2012, Pour la Science, V421, P80 Frahm K. M., PageRank of Integers, Huang Shi-Ming, 2008, DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS, V46, P70 Murtra B. C., 2010, On the Universality of Zipf's Law, Manin Yu., 2012, Kolmogorov complexity as a hidden factor of scientific discourse: from Newton's law to data mining, Talk at the Plenary Session of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences on Complexity and Analogy in Science: Theoretical, Methodological and Epistemological Aspects, November 5-7, 2012, Vatican, Borisov Dennis V., 2008, GEOMETRY AND DYNAMICS OF GROUPS AND SPACESInternational Conference on Geometry and Dynamics of Groups and Spaces held in Memory of Alexander Reznikov, SEP 22-29, 2006, Bonn, GERMANY, V265, P247 Manin Yu., Kolmogorov Complexity and the Asymptotic Bound for Error-Correcting Codes, DEHAENE S, 1992, COGNITION, V43, P1 Mandelbrot B., 1953, Communication Theory. Proc. of the Symposium on Application of Communicaions Theory, Butter-worth, Woburn, MA, P486 Tao Terence, 2012, DAEDALUS, V141, P23 Rogers H., 1958, J. Symb. Logic, V23, P331 Zipf G. K., 1936, The Psycho-Biology of Language, Li Ming, 1993, An Introduction to Kolmogorov Complexity and Its Applications, Levin L., 1976, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSRSoviet Math. Dokl., V227, P804 Yanofsky Noson S., 2011, JOURNAL OF LOGIC AND COMPUTATION, V21, P253 Schnorr C. P., 1974, Math. Systems Theory, V8, P182 Zipf G. K., 1949, Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort, Veldhuizen Todd L., Software Libraries and Their Reuse: Entropy, Kolmogorov Complexity, and Zipf's Law, Manin D. Yu., 2009, JOURNAL OF QUANTITATIVE LINGUISTICS, V16, P274 Manin YI, 2010, COURSE IN MATHEMATICAL LOGIC FOR MATHEMATICIANS, SECOND EDITION, V53, P1 Manin Dmitrii Y., 2008, COGNITIVE SCIENCE, V32, P1075 Calude Cristian S., 2009, MATHEMATICAL STRUCTURES IN COMPUTER SCIENCE4th International Conference on Theory and Applications of Models of Computation, MAY 22-25, 2007, Shanghai, PEOPLES R CHINA, V19, P45 ======================================================================== ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339952300006 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: The long-term influence of collaboration on citation patterns Authors: Gazni, A; Thelwall, M Author Full Names: Gazni, Ali; Thelwall, Mike Source: RESEARCH EVALUATION, 23 (3):261-271; 10.1093/reseval/rvu014 JUL 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: scientific collaboration, collaboration strategies, collaborative networks, organization of science KeyWords Plus: SCIENTIFIC COLLABORATION; AUTHOR DISAMBIGUATION; COCITATION NETWORKS; KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER; SOCIAL-STRUCTURE; INFORMATION USE; IMPACT FACTOR; SCIENCE; SPECIALTIES; COAUTHORSHIP Abstract: This study assesses the long-term impact of collaboration in terms of the extent to which collaborators cite each other's works and cite the same publications as each other. The results are based on coauthorship of academic articles during 1990-2010. Although the number of citations to, and common references with, collaborators both increase as the number of collaborators increases over time, these differ between collaborators. For example, many authors do not cite their collaborators and many collaborators do not cite any of the same references as each other. In contrast, many authors cite their collaborators extensively and many collaborators have many of the same references as each other. The extent of citing collaborators and citing the same references as cited by collaborators varies with the impact of the collaborators. These widely different properties may reflect some collaborators working in completely different research areas, others working in the same broad research area, and still others working within a narrow research area. Alternatively, some collaborators may learn from or monitor each other while others do not. Addresses: [Gazni, Ali] ISC, Shiraz, Iran. [Thelwall, Mike] Wolverhampton Univ, Stat Cybermetr Res Grp, Wolverhampton WV1 1LY, W Midlands, England. E-mail Addresses: ali.gazni at isc.gov.ir Cited Reference Count: 69 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: OXFORD UNIV PRESS, GREAT CLARENDON ST, OXFORD OX2 6DP, ENGLAND ISSN: 0958-2029 eISSN: 1471-5449 Web of Science Categories: Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: AM6DL Unique ID: WOS:000339952300006 Cited References: Kanani P., 2007, Proceedings of AAAI 2007 Workshop on Information Integration on the Web, P38 Marshall S., 2007, Report to the Higher Education Funding Council for England, CRANE D, 1969, AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW, V34, P335 Reuther P., 2006, International Journal of Metadata, Semantics and Ontologies, V1, Porac JF, 2004, RESEARCH POLICY, V33, P661 Blondel Vincent D., 2008, JOURNAL OF STATISTICAL MECHANICS-THEORY AND EXPERIMENT, Lambert R, 2003, Lambert Review of Business-university Collaboration: Final Report, Morris Steven A., 2008, ANNUAL REVIEW OF INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V42, P213 Reagans R, 2003, ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCE QUARTERLY, V48, P240 Katz JS, 1997, RESEARCH POLICY, V26, P1 Smalheiser N. R., 2009, Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, V43, P1 Yan Erjia, 2011, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V62, P1498 SMITH LC, 1981, LIBRARY TRENDS, V30, P83 STOKES TD, 1989, SOCIAL STUDIES OF SCIENCE, V19, P101 Didegah Fereshteh, 2011, LEARNED PUBLISHING, V24, P303 Laudel G, 2002, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V11, P3 RIESENBERG D, 1990, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V264, P1857 Zhang Lin, 2010, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS1st Joint ASIS&T/ISS Conference Seminar 2009, NOV07, 2009, Vancouver, CANADA, V4, P185 Singh J, 2005, MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, V51, P756 Tijssen RJW, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS8th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators, SEP 23-25, 2004, Leiden, NETHERLANDS, V66, P55 Maglaughlin K. L., 2005, Proceedings of the Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Stockholm, Sweden, P499 Gazni Ali, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V87, P251 Bermeo Andrade Helga, 2009, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V18, P301 Yan Erjia, 2013, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V7, P249 Bigdeli Zahed, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P505 Rinia EJ, 2002, SCIENTOMETRICS, V54, P347 Wilson T. D., 2006, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V62, P658 Burright MA, 2005, COLLEGE & RESEARCH LIBRARIES, V66, P198 GRIFFITH BC, 1971, SCIENCE, V173, P164 Wuchty Stefan, 2007, SCIENCE, V316, P1036 Fuchs Beth E., 2006, COLLEGE & RESEARCH LIBRARIES, V67, P304 Kang In-Su, 2009, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V45, P84 Franceschet Massimo, 2010, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V4, P540 Defazio Daniela, 2009, RESEARCH POLICY, V38, P293 Ohniwa RL, 2004, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V13, P175 Wilson P, 1996, LIBRARY TRENDS, V45, P192 Bigdeli Z., 2012, Scientometrics, V96, P1 Thagard P, 1997, NOUS, V31, P242 Schrage M., 1995, No More Teams!: Mastering the Dynamics of Creative Collaboration, Wallace Matthew L., 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P240 Rinia EJ, 2001, SCIENTOMETRICS6th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators, MAY 24-27, 2000, LEIDEN, NETHERLANDS, V51, P293 Fleming Lee, 2007, ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCE QUARTERLY, V52, P443 Kuruppu Pali U., 2008, PORTAL-LIBRARIES AND THE ACADEMY, V8, P387 BRODY S, 1995, LANCET, V346, P1300 Song Yang, 2007, PROCEEDINGS OF THE 7TH ACM/IEE JOINT CONFERENCE ON DIGITAL LIBRARIES7th ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries, JUN 18-23, 2007, Vancouver, CANADA, P342 Levin Michael, 2012, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V63, P1030 Liu Yuxian, 2013, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V7, P651 Price D. D. S., 1986, Little Science, Big Science and Beyond, Lambiotte R., 2009, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V3, P180 Bakshy E., 2012, Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on World Wide Web, P519 Ahuja G, 2000, ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCE QUARTERLY, V45, P425 Bilenko Mikhail, 2006, ICDM 2006: Sixth International Conference on Data Mining, Proceedings6th IEEE International Conference on Data Mining, DEC 18-22, 2006, Hong Kong, PEOPLES R CHINA, P87 Krugman P. R., 1991, Geography and Trade, Levitt Jonathan M., 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V85, P171 Adams Jonathan, 2012, NATURE, V490, P335 Yan Erjia, 2012, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V63, P1313 Mattsson Pauline, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V87, P99 Torvik VI, 2005, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V56, P140 Wallace Matthew L., 2012, PLOS ONE, V7, McRae-Spencer D. M., 2006, Proceedings of the 6th ACM/IEEE-CS joint conference on Digital libraries, P53 Johnson Ben, 2007, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V63, P609 Sonnenwald Diane H., 2007, ANNUAL REVIEW OF INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V41, P643 Jassawalla AR, 1998, JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT, V15, P237 Soler Jose M., 2007, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V1, P123 Didegah Fereshteh, 2013, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V7, P861 Culotta A., 2007, Sixth International Workshop on Information Integration on the Web (IIWeb-07), Vancouver, Canada, Moya-Anegon Felix, 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V97, P421 Kurmis AP, 2006, ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, V13, P77 Goldfinch S, 2003, SCIENTOMETRICS, V57, P321 ======================================================================== ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339680800004 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Academic rankings between the "republic of science" and "new public management" Authors: Osterloh, M; Frey, BS Author Full Names: Osterloh, Margit; Frey, Bruno S. Edited by: Lanteri A; Vromen J Source: ECONOMICS OF ECONOMISTS: INSTITUTIONAL SETTING, INDIVIDUAL INCENTIVES, AND FUTURE PROSPECTS, 77-103; 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article; Book Chapter KeyWords Plus: BASIC SCIENTIFIC-RESEARCH; ORGANIZATIONAL CONTROL; CORPORATE GOVERNANCE; INTRINSIC MOTIVATION; SELF-DETERMINATION; SIMPLE ECONOMICS; IMPACT FACTOR; HIDDEN COSTS; GONE WILD; PERFORMANCE Addresses: [Osterloh, Margit] Univ Zurich, Dept Business Adm, CH-8006 Zurich, Switzerland. [Osterloh, Margit] Univ Warwick, Warwick Business Sch, Coventry CV4 7AL, W Midlands, England. [Frey, Bruno S.] Univ Zurich, Dept Econ, CH-8006 Zurich, Switzerland. Cited Reference Count: 180 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS, THE PITT BUILDING, TRUMPINGTON ST, CAMBRIDGE CB2 1RP, CAMBS, ENGLAND ISBN: 978-1-107-01570-8 Book DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139059145 Web of Science Categories: Economics Research Areas: Business & Economics IDS Number: BA9PP Unique ID: WOS:000339680800004 Cited References: Rothwell PM, 2000, BRAIN, V123, P1964 Khurana R, 2007, FROM HIGHER AIMS TO HIRED HANDS: THE SOCIAL TRANSFORMATION OF AMERICAN BUSINESS SCHOOLS AND THE UNFULFILLED PROMISE OF MANAGEMENT AS A PROFESSION, P1 GRIFFIN D, 1992, COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, V24, P411 Osterloh M., 2010, Analyse und Kritik, V32, P267 Ordonez Lisa D., 2009, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVES, V23, P6 Buchstein H., 2009, Demokratie und Lotterie, Gittelman M, 2003, MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, V49, P366 Simkin M. V., 2005, Annals of Improbable Research, V11, P24 Schimank U, 2005, MINERVA, V43, P361 Ultee M., 1987, Seventeenth Century, V2, P95 Gillies D., 2008, How Should Research Be Organised?, GILLILAND SW, 1992, JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, V77, P672 Swanson EP, 2004, CONTEMPORARY ACCOUNTING RESEARCH, V21, P223 Starbuck W. H., 2009, Scandinavian Journal of Management, V25, P225 Fong Eric A., 2007, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, V33, P161 Buchstein H., 2007, Redescription, V11, P178 SIMON HA, 1985, AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW, V79, P293 Deci EL, 1999, PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, V125, P627 Abernethy MA, 1997, ACCOUNTING ORGANIZATIONS AND SOCIETY, V22, P233 SCHREYOGG G, 1987, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT REVIEW, V12, P91 Ursprung H. W., 2006, Jahrbucher fur Nationalokonomie und Statistik, V227, P187 Haney W. M, 2002, Education Week, P56 Bok D., 2003, Universities in the Marketplace: The Commercialization of Higher Education, Goodall AH, 2009, SOCRATES IN THE BOARDROOM: WHY RESEARCH UNIVERSITIES SHOULD BE LED BY TOP SCHOLARS, P1 Frey Bruno S., 2010, JOURNAL OF APPLIED ECONOMICS, V13, P1 Fletcher R. C., 2003, Peer Review in Health Sciences, P62 Osterloh M, 2000, ORGANIZATION SCIENCE, V11, P538 Starbuck W. H., 2006, The Production of Knowledge: The Challenge of Social Science Research, Elster J., 1989, Solomonic Judgements, Gneezy U, 2000, QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, V115, P791 Rinia EJ, 1998, RESEARCH POLICY, V27, P95 Prichard C, 1997, ORGANIZATION STUDIES, V18, P287 Gillies Donald, 2005, Studies in history and philosophy of biological and biomedical sciences, V36, P159 FREY BS, 1992, KYKLOS, V45, P161 Campbell P., 2008, Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, V8, P5 ZUCKERMAN H, 1992, THEORETICAL MEDICINE, V13, P217 Frey B. S., 2009, International Review of Economics, V56, P333 CAMPBELL DT, 1957, PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, V54, P297 Bornmann Lutz, 2009, LEARNED PUBLISHING, V22, P117 Gioia Dennis A., 2002, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT LEARNING & EDUCATION, V1, P107 Falk Armin, 2006, AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, V96, P1611 Lawrence PA, 2002, NATURE, V415, P835 Bornmann L., 2008, Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, V8, P93 Oswald Andrew J., 2007, ECONOMICA, V74, P21 Stern S, 2004, MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, V50, P835 Bush V., 1945, ''Science: The endless frontier.'' A report to the president by Vannevar Bush, Director of the Office of Scientific Research and Development, Espeland Wendy Nelson, 2007, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY, V113, P1 Frey BS, 2001, JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC SURVEYS, V15, P589 Merton R. K., 1973, The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations, Frey BS, 2003, PUBLIC CHOICE, V116, P205 Clark B. R., 1998, Creating Entrepreneurial Universities: Organizational Pathways of Transformation, Moed H. F., 2007, Science and Public Policy, V34, P575 Stephan PE, 1996, JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC LITERATURE, V34, P1199 Jimenez-Contreras E, 2003, RESEARCH POLICY, V32, P123 OUCHI WG, 1979, MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, V25, P833 IDEAS, 2008, IDEAS rankings, Amabile TM, 1996, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V39, P1154 Handelsblatt, 2010, Handlesblatt-Ranking schlagt hohe Wellen, Fuyuno I, 2006, NATURE, V441, P792 Judge Timothy A., 2007, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V50, P491 MINER LE, 1981, SRA-JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF RESEARCH ADMINISTRATORS, V12, P21 The Thomson Corporation, 2008, ISI web of knowledge journal citation report, Posner Richard A., 2010, JOURNAL OF INSTITUTIONAL ECONOMICS, V6, P1 Durso TW, 1997, SCIENTIST, V11, P13 Fehr E, 2004, SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, V106, P453 Rost Katja, 2010, CORPORATE GOVERNANCE-AN INTERNATIONAL REVIEW, V18, P212 Locke Edwin A., 2009, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVES, V23, P17 Hendriks C. M., 2004, P80 SPANGENBERG JFA, 1990, RESEARCH POLICY, V19, P239 Neckermann S., 2010, Working Paper No. 411, Monastersky R., 2005, Chronicle of Higher Education, V52, PA12 Van Fleet DD, 2000, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, V26, P839 STAW BM, 1990, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V33, P534 NELSON RR, 1959, JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY, V67, P297 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Simonton D. K., 2004, Creativity in Science: Chance, Logic, Genius, and Zeitgeist, Armstrong JS, 1997, Sci Eng Ethics, V3, P63 Strathern M., 1966, Cambridge Anthropology, V19, P1 Sokal A. D, 1996, A physicist experiments with cultural studies, The Thomson Corporation, 2008, ISI web of knowledge essential science indicators, Smith R, 1997, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V314, P463 Amabile TM, 1998, HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW, V76, P76 Ehrenberg R. G., 2000, Tuition Rising: Why College Costs So Much, Stephan Paula E., 2008, CESIFO ECONOMIC STUDIES, V54, P313 Frost Jetta, 2010, ORGANIZATIONAL DYNAMICS, V39, P126 Brook R., 2003, Science Between Evaluation and Innovation: A Conference on Peer Review, P61 Cole S., 1992, Making Science: Between Nature and Society, Albers Soenke, 2009, GERMAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, V10, P352 Nelson Richard R., 2006, INDUSTRIAL AND CORPORATE CHANGEConference on Information, Intellectual Property, and Economic Welfare, MAY 15-16, 2006, Turin, ITALY, V15, P903 Abramo Giovanni, 2009, RESEARCH POLICY, V38, P206 Butler L, 2003, RESEARCH POLICY8th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, JUL 16-20, 2001, SYDNEY, AUSTRALIA, V32, P143 Frey B. S., 2010, Nature, V465, P871 MERTON RK, 1968, SCIENCE, V159, P56 Weingart P, 2005, SCIENTOMETRICSConference on Bibliometric Analysis in Science and Research, NOV 05-07, 2003, Julich, GERMANY, V62, P117 GANS JS, 1994, JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES, V8, P165 Lee Frederic S., 2007, CAMBRIDGE JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, V31, P309 Janis I. L., 1972, Victims of Groupthink: a Psychological Study of Foreignpolicy Decisions and Fiascoes, DAHL Robert, 1989, Democracy and Its Critics, Butler L., 2007, Science and Public Policy, V34, P565 Horrobin DF, 1996, LANCET, V348, P1293 Hennessey B. A., 1998, American Psychologist, V53, P647 Leibniz G. W, 1931, Samtliche Schriften und Briefe (Akademie-Ausgabe), V1, P569 POLANYI M, 1962, MINERVA, V1, P54 FREY BS, 2008, J PSYCHOL, V216, P198 Moed HF, 2002, NATURE, V415, P731 Bhagwat Jui G, 2004, Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR, V1, P493 Weibel Antoinette, 2010, JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION RESEARCH AND THEORY, V20, P387 Carson L., 1999, Random Selection in Politics, Heintz B., 2008, Governance von und durch Wissen, P110 Benz Matthias, 2007, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT REVIEWAnnual Conference of the Associational-of-German-Speaking Business Economics, JUN, 2003, Zurich, SWITZERLAND, V32, P92 NICHOLS S, 2006, ED POLICY ANAL ARCH, V14, P1 Laband DN, 2003, KYKLOS, V56, P161 Wenneras C., 1999, Peer Review in Health Sciences, P79 Tsang Eric W. K., 2007, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT LEARNING & EDUCATION, V6, P128 Stokes D. E., 1997, Pasteur's Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation, Dryzek O., 2002, Deliberative Democracy and Beyond, Eizenhardt K. M., 1985, Management Science, V31, P134 Roach Michael, 2010, RESEARCH POLICY, V39, P422 Mudambi Ram, 2007, JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT, V24, P442 Garfield E, 2006, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V295, P90 HOLMSTROM B, 1991, JOURNAL OF LAW ECONOMICS & ORGANIZATION, V7, P24 Ethiraj Sendil K., 2009, ORGANIZATION SCIENCE, V20, P4 Lane Julia, 2010, NATURE, V464, P488 Ackermann B. A., 2004, Deliberation Day, Hargreaves Heap S. P, 2002, Science Bought and Sold: Essays in the Economics of Science, P387 Marginson S., 2000, The Enterprise University: Power, Governance and Reinvention in Australia, Adler R., 2008, Report from the International Mathematical Union (IMU) in cooperation with the International Council of Industrial and Applied Mathematics (ICIAM) and the Institute of Mathematical Statistics (IMS), Donovan C., 2007, Science and Public Policy, V34, P585 Gerhart B., 2003, Compensation: Theory, Evidence, and Strategic Implications, Heilig Julian Vasquez, 2008, EDUCATIONAL EVALUATION AND POLICY ANALYSIS, V30, P75 Schweitzer ME, 2004, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V47, P422 Fishkin J., 1991, Democracy and Deliberation, Lazear Edward P., 2007, JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES, V21, P91 Miller CC, 2006, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V49, P425 Hamermesh Daniel S., 2007, CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS-REVUE CANADIENNE D ECONOMIQUE, V40, P715 Shanghai Jiao Tong University, 2007, Academic Ranking of World Universities, LINDSEY D, 1991, SCIENTOMETRICS, V22, P313 Sorenson O, 2004, RESEARCH POLICY, V33, P1615 Holcombe Randall G., 2004, ECON JOURNAL WATCH, V1, P498 PETERS DP, 1982, BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES, V5, P187 Mahoney M. J., 1977, Cognitive Therapy Research, V1, P161 Willmott H, 2003, STUDIES IN HIGHER EDUCATIONHigher-Education Close-Up Conference, JUL 06-08, 1998, LANCASTER, ENGLAND, V28, P129 CICCHETTI DV, 1991, BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES, V14, P119 Arrow K., 1962, The Rate and Direction of Scientific Activity: Economic and Societal Factors, P609 Weller A. C., 2001, Editorial Peer Review: Its Strengths and Weaknesses, Kuhn Thomas S, 1962, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Adler Nancy J., 2009, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT LEARNING & EDUCATION, V8, P72 EARLEY PC, 1989, JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, V74, P24 Bedeian AG, 2003, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT INQUIRY, V12, P331 OUCHI WG, 1977, ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCE QUARTERLY, V22, P95 Gagne M, 2005, JOURNAL OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR, V26, P331 Franzoni C., 2010, Working paper, Perrin B, 1998, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EVALUATION, V19, P367 Habermas Juergen, 2006, COMMUNICATION THEORY, V16, P411 Singh Gangaram, 2007, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT INQUIRY, V16, P319 Duxbury N., 1999, Random Justice: On Lotteries and Legal Decision Making, DASGUPTA P, 1994, RESEARCH POLICY, V23, P487 Amabile T. M., 1996, Creativity in Context: Update to the Social Psychology of Creativity, Kotiaho JS, 1999, NATURE, V400, P307 Bedeian Arthur G., 2004, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT LEARNING & EDUCATION, V3, P198 Emery F. E., 1989, Toward Real Democracy and Toward Real Democracy: Further Problems, Starbuck WH, 2005, ORGANIZATION SCIENCE, V16, P180 Worrell Dan L., 2009, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT LEARNING & EDUCATION, V8, P127 Hayek F. A., 1979, Law, Legislation and Liberty, Volume 3: The Political Order of a Free People, V3, Donoghue F, 2008, LAST PROFESSORS: THE TWILIGHT OF THE HUMANITIES IN THE CORPORATE UNIVERSITY, P1 Nelson RR, 2004, RESEARCH POLICY, V33, P455 Brezis E. S., 2007, Science and Public Policy, V2007, P691 Burnheim J., 1985, Is Democracy Possible? The Alternative to Electoral Politics, Garfield E, 1997, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V314, P1765 GOTTFREDSON SD, 1978, AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGIST, V33, P920 Todd P., 2008, Ethics Sci. Environ. Polit., V8, P13 Fishkin J., 2005, The Deliberative Democracy Handbook: Strategies for Effective Civic Engagement in the Twenty-First Century, P80 Frey B, 1997, Not just for the money. An economic theory of personal motivation, Van Raan AFJ, 2005, SCIENTOMETRICSConference on Bibliometric Analysis in Science and Research, NOV 05-07, 2003, Julich, GERMANY, V62, P133 Frey B. S., 2006, Review of International Organizations, V1, P27 Eizenberger R., 1996, American Psychologist, V51, P1153 Lawrence PA, 2003, NATURE, V422, P259 Campanario JM, 1996, SCIENTOMETRICS, V37, P3 Taylor M., 2008, Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, V8, P17 Dowlen O., 2008, The Political Potential of Sortition: A Study of the Random Selection of Citizens for Public Office, ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339933800008 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Performance analysis of scientific researchers in biomedicine Authors: Gamba, G Author Full Names: Gamba, Gerardo Source: REVISTA DE INVESTIGACION CLINICA, 65 (5):420-435; SEP-OCT 2013 Language: Spanish Document Type: Article Author Keywords: h-index, Impact factor, Publications, Author, Citation KeyWords Plus: IMPACT FACTOR Abstract: Background. There is no data about the performance of scientific researchers in biomedicine in our environment that can be use by individual subjects to compare their execution with their pairs. Material and methods. Using the Scopus browser the following data from 115 scientific researchers in biomedicine were obtained: actual institution, number of articles published, place on each article within the author list as first, last or unique author, total number of citations, percentage of citations due to the most cited paper, and h-index. Results were analyzed with descriptive statistics and simple lineal regressions. Results. Most of scientific researches in the sample are from the National Institutes of the Health Ministry or some of the research institutes or faculties at the Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico. Total number of publications was < 50 in 26%, from 50 to 100 in 36.5%, from 101 to 150 in 18.2%, from 151 to 200 in 9.5%, and more than 200 papers in 9.5%. The researcher was considered to be the main author, by being the first, the last or the unique author, from the 22 to 91% of the papers, with 75% being main author in more than 50% of the manuscripts. Total citations varied from 240 to 10,866. There is a significant correlation between the number of papers and citations, with R2 of 0.46. In the most cited paper, the researchers were considered the main author in 43%. The h-index varied from 7 to 57. Eight researchers had h-index of less than 10. Most are between 11 and 20, 25% are between 21 and 0 and only 10.4% had an h-index of more than 30. There is a significant correlation between number of published papers and h-index, with R2 of 0.57. Conclusions. This work provides an analysis of scientific publications in a sample of 115 scientific researchers in biomedicine in Mexico City, which can be used to compare the productivity of individual subjects with their pairs. Addresses: [Gamba, Gerardo] Inst Nacl Ciencias Med & Nutr Salvador Zubiran, Inst Nacl Salud, Mexico City 14080, DF, Mexico. [Gamba, Gerardo] Inst Nacl Ciencias Med & Nutr Salvador Zubiran, Unidad Fisiol Mol, Mexico City 14080, DF, Mexico. [Gamba, Gerardo] Univ Nacl Autonoma Mexico, Inst Invest Biomed, Mexico City 04510, DF, Mexico. E-mail Addresses: gamba at biomedicas.unam.mx Cited Reference Count: 6 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: INST NACIONAL NUTRICION, VASCO DE QUIROZA 15, COLONIA SECCION XVI, TLALPAN, MEXICO 14000 D F, MEXICO ISSN: 0034-8376 Web of Science Categories: Medicine, General & Internal Research Areas: General & Internal Medicine IDS Number: AM5XH Unique ID: WOS:000339933800008 Cited References: Lipsky Peter E., 2007, NATURE CLINICAL PRACTICE RHEUMATOLOGY, V3, P189 Siegel Rebecca, 2013, CA-A CANCER JOURNAL FOR CLINICIANS, V63, P11 Xu BE, 2000, JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY, V275, P16795 Wilson FH, 2001, SCIENCE, V293, P1107 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Alberts Bruce, 2013, SCIENCE, V340, P787 *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339781600012 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Should Self-Citation of Articles Be Penalized? Authors: Garcia-Pachon, E; Padilla-Navas, I Author Full Names: Garcia-Pachon, Eduardo; Padilla-Navas, Isabel Source: ARCHIVOS DE BRONCONEUMOLOGIA, 50 (8):372-372; 10.1016/j.arbres.2014.02.012 AUG 2014 Language: Spanish Document Type: Letter Addresses: [Garcia-Pachon, Eduardo; Padilla-Navas, Isabel] Hosp Gen Univ, Secc Neumol, Elche, Spain. E-mail Addresses: egpachon at gmail.com Cited Reference Count: 5 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: EDICIONES DOYMA S A, TRAV DE GRACIA 17-21, 08021 BARCELONA, SPAIN ISSN: 0300-2896 eISSN: 1579-2129 Web of Science Categories: Respiratory System Research Areas: Respiratory System IDS Number: AM3VT Unique ID: WOS:000339781600012 Cited References: Garcia-Pachon E, 2013, Arch Bronconeumol, Garcia-Pachon Eduardo, 2014, MEDICINA CLINICA, V142, P226 Bartneck Christoph, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V87, P85 De Granda-Orive JI, 2013, Autocitacion: ?debemos penalizarla. Arch Bronconeumol, Sielbelt M, 2010, BMC Musculoskelet Dis., V11, P4 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339470600022 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Systematic reviews on reports of hip fractures in Web of Science: a bibliometric analysis of publication activity Authors: Mao, Z; Wang, GQ; Mei, XF; Chen, S; Liu, XX; Zeng, XT; Long, AH; Zhang, LC; Zhang, LH; Tang, PF Author Full Names: Mao Zhi; Wang Guoqi; Mei Xifan; Chen Shuo; Liu Xiaoxie; Zeng Xiantao; Long Anhua; Zhang Licheng; Zhang Lihai; Tang Peifu Source: CHINESE MEDICAL JOURNAL, 127 (13):2518-2522; 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0366-6999.20132111 JUL 5 2014 Language: English Document Type: Review Author Keywords: hip fracture, evidence-based medicine, systematic review, meta-analysis, bibliometrics KeyWords Plus: BONE-MINERAL DENSITY; CHINA CONTRIBUTION; UNITED-STATES; GROWING TREND; HEALTH-CARE; METAANALYSIS; ORTHOPEDICS; JOURNALS; SURGERY; PUBLISH Abstract: Background The objective of this study was to analyze the trend in the publication of systematic reviews on hip fractures through a bibliometric approach. Methods Literature including systematic reviews or meta-analyses on hip fractures was searched from the ISI Web of Science citation database. The search results were analyzed in terms of geographical authorship and frequency of citation by country, institution, author, and periodical distribution. Results A total of 654 published systematic reviews from 1995 to 2013 in 48 countries or regions were retrieved. The United States (171) was the predominant country in terms of the number of total publications, followed by the United Kingdom (149), Canada (120), Australia (76), and China (54). The number of systematic reviews significantly increased during the last 6 years, especially in China. The production ranking changed in 2012, at which time the United States and China were the leaders in the yearly production of systematic reviews on hip fractures. The amount of literature (27 publications) from China contributed almost one-quarter of the total literature (109 publications) in 2012. However, the average number of citations of each article from China was still low (6.70), while the highest number of citations of each article was from Sweden (193.36). The references were published in 239 different journals, with 15 journals contributing to 41.3% of the systematic reviews on hip fractures. The two journals that contributed the most were Osteoporosis International (10.6%) and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (7.6%). The predominant institution in terms of the number of publications was McMaster University (36) in Canada. Conclusions The best evidence in the field of hip fractures has attracted increasing attention. Systematic reviews on hip fractures from China have been increasingly more frequent during the past 6 years, particularly in 2012. Addresses: [Mao Zhi; Wang Guoqi; Mei Xifan; Long Anhua; Zhang Licheng; Tang Peifu] Chinese Peoples Liberat Army Gen Hosp, Dept Orthoped, Beijing 100853, Peoples R China. [Chen Shuo] Chinese Peoples Liberat Army Gen Hosp, Dept Med Informat, Beijing 100853, Peoples R China. [Liu Xiaoxie] Chinese Peoples Liberat Army Gen Hosp, Rehabil Med Ctr, Beijing 100853, Peoples R China. [Zhang Lihai] Chinese Peoples Liberat Army Gen Hosp, Dept Orthopaed Trauma, Beijing 100853, Peoples R China. [Mei Xifan] Liaoning Med Univ, Affiliated Hosp 1, Dept Orthoped, Jinzhou 121000, Liaoning, Peoples R China. [Zeng Xiantao] Hubei Univ Med, Taihe Hosp, Evidence Based Med Ctr, Shiyan 442000, Hubei, Peoples R China. E-mail Addresses: pftang301 at sina.com Cited Reference Count: 24 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: CHINESE MEDICAL ASSOC, 42 DONGSI XIDAJIE, BEIJING 100710, PEOPLES R CHINA ISSN: 0366-6999 Web of Science Categories: Medicine, General & Internal Research Areas: General & Internal Medicine IDS Number: AL9OM Unique ID: WOS:000339470600022 Cited References: Kelly J. C., 2010, JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-BRITISH VOLUME, V92B, P1338 Zhang Wen-Jun, 2012, ANNALS OF PLASTIC SURGERY, V68, P328 Liberati Alessandro, 2009, ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, V151, PW65 Bastian Hilda, 2010, PLOS MEDICINE, V7, Alberts Bruce, 2013, SCIENCE, V340, P787 Franzoni Chiara, 2011, SCIENCE, V333, P702 Wang C. -L., 2007, OSTEOPOROSIS INTERNATIONAL, V18, P295 Bosker BH, 2006, JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-BRITISH VOLUME, V88B, P156 Smith R., 2008, JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-BRITISH VOLUME, V90B, P125 Bischoff-Ferrari Heike A., 2012, NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, V367, P40 Burge Russel, 2007, JOURNAL OF BONE AND MINERAL RESEARCH, V22, P465 Li Zhi, 2010, JOURNAL OF TRAUMA-INJURY INFECTION AND CRITICAL CARE, V69, PE20 Meneghini R. Michael, 2011, ORTHOPEDICS, V34, PE245 Murad M. Hassan, 2013, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V309, P2217 Cheng T., 2012, ORTHOPAEDICS & TRAUMATOLOGY-SURGERY & RESEARCH, V98, P253 Cheng Tao, 2010, JOURNAL OF RHEUMATOLOGY, V37, P2390 Marshall D, 1996, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V312, P1254 Rushton N, 2001, Journal of orthopaedic science : official journal of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association, V6, P208 COOK DJ, 1995, JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGYPotsdam International Consultation on Meta-Analysis, MAR, 1994, POTSDAM, GERMANY, V48, P167 Migaud H., 2012, ORTHOPAEDICS & TRAUMATOLOGY-SURGERY & RESEARCH, V98, P251 Ioannidis John P. A., 2007, JOURNAL OF BONE AND MINERAL RESEARCH, V22, P173 Moher David, 2007, PLOS MEDICINE, V4, P447 Johnell O, 2004, OSTEOPOROSIS INTERNATIONAL, V15, P897 Bhandari M, 2006, INJURY-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THE CARE OF THE INJURED, V37, P301 ======================================================================== ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339952300006 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: The long-term influence of collaboration on citation patterns Authors: Gazni, A; Thelwall, M Author Full Names: Gazni, Ali; Thelwall, Mike Source: RESEARCH EVALUATION, 23 (3):261-271; 10.1093/reseval/rvu014 JUL 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: scientific collaboration, collaboration strategies, collaborative networks, organization of science KeyWords Plus: SCIENTIFIC COLLABORATION; AUTHOR DISAMBIGUATION; COCITATION NETWORKS; KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER; SOCIAL-STRUCTURE; INFORMATION USE; IMPACT FACTOR; SCIENCE; SPECIALTIES; COAUTHORSHIP Abstract: This study assesses the long-term impact of collaboration in terms of the extent to which collaborators cite each other's works and cite the same publications as each other. The results are based on coauthorship of academic articles during 1990-2010. Although the number of citations to, and common references with, collaborators both increase as the number of collaborators increases over time, these differ between collaborators. For example, many authors do not cite their collaborators and many collaborators do not cite any of the same references as each other. In contrast, many authors cite their collaborators extensively and many collaborators have many of the same references as each other. The extent of citing collaborators and citing the same references as cited by collaborators varies with the impact of the collaborators. These widely different properties may reflect some collaborators working in completely different research areas, others working in the same broad research area, and still others working within a narrow research area. Alternatively, some collaborators may learn from or monitor each other while others do not. Addresses: [Gazni, Ali] ISC, Shiraz, Iran. [Thelwall, Mike] Wolverhampton Univ, Stat Cybermetr Res Grp, Wolverhampton WV1 1LY, W Midlands, England. E-mail Addresses: ali.gazni at isc.gov.ir Cited Reference Count: 69 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: OXFORD UNIV PRESS, GREAT CLARENDON ST, OXFORD OX2 6DP, ENGLAND ISSN: 0958-2029 eISSN: 1471-5449 Web of Science Categories: Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: AM6DL Unique ID: WOS:000339952300006 Cited References: Kanani P., 2007, Proceedings of AAAI 2007 Workshop on Information Integration on the Web, P38 Marshall S., 2007, Report to the Higher Education Funding Council for England, CRANE D, 1969, AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW, V34, P335 Reuther P., 2006, International Journal of Metadata, Semantics and Ontologies, V1, Porac JF, 2004, RESEARCH POLICY, V33, P661 Blondel Vincent D., 2008, JOURNAL OF STATISTICAL MECHANICS-THEORY AND EXPERIMENT, Lambert R, 2003, Lambert Review of Business-university Collaboration: Final Report, Morris Steven A., 2008, ANNUAL REVIEW OF INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V42, P213 Reagans R, 2003, ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCE QUARTERLY, V48, P240 Katz JS, 1997, RESEARCH POLICY, V26, P1 Smalheiser N. R., 2009, Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, V43, P1 Yan Erjia, 2011, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V62, P1498 SMITH LC, 1981, LIBRARY TRENDS, V30, P83 STOKES TD, 1989, SOCIAL STUDIES OF SCIENCE, V19, P101 Didegah Fereshteh, 2011, LEARNED PUBLISHING, V24, P303 Laudel G, 2002, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V11, P3 RIESENBERG D, 1990, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V264, P1857 Zhang Lin, 2010, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS1st Joint ASIS&T/ISS Conference Seminar 2009, NOV07, 2009, Vancouver, CANADA, V4, P185 Singh J, 2005, MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, V51, P756 Tijssen RJW, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS8th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators, SEP 23-25, 2004, Leiden, NETHERLANDS, V66, P55 Maglaughlin K. L., 2005, Proceedings of the Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Stockholm, Sweden, P499 Gazni Ali, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V87, P251 Bermeo Andrade Helga, 2009, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V18, P301 Yan Erjia, 2013, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V7, P249 Bigdeli Zahed, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P505 Rinia EJ, 2002, SCIENTOMETRICS, V54, P347 Wilson T. D., 2006, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V62, P658 Burright MA, 2005, COLLEGE & RESEARCH LIBRARIES, V66, P198 GRIFFITH BC, 1971, SCIENCE, V173, P164 Wuchty Stefan, 2007, SCIENCE, V316, P1036 Fuchs Beth E., 2006, COLLEGE & RESEARCH LIBRARIES, V67, P304 Kang In-Su, 2009, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V45, P84 Franceschet Massimo, 2010, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V4, P540 Defazio Daniela, 2009, RESEARCH POLICY, V38, P293 Ohniwa RL, 2004, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V13, P175 Wilson P, 1996, LIBRARY TRENDS, V45, P192 Bigdeli Z., 2012, Scientometrics, V96, P1 Thagard P, 1997, NOUS, V31, P242 Schrage M., 1995, No More Teams!: Mastering the Dynamics of Creative Collaboration, Wallace Matthew L., 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P240 Rinia EJ, 2001, SCIENTOMETRICS6th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators, MAY 24-27, 2000, LEIDEN, NETHERLANDS, V51, P293 Fleming Lee, 2007, ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCE QUARTERLY, V52, P443 Kuruppu Pali U., 2008, PORTAL-LIBRARIES AND THE ACADEMY, V8, P387 BRODY S, 1995, LANCET, V346, P1300 Song Yang, 2007, PROCEEDINGS OF THE 7TH ACM/IEE JOINT CONFERENCE ON DIGITAL LIBRARIES7th ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries, JUN 18-23, 2007, Vancouver, CANADA, P342 Levin Michael, 2012, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V63, P1030 Liu Yuxian, 2013, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V7, P651 Price D. D. S., 1986, Little Science, Big Science and Beyond, Lambiotte R., 2009, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V3, P180 Bakshy E., 2012, Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on World Wide Web, P519 Ahuja G, 2000, ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCE QUARTERLY, V45, P425 Bilenko Mikhail, 2006, ICDM 2006: Sixth International Conference on Data Mining, Proceedings6th IEEE International Conference on Data Mining, DEC 18-22, 2006, Hong Kong, PEOPLES R CHINA, P87 Krugman P. R., 1991, Geography and Trade, Levitt Jonathan M., 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V85, P171 Adams Jonathan, 2012, NATURE, V490, P335 Yan Erjia, 2012, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V63, P1313 Mattsson Pauline, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V87, P99 Torvik VI, 2005, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V56, P140 Wallace Matthew L., 2012, PLOS ONE, V7, McRae-Spencer D. M., 2006, Proceedings of the 6th ACM/IEEE-CS joint conference on Digital libraries, P53 Johnson Ben, 2007, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V63, P609 Sonnenwald Diane H., 2007, ANNUAL REVIEW OF INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V41, P643 Jassawalla AR, 1998, JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT, V15, P237 Soler Jose M., 2007, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V1, P123 Didegah Fereshteh, 2013, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V7, P861 Culotta A., 2007, Sixth International Workshop on Information Integration on the Web (IIWeb-07), Vancouver, Canada, Moya-Anegon Felix, 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V97, P421 Kurmis AP, 2006, ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, V13, P77 Goldfinch S, 2003, SCIENTOMETRICS, V57, P321 ======================================================================== ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339873900009 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Bibliometric analysis of research on secondary organic aerosols: Update Authors: Li, JF; Zhang, YH; Herjavic, G; Wine, PH; Klasinc, L Author Full Names: Li, Jinfeng; Zhang, Yuanhang; Herjavic, Glenda; Wine, Paul H.; Klasinc, Leo Source: PURE AND APPLIED CHEMISTRY, 86 (7):1169-1175; 10.1515/pac-2014-0204 JUL 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: bibliometrics, carbon compounds, environmental chemistry, IUPAC Congress-44, oxidation, photodegradation, research trends, secondary organic aerosol, word cluster analysis KeyWords Plus: PEARL RIVER DELTA; IDENTIFICATION; ISOPRENE; INDEX; CHINA Abstract: This study was conceived to evaluate the global scientific output of secondary organic aerosol (SOA) research and to assess the characteristics of the research patterns, tendencies, and methods in the papers. Data were based on the online version of Science Citation Index Expanded from 1990 to 2013. Publications referring to SOA were assessed by distribution of the number of publications and times cited, source journals, h-index, and the most cited publications in these years. By synthetic analysis of author keywords, KeyWords Plus, titles, and abstracts, it was concluded that modeling is currently and will at least over the next decade continue to be the predominant research method to validate state-of-the-art knowledge of SOA, and that the foci of SOA research will be the key precursors terpenes, isoprene, and dicarbonyls; the mechanisms of oxidation and aqueous-phase reactions; emission inventories; and chemical composition. Recent years show growing interest for research on health effects. Addresses: [Herjavic, Glenda; Klasinc, Leo] Rudjer Boskovic Inst, Zagreb, Croatia. [Li, Jinfeng; Zhang, Yuanhang] Peking Univ, Coll Environm Sci & Engn, Beijing 100871, Peoples R China. [Li, Jinfeng] China Inst Atom Energy, Dept Radiat Safety, Beijing, Peoples R China. [Wine, Paul H.] Georgia Inst Technol, Sch Chem & Biochem, Atlanta, GA 30332 USA. [Wine, Paul H.] Georgia Inst Technol, Sch Earth & Atmospher Sci, Atlanta, GA 30332 USA. E-mail Addresses: klasinc at irb.hr Funding Acknowledgement: Chemistry and the Environment Division of the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry [2012-028-2-600] Funding Text: This study was supported by the Chemistry and the Environment Division of the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (No. 2012-028-2-600). Discussions with Dr. Weiwei Hu, Dr. Song Guo, Dr. Yunpeng Li and Prof. Yuh-shan Ho are gratefully acknowledged. Cited Reference Count: 17 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: WALTER DE GRUYTER GMBH, GENTHINER STRASSE 13, D-10785 BERLIN, GERMANY ISSN: 0033-4545 eISSN: 1365-3075 Web of Science Categories: Chemistry, Multidisciplinary Research Areas: Chemistry IDS Number: AM5CS Unique ID: WOS:000339873900009 Cited References: Kanakidou M, 2005, ATMOSPHERIC CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS, V5, P1053 Lin Ying-Hsuan, 2013, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V110, P6718 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Grosjean D., 1976, Abstracts Papers of the American Chemical Society, V1, P2 Baltensperger Urs, 2008, JOURNAL OF AEROSOL MEDICINE AND PULMONARY DRUG DELIVERY, V21, P145 Wang Siyuan, 2013, JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-ATMOSPHERES, V118, P507 ROGGE WF, 1993, ATMOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENT PART A-GENERAL TOPICS4TH INTERNATIONAL CONF ON CARBONACEOUS PARTICLES IN THE ATMOSPHERE, APR 03-05, 1991, VIENNA, AUSTRIA, V27, P1309 TURPIN BJ, 1995, ATMOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENT, V29, P3527 von Stackelberg Katherine, 2013, ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH, V12, Solomon Paul A., 2008, JOURNAL OF THE AIR & WASTE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION, V58, PS3 Li Jinfeng, 2013, PURE AND APPLIED CHEMISTRY, V85, P1241 Hallquist M., 2009, ATMOSPHERIC CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS, V9, P5155 Li Nan, 2013, ATMOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENT, V76, P200 Kalberer M, 2004, SCIENCE, V303, P1659 Jiang Fei, 2012, JOURNAL OF AEROSOL SCIENCE, V43, P57 Pernigotti D., 2013, AIR QUALITY ATMOSPHERE AND HEALTH, V6, P701 PANDIS SN, 1992, ATMOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENT PART A-GENERAL TOPICS, V26, P2269 ======================================================================= 47. *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339480400025 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: A Century of Citation Classics in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Journals Revisited Authors: Coelho, DH; Edelmayer, LW; Fenton, JE Author Full Names: Coelho, Daniel H.; Edelmayer, Luke W.; Fenton, John E. Source: LARYNGOSCOPE, 124 (6):1358-1362; 10.1002/lary.24573 JUN 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: Citation analysis, otorhinolaryngology, bibliometrics, citation classics, publication KeyWords Plus: BIAS Abstract: Objectives/Hypothesis: Citation classics have traditionally been defined in the smaller medical specialties as any article published in a peer-reviewed journal that has received 100 or more citations from other articles also published in peer-reviewed journals. This study aimed to determine patterns of citation classics changes in the medical field otorhinolaryngology and head and neck surgery (OHNS) over the past decade and serves as a follow-up to an original study published in 2002, "A Century of Citation Classics in Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery." Study Design: Bibliometric analysis. Methods: Using the Journal Citation Reports and Web of Science, OHNS journals were selected and assessed for the content of citation classics. Results: Nine-hundred five citation classics were found, over 11-fold more than 1 decade prior. Other significant changes were seen in country of origin, decade of publication, number of authors per article, subspecialty of article, and most frequently discussed topics. Conclusions: The dramatic rise in quantity and nature of citation classics in the past decade may be due to unprecedented advancements in information technology and communication, allowing studies and experiments to be performed, written, reviewed, published, and cited at rapid rates. Addresses: [Coelho, Daniel H.; Edelmayer, Luke W.] Virginia Commonwealth Univ, Dept Otolaryngol Head & Neck Surg, Richmond, VA 23298 USA. [Fenton, John E.] Univ Limerick, Univ Hosp Limerick, Dept Otolaryngol Head & Neck Surg, Limerick, Ireland. Univ Limerick, Grad Entry Med Sch, Limerick, Ireland. E-mail Addresses: dcoelho at mcvh-vcu.edu Cited Reference Count: 11 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: WILEY-BLACKWELL, 111 RIVER ST, HOBOKEN 07030-5774, NJ USA ISSN: 0023-852X eISSN: 1531-4995 Web of Science Categories: Medicine, Research & Experimental; Otorhinolaryngology Research Areas: Research & Experimental Medicine; Otorhinolaryngology IDS Number: AL9SF Unique ID: WOS:000339480400025 Cited References: Picknett T, 1999, JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR BIOLOGY, V293, P173 Larsen Peder Olesen, 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V84, P575 Fenton JE, 2002, JOURNAL OF LARYNGOLOGY AND OTOLOGY9th Meeting of the British-Society-of-History-of-ENT, SEP, 2001, BIRMINGHAM, ENGLAND, V116, P494 HOUSE JW, 1985, OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD AND NECK SURGERY, V93, P146 Narin F, 1976, Remacle M, 2000, EUROPEAN ARCHIVES OF OTO-RHINO-LARYNGOLOGY, V257, P227 Meltzer EO, 2004, OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD AND NECK SURGERY, V131, PS1 GARFIELD E, 1977, CURRENT CONTENTS, P5 Link AM, 1998, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION3rd International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication, SEP, 1997, PRAGUE, CZECH REPUBLIC, V280, P246 DUBIN D, 1993, ARCHIVES OF DERMATOLOGY, V129, P1121 CAMPBELL FM, 1990, BULLETIN OF THE MEDICAL LIBRARY ASSOCIATION, V78, P376 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339852300001 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Voting with Their Feet: In Which Journals Do the Most Prolific Finance Researchers Publish? Authors: Danielson, MG; Heck, JL Author Full Names: Danielson, Morris G.; Heck, Jean L. Source: FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, 43 (1):1-27; 10.1111/fima.12025 SPR 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article KeyWords Plus: RANKING Abstract: The financial economics literature has experienced rapid growth over the past 40 years, triggering a dramatic increase in the number of journals. We employ a new method to analyze the current pecking order of finance journals. Specifically, we analyze the publication records of prolific authors to provide evidence regarding the perceived quality of a set of 23 high-impact finance journals. Assuming these scholars target the "best" research outlets, their publication records can reveal information about their subjective rankings of the next-best alternatives to the traditional elite finance journals. The results suggest that prolific authors are most likely to target outlets that have raised their profile in recent years (e.g., Financial Management and Financial Analysts Journal) and new specialized finance journals (e.g., Journal of Financial Markets, Journal of Corporate Finance, and Journal of Financial Intermediation) when publishing outside the set of elite journals. Addresses: [Danielson, Morris G.; Heck, Jean L.] St Josephs Univ, Haub Sch Business, Philadelphia, PA 19131 USA. Cited Reference Count: 22 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: WILEY-BLACKWELL, 111 RIVER ST, HOBOKEN 07030-5774, NJ USA ISSN: 0046-3892 eISSN: 1755-053X Web of Science Categories: Business, Finance Research Areas: Business & Economics IDS Number: AM4UV Unique ID: WOS:000339852300001 Cited References: Griffiths M. D., 2005, Journal of Financial Education, V31, P1 MABRY RH, 1985, JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL RESEARCH, V8, P287 ALEXANDER JC, 1994, JOURNAL OF FINANCE, V49, P697 Zivney T. L., 1994, Financial Practice and Education, V4, P77 Borokhovich KA, 2000, JOURNAL OF FINANCE, V55, P1457 Borokhovich Kenneth A., 2011, JOURNAL OF BANKING & FINANCE, V35, P1 Chan K. C., 2000, Financial Practice and Education, V10, P132 Trimple S. W., 2010, Chronicle of Higher Education, V56, PA80 Engemann Kristie M., 2009, FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF ST LOUIS REVIEW, V91, P127 Heck J. L., 2005, Journal of Finance Literature, V1, P40 Oltheten E, 2005, JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL AND QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS, V40, P223 Keloharju Matti, 2008, EUROPEAN FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, V14, P564 Tanner G., 2000, Financial Practice and Education, V10, P123 Coe R. K., 1983, Journal of Financial Research, V6, P345 Heck J. L., 2010, Advances in Accounting, V26, P195 Fishe RPH, 1998, JOURNAL OF FINANCE, V53, P1053 Weston J. F., 1994, Financial Practice and Education, V4, P7 Corbett E. P. J., 1992, Journal of Advanced Composition, V12, P111 Wilhite Allen W., 2012, SCIENCE, V335, P542 Currie Russell R., 2011, JOURNAL OF BANKING & FINANCE, V35, P7 Chen Carl R., 2007, JOURNAL OF CORPORATE FINANCE, V13, P1008 Madura J., 1999, Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, V12, P89 ======================================================================== ======================================================================== ======================================================================== *Record 36 of 47. *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000338291000016 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Journalists' Self-regulation in Greece Authors: Psychogiopoulou, E; Kandyla, A; Anagnostou, D Author Full Names: Psychogiopoulou, Evangelia; Kandyla, Anna; Anagnostou, Dia Edited by: Psychogiopoulou E Source: MEDIA POLICIES REVISITED: THE CHALLENGE FOR MEDIA FREEDOM AND INDEPENDENCE, 220-233; 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article; Book Chapter Addresses: [Psychogiopoulou, Evangelia; Kandyla, Anna; Anagnostou, Dia] Hellen Fdn European & Foreign Policy, Athens, Greece. [Psychogiopoulou, Evangelia] Hellen Minist Culture & Sports, Athens, Greece. [Anagnostou, Dia] Pante Univ Social & Polit Sci, Athens, Greece. Cited Reference Count: 0 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: PALGRAVE, HOUNDMILLS, BASINGSTOKE RG21 6XS, ENGLAND ISBN: 978-1-137-33784-9; 978-1-137-33783-2 Book DOI: 10.1057/9781137337849 Web of Science Categories: Communication Research Areas: Communication IDS Number: BA8MI Unique ID: WOS:000338291000016 ======================================================================== *Record 37 of 47. *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339691200009 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Kierkegaard's Journals and Notebooks, vol 5 Authors: Petit, JF Author Full Names: Petit, Jean-Francois Source: REVUE DES SCIENCES PHILOSOPHIQUES ET THEOLOGIQUES, 98 (1):191-192; JAN-MAR 2014 Language: French Document Type: Book Review Cited Reference Count: 1 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: LIBRAIRIE PHILOS, J VRIN, 6 PLACE SORBONNE, 75005 PARIS, FRANCE ISSN: 0035-2209 Web of Science Categories: Philosophy; Religion Research Areas: Philosophy; Religion IDS Number: AM2OR Unique ID: WOS:000339691200009 Cited References: KIRMMSE BH, 2011, KIERKEGAARDS J NOTEB, V5, ======================================================================== *Record 38 of 47. *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339823800001 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Mathematical Model and Analysis of the Water-Lubricated Hydrostatic Journal Bearings considering the Translational and Tilting Motions Authors: Feng, HH; Xu, CD; Wan, J Author Full Names: Feng, Hui-Hui; Xu, Chun-Dong; Wan, Jie Source: MATHEMATICAL PROBLEMS IN ENGINEERING, 10.1155/2014/353769 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article KeyWords Plus: DYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS Abstract: The water-lubricated bearings have been paid attention for their advantages to reduce the power loss and temperature rise and increase load capacity at high speed. To fully study the complete dynamic coefficients of two water-lubricated, hydrostatic journal bearings used to support a rigid rotor, a four-degree-of-freedom model considering the translational and tilting motion is presented. The effects of tilting ratio, rotary speed, and eccentricity ratio on the static and dynamic performances of the bearings are investigated. The bulk turbulent Reynolds equation is adopted. The finite difference method and a linear perturbation method are used to calculate the zeroth- and first-order pressure fields to obtain the static and dynamic coefficients. The results suggest that when the tilting ratio is smaller than 0.4 or the eccentricity ratio is smaller than 0.1, the static and dynamic characteristics are relatively insensitive to the tilting and eccentricity ratios; however, for larger tilting or eccentricity ratios, the tilting and eccentric effects should be fully considered. Meanwhile, the rotary speed significantly affects the performance of the hydrostatic, water-lubricated bearings. Addresses: [Feng, Hui-Hui; Xu, Chun-Dong] Southeast Univ, Sch Mech Engn, Nanjing 211189, Jiangsu, Peoples R China. [Wan, Jie] CSR Qishuyan Inst Co Ltd, Changzhou 213011, Peoples R China. E-mail Addresses: fhhwjmail at 163.com Cited Reference Count: 18 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: HINDAWI PUBLISHING CORPORATION, 410 PARK AVENUE, 15TH FLOOR, #287 PMB, NEW YORK, NY 10022 USA ISSN: 1024-123X eISSN: 1563-5147 Article Number: 353769 Web of Science Categories: Engineering, Multidisciplinary; Mathematics, Interdisciplinary Applications Research Areas: Engineering; Mathematics IDS Number: AM4KQ Unique ID: WOS:000339823800001 Cited References: Frene J, 2006, TRIBOLOGY INTERNATIONAL4th AIMETA International Tribology Conference (AITC 2004), SEP 14-17, 2004, Rome, ITALY, V39, P734 HIRS GG, 1973, JOURNAL OF LUBRICATION TECHNOLOGY-TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASME, V95, P137 Jang Gunhee, 2006, TRIBOLOGY LETTERS, V22, P239 Ebrat O, 2004, TRIBOLOGY TRANSACTIONSSTLE/ASME Tribology Conference, OCT 27-29, 2003, Ponte Verda Beach, FL, V47, P94 Jang GH, 2002, MICROSYSTEM TECHNOLOGIES12th Annual Symposium on Information Storage and Processing Systems, JUN 28-29, 2001, SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA, V8, P261 Sharma Satish C., 2012, JOURNAL OF TRIBOLOGY-TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASME, V134, Liu Feng, 2008, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PRECISION ENGINEERING AND MANUFACTURING, V9, P47 Gao Gengyuan, 2014, TRIBOLOGY INTERNATIONAL, V75, P31 Corbett J., 1998, CIRP Annals: Manufacturing Technology, V47, P467 Yoshimoto S, 1998, TRIBOLOGY INTERNATIONAL, V31, P331 Jain SC, 1997, WEAR, V210, P67 Khonsari M. M., 2008, Applied Tribology, [Anonymous], 2006, Proceedings of IJTC, STLE/ASME International Joint Tribology Conference, October, 2006, San Antonio, Tex, USA, P391 Nakano S., 2009, International Journal of Rotating Machinery, V2009, Bassani R, 2006, TRIBOLOGY INTERNATIONAL4th AIMETA International Tribology Conference (AITC 2004), SEP 14-17, 2004, Rome, ITALY, V39, P827 SANANDRES L, 1995, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL SCIENCES, V37, P815 Kim Hakwoon, 2011, MICROSYSTEM TECHNOLOGIES-MICRO-AND NANOSYSTEMS-INFORMATION STORAGE AND PROCESSING SYSTEMS20th ASME Annual Conference on Information Storage and Processing Systems (ISPS), JUN 14-15, 2010, Santa Clara, CA, V17, P749 Feng Huihui, 2013, FRONTIERS OF MANUFACTURING SCIENCE AND MEASURING TECHNOLOGY III, PTS 1-33rd International Conference on Frontiers of Manufacturing Science and Measuring Technology (ICFMM 2013), JUL 30-31, 2013, LiJiang, PEOPLES R CHINA, V401, P121 ======================================================================== ======================================================================== *Record 43 of 47. *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339728300023 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Identification of "hot spots" of the science of catalysis: bibliometric and thematic analysis of nowaday reviews and monographs Authors: Zibareva, IV; Parmon, VN Author Full Names: Zibareva, I. V.; Parmon, V. N. Source: RUSSIAN CHEMICAL BULLETIN, 62 (10):2266-2278; 10.1007/s11172-013-0329-1 OCT 2013 Language: English Document Type: Review Author Keywords: catalysis, bibliometric analysis, thematic analysis, Chemical Abstracts Plus database on the SciFinder platform KeyWords Plus: CROSS-COUPLING REACTIONS; ASYMMETRIC CATALYSIS; BIODIESEL PRODUCTION; FUEL-CELLS; METAL; PERSPECTIVES; MECHANISM; WATER; ORGANOCATALYSIS; PHOTOCATALYSIS Abstract: Bibliometric and thematic analyses were performed for more than 11 thousand reviews and monographs in catalysis registered in the Chemical Abstracts Plus database on the SciFinder platform from April, 2011, to December, 2012, with the aim to elucidate the hot spots of this area. The identified spots include photo- and electrocatalysis; stereoselective (bio-) catalysis; catalytic functionalization of organic compounds; catalysis by nanostructured, in particular, graphene-based materials; catalytic production of biofuel; and application of catalysis in novel energy technologies. Addresses: [Zibareva, I. V.; Parmon, V. N.] Russian Acad Sci, Siberian Branch, GK Boreskov Inst Catalysis, Novosibirsk 630090, Russia. [Zibareva, I. V.; Parmon, V. N.] Novosibirsk State Univ, Natl Res Univ, Novosibirsk 630090, Russia. E-mail Addresses: zibareva at catalysis.ru Funding Acknowledgement: Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences (interdisciplinary integration Project) [37] Funding Text: This work was financially supported by the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences (interdisciplinary integration Project No. 37). Cited Reference Count: 138 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: SPRINGER, 233 SPRING ST, NEW YORK, NY 10013 USA ISSN: 1066-5285 eISSN: 1573-9171 Web of Science Categories: Chemistry, Multidisciplinary Research Areas: Chemistry IDS Number: AM3CD Unique ID: WOS:000339728300023 Cited References: Carlos Serrano-Ruiz Juan, 2011, ENERGY & ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE, V4, P83 Tomashenko Olesya A., 2011, CHEMICAL REVIEWS, V111, P4475 Loges Bjoern, 2010, TOPICS IN CATALYSIS, V53, P902 Leung Dennis Y. C., 2010, APPLIED ENERGY, V87, P1083 Narayanam Jagan M. R., 2011, CHEMICAL SOCIETY REVIEWS, V40, P102 Pedrycz Witold, 2011, WILEY INTERDISCIPLINARY REVIEWS-DATA MINING AND KNOWLEDGE DISCOVERY, V1, P1 Linic Suljo, 2011, NATURE MATERIALS, V10, P911 Wencel-Delord Joanna, 2011, CHEMICAL SOCIETY REVIEWS, V40, P4740 Sun Yiqing, 2011, ENERGY & ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE, V4, P1113 Zhang Yan, 2012, CHEMICAL REVIEWS, V112, P2467 Biermann Ursula, 2011, ANGEWANDTE CHEMIE-INTERNATIONAL EDITION, V50, P3854 Engle Keary M., 2012, ACCOUNTS OF CHEMICAL RESEARCH, V45, P788 Zhou Kebin, 2012, ANGEWANDTE CHEMIE-INTERNATIONAL EDITION, V51, P602 2011, International Assessment of Research and Development in Catalysis by Nanostructured Materials, Johnson Tarn C., 2010, CHEMICAL SOCIETY REVIEWS, V39, P81 Shao Zhihui, 2012, CHEMICAL SOCIETY REVIEWS, V41, P560 Wendlandt Alison E., 2011, ANGEWANDTE CHEMIE-INTERNATIONAL EDITION, V50, P11062 Suzuki Akira, 2011, ANGEWANDTE CHEMIE-INTERNATIONAL EDITION, V50, P6722 Tessonnier Jean-Philippe, 2011, CHEMSUSCHEM, V4, P824 Artero Vincent, 2011, ANGEWANDTE CHEMIE-INTERNATIONAL EDITION, V50, P7238 Aguado-Monsonet M. A., 1998, Use of Bibliometrics as a Technology Watch Technique. Application to the Analysis in the Recent Development of the Photocatalysis, Huang Xiao, 2012, CHEMICAL SOCIETY REVIEWS, V41, P666 Busacca Carl A., 2011, ADVANCED SYNTHESIS & CATALYSIS, V353, P1825 Albrecht Lukasz, 2011, ANGEWANDTE CHEMIE-INTERNATIONAL EDITION, V50, P8492 Shi Zhuangzhi, 2012, CHEMICAL SOCIETY REVIEWS, V41, P3381 Knowles Robert R., 2010, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V107, P20678 Zhou Yingke, 2010, ENERGY & ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE, V3, P1437 Arvanitis R, 2001, INTERNATIONAL SOCIAL SCIENCE JOURNAL, V53, P201 Monsaert Stijn, 2009, CHEMICAL SOCIETY REVIEWS, V38, P3360 Li Hu, 2011, CATALYSIS SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, V1, P191 Zhang Chun, 2012, CHEMICAL SOCIETY REVIEWS, V41, P3464 Todres Z. V., 1983, Khimiya i Zhizn'Chemistry and Life, V11, P84 Dau Holger, 2010, CHEMCATCHEM, V2, P724 Peng Zhenmeng, 2009, NANO TODAY, V4, P143 Henderson Michael A., 2011, SURFACE SCIENCE REPORTS, V66, P185 Vlaar Tjostil, 2011, ADVANCED SYNTHESIS & CATALYSIS, V353, P809 Zibareva I. V., 2014, KINETICS AND CATALYSIS, V55, P1 Rueping Magnus, 2011, GREEN CHEMISTRY, V13, P1084 Stahlberg Tim, 2011, CHEMSUSCHEM, V4, P451 Duda David M., 2011, CURRENT OPINION IN STRUCTURAL BIOLOGY, V21, P257 Katryniok Benjamin, 2011, GREEN CHEMISTRY, V13, P1960 Zibareva I. V., 2008, Vestn. Ross. Akad. NaukHerald Russ. Acad. Sci., V78, P490 Pradal Alexandre, 2011, SYNTHESIS-STUTTGART, P1501 Pellissier Helene, 2012, ADVANCED SYNTHESIS & CATALYSIS, V354, P237 Yu Shichao, 2012, ANGEWANDTE CHEMIE-INTERNATIONAL EDITION, V51, P3074 Roy Poulomi, 2011, ANGEWANDTE CHEMIE-INTERNATIONAL EDITION, V50, P2904 Hopkinson Matthew N., 2011, CHEMISTRY-A EUROPEAN JOURNAL, V17, P8248 BAUIN S, 1991, SCIENTOMETRICS, V22, P113 Parmon V. N., 2012, Vestn. Ross. Akad. NaukHerald Russ. Acad. Sci., V82, P531 Moyano Albert, 2011, CHEMICAL REVIEWS, V111, P4703 Rueping Magnus, 2011, ANGEWANDTE CHEMIE-INTERNATIONAL EDITION, V50, P6706 Walter Michael G., 2010, CHEMICAL REVIEWS, V110, P6446 Wegner Hermann A., 2011, ANGEWANDTE CHEMIE-INTERNATIONAL EDITION, V50, P8236 Ho YS, 2007, J Environ Prot Sci., V1, P1 Allen C. Liana, 2011, CHEMICAL SOCIETY REVIEWS, V40, P3405 Hirano Keiichi, 2011, CHEMISTRY LETTERS, V40, P786 Surry David S., 2011, CHEMICAL SCIENCE, V2, P27 Polshettiwar Vivek, 2011, CHEMICAL REVIEWS, V111, P3036 Fihri Aziz, 2011, CHEMICAL SOCIETY REVIEWS, V40, P5181 Che Chi-Ming, 2011, CHEMICAL SOCIETY REVIEWS, V40, P1950 Parmon Valentin, 2008, MATERIALS RESEARCH INNOVATIONS, V12, P60 Martinez Cristina, 2011, COORDINATION CHEMISTRY REVIEWS, V255, P1558 Ackermann Lutz, 2011, CHEMICAL REVIEWS, V111, P1315 Putaj Piotr, 2011, COORDINATION CHEMISTRY REVIEWS, V255, P1642 Teply Filip, 2011, COLLECTION OF CZECHOSLOVAK CHEMICAL COMMUNICATIONS, V76, P859 Yoon Minyoung, 2012, CHEMICAL REVIEWS, V112, P1196 Woodmansee David H., 2011, CHEMICAL COMMUNICATIONS, V47, P7912 Furuya Takeru, 2011, NATURE, V473, P470 Biermann U., 2012, Chem. Soc. Rev., V41, P1538 Chen Xiaobo, 2010, CHEMICAL REVIEWS, V110, P6503 Bredikhin S. V., 2013, Analiz tsitirovaniya v bibliometriiCitation Analysis in Bibliometry, Bridgwater A. V., 2012, BIOMASS & BIOENERGY, V38, P68 Bernhardt T. M., 2007, NANOCATALYSIS, P1 Wormell I., 2000, Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science, V70, P77 Davis R. J., 2009, World Technology Evaluation Center Panel Report on International Assessment of Research and Development in Catalysis by Nanostructured Materials, Noskov A. S., 2011, EKO (ECO), P52 Knothe Gerhard, 2010, PROGRESS IN ENERGY AND COMBUSTION SCIENCE, V36, P364 Rabaey Korneel, 2010, NATURE REVIEWS MICROBIOLOGY, V8, P706 Rodriguez Nuria, 2011, CHEMICAL SOCIETY REVIEWS, V40, P5030 Huang Kun, 2011, CHEMICAL SOCIETY REVIEWS, V40, P2435 Fortman George C., 2011, CHEMICAL SOCIETY REVIEWS, V40, P5151 Das Jaya Prakash, 2011, CHEMICAL COMMUNICATIONS, V47, P4593 Fang Xiaosheng, 2011, PROGRESS IN MATERIALS SCIENCE, V56, P175 Collet Florence, 2011, CHEMICAL SOCIETY REVIEWS, V40, P1926 Dzik Wojciech I., 2011, ANGEWANDTE CHEMIE-INTERNATIONAL EDITION, V50, P3356 Merritt Eleanor A., 2011, SYNTHESIS-STUTTGART, P517 Aleman Jose, 2011, CHEMISTRY-A EUROPEAN JOURNAL, V17, P6890 Cho Seung Hwan, 2011, CHEMICAL SOCIETY REVIEWS, V40, P5068 Whitney Spencer M., 2011, PLANT PHYSIOLOGY, V155, P27 Michl J, 2000, CHEMICAL REVIEWS, V100, P1 Wang Dingsheng, 2011, ADVANCED MATERIALS, V23, P1044 Chen Da, 2010, CHEMICAL SOCIETY REVIEWS, V39, P3157 Jaouen Frederic, 2011, ENERGY & ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE, V4, P114 Kaur Parminder, 2011, ACS CATALYSIS, V1, P819 Tijssen RJW, 1997, RESEARCH POLICY, V25, P1277 Wang Yong, 2012, ANGEWANDTE CHEMIE-INTERNATIONAL EDITION, V51, P68 Ackermann Lutz, 2011, ANGEWANDTE CHEMIE-INTERNATIONAL EDITION, V50, P3842 Wang Wei, 2011, CHEMICAL SOCIETY REVIEWS, V40, P3703 Barluenga Jose, 2011, ANGEWANDTE CHEMIE-INTERNATIONAL EDITION, V50, P7486 Hickman A. J., 2012, Nature, V484, P7393 Chen Zhongwei, 2011, ENERGY & ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE, V4, P3167 Yus Miguel, 2011, CHEMICAL REVIEWS, V111, P7774 Marshakova-Shaikevich I, 2001, SCIENTOMETRICS, V52, P323 Zhao Xiao, 2011, ENERGY & ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE, V4, P2736 Tan Tianwei, 2010, BIOTECHNOLOGY ADVANCESForest Biorefineries III/2nd International Biorefinery Conference, OCT 06-07, 2009, Syracuse, NY, V28, P628 Du Bois J., 2011, ORGANIC PROCESS RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT, V15, P758 Morozan Adina, 2011, ENERGY & ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE, V4, P1238 Balanta Angelica, 2011, CHEMICAL SOCIETY REVIEWS, V40, P4973 Hallett Jason P., 2011, CHEMICAL REVIEWS, V111, P3508 Borrmann L., 2012, J. Informetrics, V6, P11 Khaitun S. D., 2005, Kolichestvennyi analiz sotsial 'nykh yavlenii. Problemy i perspektivyQuantitative Analysis of Social Phenomena. Problems and Prospects, Wu Xiao-Feng, 2011, CHEMICAL SOCIETY REVIEWS, V40, P4986 Klomsiri Chananat, 2011, ANTIOXIDANTS & REDOX SIGNALING, V14, P1065 Holm Martin Spangsberg, 2011, CATALYSIS TODAY, V168, P3 Castellanos Alejandro, 2011, CHEMISTRY-A EUROPEAN JOURNAL, V17, P5766 [Anonymous], 2006, P6 Alonso Francisco, 2011, ACCOUNTS OF CHEMICAL RESEARCH, V44, P379 Suh Myunghyun Paik, 2012, CHEMICAL REVIEWS, V112, P782 Antolini Ermete, 2009, ENERGY & ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE, V2, P915 Jomova Klaudia, 2011, TOXICOLOGY, V283, P65 Zabeti Masoud, 2009, FUEL PROCESSING TECHNOLOGY, V90, P770 Derish Pamela A., 2011, CLINICAL CHEMISTRY, V57, P388 ParlevIiet F., 2008, CATALYSIS TODAY4th International Symposium on Molecular Aspects of Catalysis by Sulfides, MAY 13-17, 2007, Amsterdam, NETHERLANDS, V130, P254 Shi Wei, 2011, CHEMICAL SOCIETY REVIEWS, V40, P2761 Janaun Jidon, 2010, RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS, V14, P1312 Stephan Douglas W., 2011, INORGANIC CHEMISTRY, V50, P12338 Rhee Sue Goo, 2011, ANTIOXIDANTS & REDOX SIGNALING, V15, P781 Jiao Feng, 2010, ENERGY & ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE, V3, P1018 Rocha Joao, 2011, CHEMICAL SOCIETY REVIEWS, V40, P926 Ridley D. D., 2009, Information Retrieval: SciFinder, Lam Man Kee, 2010, BIOTECHNOLOGY ADVANCES, V28, P500 Bonits M., 1977, Mezhdunarodnyi forum informatsii i dokumentatsiiInternational Forum on Information and Documentation, V2, P27 Marshakova-Shaikevich I. V., 2008, Rossiya v mirovoi nauke: bibliometricheskii analizRussia in the World Science. Bibliometric Analysis, Goebel M.W.E., 2010, World Patent Information, V32, Boreskov G. K., 1987, Kataliz. Voprosy teorii i praktikiCatalysis. Theoretical and Practical Aspects, Ahmed Takiya J., 2011, COORDINATION CHEMISTRY REVIEWS, V255, P949 Junge Kathrin, 2011, CHEMICAL COMMUNICATIONS, V47, P4849 Dominguez Gema, 2011, CHEMICAL SOCIETY REVIEWS, V40, P3430 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000340136400021 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Association Between Analytic Strategy and Estimates of Treatment Outcomes in Meta-analyses Authors: Dechartres, A; Altman, DG; Trinquart, L; Boutron, I; Ravaud, P Author Full Names: Dechartres, Agnes; Altman, Douglas G.; Trinquart, Ludovic; Boutron, Isabelle; Ravaud, Philippe Source: JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 312 (6):623-630; 10.1001/jama.2014.8166 AUG 13 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article KeyWords Plus: RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED-TRIALS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS; CLINICAL-TRIALS; EMPIRICAL-EVIDENCE; SMALLER TRIALS; HEALTH-CARE; BIAS; QUALITY; INTERVENTIONS; PUBLICATION Abstract: IMPORTANCE A persistent dilemma when performingmeta-analyses is whether all available trials should be included in the meta-analysis. OBJECTIVES To compare treatment outcomes estimated by meta-analysis of all trials and several alternative analytic strategies: single most precise trial (ie, trial with the narrowest confidence interval), meta-analysis restricted to the 25% largest trials, limit meta-analysis (a meta-analysis model adjusted for small-study effect), and meta-analysis restricted to trials at low overall risk of bias. DATA SOURCES One hundred sixty-three meta-analyses published between 2008 and 2010 in high-impact-factor journals and between 2011 and 2013 in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews: 92 (705 randomized clinical trials [RCTs]) with subjective outcomes and 71 (535 RCTs) with objective outcomes. DATA SYNTHESIS For each meta-analysis, the difference in treatment outcomes between meta-analysis of all trials and each alternative strategy, expressed as a ratio of odds ratios (ROR), was assessed considering the dependency between strategies. A difference greater than 30% was considered substantial. RORs were combined by random-effects meta-analysis models to obtain an average difference across the sample. An ROR greater than 1 indicates larger treatment outcomes with meta-analysis of all trials. Subjective and objective outcomes were analyzed separately. RESULTS Treatment outcomes were larger in the meta-analysis of all trials than in the single most precise trial (combined ROR, 1.13 [95% CI, 1.07-1.19]) for subjective outcomes and 1.03 (95% CI, 1.01-1.05) for objective outcomes). The difference in treatment outcomes between these strategies was substantial in 47 of 92 (51%) meta-analyses of subjective outcomes (meta-analysis of all trials showing larger outcomes in 40/47) and in 28 of 71 (39%) meta-analyses of objective outcomes (meta-analysis of all trials showing larger outcomes in 21/28). The combined ROR for subjective and objective outcomes was, respectively, 1.08 (95% CI, 1.04-1.13) and 1.03 (95% CI, 1.00-1.06) when comparingmeta-analysis of all trials and meta-analysis of the 25% largest trials, 1.17 (95% CI, 1.11-1.22) and 1.13 (95% CI, 0.82-1.55) when comparingmeta-analysis of all trials and limit meta-analysis, and 0.94 (95% CI, 0.86-1.04) and 1.03 (95% CI, 1.00-1.06) when comparingmeta-analysis of all trials and meta-analysis restricted to trials at low risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Estimation of treatment outcomes inmeta-analyses differs depending on the strategy used. This instability in findings can result in major alterations in the conclusions derived from the analysis and underlines the need for systematic sensitivity analyses. Addresses: [Dechartres, Agnes; Trinquart, Ludovic; Boutron, Isabelle; Ravaud, Philippe] INSERM, U1153, Ctr Epidemiol & Stat, Paris, France. [Dechartres, Agnes; Boutron, Isabelle; Ravaud, Philippe] Hop Hotel Dieu, AP HP, Ctr Epidemiol Clin, F-75004 Paris, France. [Dechartres, Agnes; Boutron, Isabelle; Ravaud, Philippe] Univ Paris 05, Sorbonne Paris Cite, Fac Med, Paris, France. [Altman, Douglas G.] Ctr Stat Med, Oxford, England. [Trinquart, Ludovic; Ravaud, Philippe] Columbia Univ, Sch Publ Hlth, Div Epidemiol, New York, NY USA. [Boutron, Isabelle; Ravaud, Philippe] French Cochrane Ctr, Paris, France. E-mail Addresses: agnes.dechartres at htd.aphp.fr Funding Acknowledgement: program "Equipe espoir de la Recherche," Fondation pour la Recherche Medicale, Paris, France [DEQ20101221475]; Institut National de la Sante et de la Recherche Medicale; Cancer Research UK [C5529] Funding Text: Our team is supported by an academic grant from the program "Equipe espoir de la Recherche," Fondation pour la Recherche Medicale, Paris, France (No. DEQ20101221475). Dr Dechartres is funded by the Institut National de la Sante et de la Recherche Medicale. Dr Altman is supported by Cancer Research UK (C5529). Cited Reference Count: 58 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: AMER MEDICAL ASSOC, 330 N WABASH AVE, STE 39300, CHICAGO, IL 60611-5885 USA ISSN: 0098-7484 eISSN: 1538-3598 Web of Science Categories: Medicine, General & Internal Research Areas: General & Internal Medicine IDS Number: AM8OU Unique ID: WOS:000340136400021 Cited References: Sterne JAC, 2002, STATISTICS IN MEDICINEInternational Symposium on Methodological Issues in Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis, JUL 03-05, 2000, OXFORD, ENGLAND, V21, P1513 Pereira Tiago V., 2011, JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, V64, P1060 Moreno Santiago G., 2012, STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, V31, P1407 Dechartres Agnes, 2013, BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V346, Klebanoff MA, 1997, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V277, P376 Pereira Tiago V., 2012, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V308, P1676 Moses LE, 2002, STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, V21, P793 Sweeting MJ, 2004, STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, V23, P1351 Ruecker Gerta, 2011, BIOMETRICAL JOURNAL, V53, P351 LeLorier J, 1998, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V280, P518 Hartling Lisa, 2013, JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, V66, P973 Chan AW, 2004, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V291, P2457 Schneider Markus P., 2010, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, V55, P2299 Ioannidis JPA, 1998, NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, V338, P59 Juni P, 1999, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V282, P1054 Johnson BT, 1997, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V277, P377 Moseley Anne M., 2009, JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, V62, P1021 Khan S, 1998, NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, V338, P60 Chalmers I, 1995, Systematic Reviews, Kjaergard LL, 2001, ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, V135, P982 Kirkham Jamie J., 2010, BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V340, Ioannidis JPA, 1998, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V279, P1089 Cappelleri JC, 1996, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V276, P1332 Sterne JAC, 2000, JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, V53, P1119 2011, Ruecker Gerta, 2011, BIOSTATISTICS, V12, P122 Khan S, 1998, N Engl J Med, V338, P61 VILLAR J, 1995, LANCET, V345, P772 SCHULZ KF, 1995, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V273, P408 Shea B, 2002, EVALUATION & THE HEALTH PROFESSIONS, V25, P116 Hopewell Sally, 2013, BMJ OPEN, V3, Cuijpers Pim, 2008, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY, V165, P1272 Dechartres Agnes, 2011, ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, V155, P39 Piscione Federico, 2010, HEART, V96, P588 Bent S, 1998, N Engl J Med, V338, P61 EGGER M, 1995, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V311, P753 Klebanoff MA, 1997, JAMA, V277, P377 Hartling Lisa, 2009, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V339, BORZAK S, 1995, ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, V123, P873 Moreno Santiago G., 2009, BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, V9, van Rijen Miranda, 2008, COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, Juni P, 2001, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V323, P42 Flather MD, 1997, CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS8th International Symposium on Long-Term Clinical Trials, SEP 28-29, 1995, TORONTO, CANADA, V18, P568 Savovic Jelena, 2012, ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, V157, P429 Nueesch Eveline, 2010, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V341, Moher D, 1998, LANCET, V352, P609 Sterne JAC, 2001, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V323, P101 Schriger David L., 2010, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, V39, P421 Higgins Julian P T, 2011, BMJ (Clinical research ed.), V343, Pd5928 Nueesch Eveline, 2009, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V339, LeLorier J, 1997, NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, V337, P536 Sterne Jonathan A. C., 2011, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V343, Ioannidis JPA, 2005, PLOS MEDICINE, V2, P696 Bent S, 1998, NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, V338, P60 Wood Lesley, 2008, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V336, P601 Glasziou Paul P., 2010, BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, V10, SLAVIN RE, 1995, JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGYPotsdam International Consultation on Meta-Analysis, MAR, 1994, POTSDAM, GERMANY, V48, P9 Pildal J., 2007, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, V36, P847 ======================================================================== *Record 3 of 6. *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339952300006 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: The long-term influence of collaboration on citation patterns Authors: Gazni, A; Thelwall, M Author Full Names: Gazni, Ali; Thelwall, Mike Source: RESEARCH EVALUATION, 23 (3):261-271; 10.1093/reseval/rvu014 JUL 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article Author Keywords: scientific collaboration, collaboration strategies, collaborative networks, organization of science KeyWords Plus: SCIENTIFIC COLLABORATION; AUTHOR DISAMBIGUATION; COCITATION NETWORKS; KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER; SOCIAL-STRUCTURE; INFORMATION USE; IMPACT FACTOR; SCIENCE; SPECIALTIES; COAUTHORSHIP Abstract: This study assesses the long-term impact of collaboration in terms of the extent to which collaborators cite each other's works and cite the same publications as each other. The results are based on coauthorship of academic articles during 1990-2010. Although the number of citations to, and common references with, collaborators both increase as the number of collaborators increases over time, these differ between collaborators. For example, many authors do not cite their collaborators and many collaborators do not cite any of the same references as each other. In contrast, many authors cite their collaborators extensively and many collaborators have many of the same references as each other. The extent of citing collaborators and citing the same references as cited by collaborators varies with the impact of the collaborators. These widely different properties may reflect some collaborators working in completely different research areas, others working in the same broad research area, and still others working within a narrow research area. Alternatively, some collaborators may learn from or monitor each other while others do not. Addresses: [Gazni, Ali] ISC, Shiraz, Iran. [Thelwall, Mike] Wolverhampton Univ, Stat Cybermetr Res Grp, Wolverhampton WV1 1LY, W Midlands, England. E-mail Addresses: ali.gazni at isc.gov.ir Cited Reference Count: 69 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: OXFORD UNIV PRESS, GREAT CLARENDON ST, OXFORD OX2 6DP, ENGLAND ISSN: 0958-2029 eISSN: 1471-5449 Web of Science Categories: Information Science & Library Science Research Areas: Information Science & Library Science IDS Number: AM6DL Unique ID: WOS:000339952300006 Cited References: Kanani P., 2007, Proceedings of AAAI 2007 Workshop on Information Integration on the Web, P38 Marshall S., 2007, Report to the Higher Education Funding Council for England, CRANE D, 1969, AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW, V34, P335 Reuther P., 2006, International Journal of Metadata, Semantics and Ontologies, V1, Porac JF, 2004, RESEARCH POLICY, V33, P661 Blondel Vincent D., 2008, JOURNAL OF STATISTICAL MECHANICS-THEORY AND EXPERIMENT, Lambert R, 2003, Lambert Review of Business-university Collaboration: Final Report, Morris Steven A., 2008, ANNUAL REVIEW OF INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V42, P213 Reagans R, 2003, ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCE QUARTERLY, V48, P240 Katz JS, 1997, RESEARCH POLICY, V26, P1 Smalheiser N. R., 2009, Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, V43, P1 Yan Erjia, 2011, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V62, P1498 SMITH LC, 1981, LIBRARY TRENDS, V30, P83 STOKES TD, 1989, SOCIAL STUDIES OF SCIENCE, V19, P101 Didegah Fereshteh, 2011, LEARNED PUBLISHING, V24, P303 Laudel G, 2002, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V11, P3 RIESENBERG D, 1990, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V264, P1857 Zhang Lin, 2010, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS1st Joint ASIS&T/ISS Conference Seminar 2009, NOV07, 2009, Vancouver, CANADA, V4, P185 Singh J, 2005, MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, V51, P756 Tijssen RJW, 2006, SCIENTOMETRICS8th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators, SEP 23-25, 2004, Leiden, NETHERLANDS, V66, P55 Maglaughlin K. L., 2005, Proceedings of the Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Stockholm, Sweden, P499 Gazni Ali, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V87, P251 Bermeo Andrade Helga, 2009, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V18, P301 Yan Erjia, 2013, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V7, P249 Bigdeli Zahed, 2012, SCIENTOMETRICS, V92, P505 Rinia EJ, 2002, SCIENTOMETRICS, V54, P347 Wilson T. D., 2006, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V62, P658 Burright MA, 2005, COLLEGE & RESEARCH LIBRARIES, V66, P198 GRIFFITH BC, 1971, SCIENCE, V173, P164 Wuchty Stefan, 2007, SCIENCE, V316, P1036 Fuchs Beth E., 2006, COLLEGE & RESEARCH LIBRARIES, V67, P304 Kang In-Su, 2009, INFORMATION PROCESSING & MANAGEMENT, V45, P84 Franceschet Massimo, 2010, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V4, P540 Defazio Daniela, 2009, RESEARCH POLICY, V38, P293 Ohniwa RL, 2004, RESEARCH EVALUATION, V13, P175 Wilson P, 1996, LIBRARY TRENDS, V45, P192 Bigdeli Z., 2012, Scientometrics, V96, P1 Thagard P, 1997, NOUS, V31, P242 Schrage M., 1995, No More Teams!: Mastering the Dynamics of Creative Collaboration, Wallace Matthew L., 2009, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V60, P240 Rinia EJ, 2001, SCIENTOMETRICS6th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators, MAY 24-27, 2000, LEIDEN, NETHERLANDS, V51, P293 Fleming Lee, 2007, ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCE QUARTERLY, V52, P443 Kuruppu Pali U., 2008, PORTAL-LIBRARIES AND THE ACADEMY, V8, P387 BRODY S, 1995, LANCET, V346, P1300 Song Yang, 2007, PROCEEDINGS OF THE 7TH ACM/IEE JOINT CONFERENCE ON DIGITAL LIBRARIES7th ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries, JUN 18-23, 2007, Vancouver, CANADA, P342 Levin Michael, 2012, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V63, P1030 Liu Yuxian, 2013, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V7, P651 Price D. D. S., 1986, Little Science, Big Science and Beyond, Lambiotte R., 2009, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V3, P180 Bakshy E., 2012, Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on World Wide Web, P519 Ahuja G, 2000, ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCE QUARTERLY, V45, P425 Bilenko Mikhail, 2006, ICDM 2006: Sixth International Conference on Data Mining, Proceedings6th IEEE International Conference on Data Mining, DEC 18-22, 2006, Hong Kong, PEOPLES R CHINA, P87 Krugman P. R., 1991, Geography and Trade, Levitt Jonathan M., 2010, SCIENTOMETRICS, V85, P171 Adams Jonathan, 2012, NATURE, V490, P335 Yan Erjia, 2012, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V63, P1313 Mattsson Pauline, 2011, SCIENTOMETRICS, V87, P99 Torvik VI, 2005, JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V56, P140 Wallace Matthew L., 2012, PLOS ONE, V7, McRae-Spencer D. M., 2006, Proceedings of the 6th ACM/IEEE-CS joint conference on Digital libraries, P53 Johnson Ben, 2007, JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, V63, P609 Sonnenwald Diane H., 2007, ANNUAL REVIEW OF INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, V41, P643 Jassawalla AR, 1998, JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT, V15, P237 Soler Jose M., 2007, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V1, P123 Didegah Fereshteh, 2013, JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, V7, P861 Culotta A., 2007, Sixth International Workshop on Information Integration on the Web (IIWeb-07), Vancouver, Canada, Moya-Anegon Felix, 2013, SCIENTOMETRICS, V97, P421 Kurmis AP, 2006, ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, V13, P77 Goldfinch S, 2003, SCIENTOMETRICS, V57, P321 ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339680800004 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Academic rankings between the "republic of science" and "new public management" Authors: Osterloh, M; Frey, BS Author Full Names: Osterloh, Margit; Frey, Bruno S. Edited by: Lanteri A; Vromen J Source: ECONOMICS OF ECONOMISTS: INSTITUTIONAL SETTING, INDIVIDUAL INCENTIVES, AND FUTURE PROSPECTS, 77-103; 2014 Language: English Document Type: Article; Book Chapter KeyWords Plus: BASIC SCIENTIFIC-RESEARCH; ORGANIZATIONAL CONTROL; CORPORATE GOVERNANCE; INTRINSIC MOTIVATION; SELF-DETERMINATION; SIMPLE ECONOMICS; IMPACT FACTOR; HIDDEN COSTS; GONE WILD; PERFORMANCE Addresses: [Osterloh, Margit] Univ Zurich, Dept Business Adm, CH-8006 Zurich, Switzerland. [Osterloh, Margit] Univ Warwick, Warwick Business Sch, Coventry CV4 7AL, W Midlands, England. [Frey, Bruno S.] Univ Zurich, Dept Econ, CH-8006 Zurich, Switzerland. Cited Reference Count: 180 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS, THE PITT BUILDING, TRUMPINGTON ST, CAMBRIDGE CB2 1RP, CAMBS, ENGLAND ISBN: 978-1-107-01570-8 Book DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139059145 Web of Science Categories: Economics Research Areas: Business & Economics IDS Number: BA9PP Unique ID: WOS:000339680800004 Cited References: Rothwell PM, 2000, BRAIN, V123, P1964 Khurana R, 2007, FROM HIGHER AIMS TO HIRED HANDS: THE SOCIAL TRANSFORMATION OF AMERICAN BUSINESS SCHOOLS AND THE UNFULFILLED PROMISE OF MANAGEMENT AS A PROFESSION, P1 GRIFFIN D, 1992, COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, V24, P411 Osterloh M., 2010, Analyse und Kritik, V32, P267 Ordonez Lisa D., 2009, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVES, V23, P6 Buchstein H., 2009, Demokratie und Lotterie, Gittelman M, 2003, MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, V49, P366 Simkin M. V., 2005, Annals of Improbable Research, V11, P24 Schimank U, 2005, MINERVA, V43, P361 Ultee M., 1987, Seventeenth Century, V2, P95 Gillies D., 2008, How Should Research Be Organised?, GILLILAND SW, 1992, JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, V77, P672 Swanson EP, 2004, CONTEMPORARY ACCOUNTING RESEARCH, V21, P223 Starbuck W. H., 2009, Scandinavian Journal of Management, V25, P225 Fong Eric A., 2007, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, V33, P161 Buchstein H., 2007, Redescription, V11, P178 SIMON HA, 1985, AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW, V79, P293 Deci EL, 1999, PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, V125, P627 Abernethy MA, 1997, ACCOUNTING ORGANIZATIONS AND SOCIETY, V22, P233 SCHREYOGG G, 1987, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT REVIEW, V12, P91 Ursprung H. W., 2006, Jahrbucher fur Nationalokonomie und Statistik, V227, P187 Haney W. M, 2002, Education Week, P56 Bok D., 2003, Universities in the Marketplace: The Commercialization of Higher Education, Goodall AH, 2009, SOCRATES IN THE BOARDROOM: WHY RESEARCH UNIVERSITIES SHOULD BE LED BY TOP SCHOLARS, P1 Frey Bruno S., 2010, JOURNAL OF APPLIED ECONOMICS, V13, P1 Fletcher R. C., 2003, Peer Review in Health Sciences, P62 Osterloh M, 2000, ORGANIZATION SCIENCE, V11, P538 Starbuck W. H., 2006, The Production of Knowledge: The Challenge of Social Science Research, Elster J., 1989, Solomonic Judgements, Gneezy U, 2000, QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, V115, P791 Rinia EJ, 1998, RESEARCH POLICY, V27, P95 Prichard C, 1997, ORGANIZATION STUDIES, V18, P287 Gillies Donald, 2005, Studies in history and philosophy of biological and biomedical sciences, V36, P159 FREY BS, 1992, KYKLOS, V45, P161 Campbell P., 2008, Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, V8, P5 ZUCKERMAN H, 1992, THEORETICAL MEDICINE, V13, P217 Frey B. S., 2009, International Review of Economics, V56, P333 CAMPBELL DT, 1957, PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, V54, P297 Bornmann Lutz, 2009, LEARNED PUBLISHING, V22, P117 Gioia Dennis A., 2002, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT LEARNING & EDUCATION, V1, P107 Falk Armin, 2006, AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, V96, P1611 Lawrence PA, 2002, NATURE, V415, P835 Bornmann L., 2008, Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, V8, P93 Oswald Andrew J., 2007, ECONOMICA, V74, P21 Stern S, 2004, MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, V50, P835 Bush V., 1945, ''Science: The endless frontier.'' A report to the president by Vannevar Bush, Director of the Office of Scientific Research and Development, Espeland Wendy Nelson, 2007, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY, V113, P1 Frey BS, 2001, JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC SURVEYS, V15, P589 Merton R. K., 1973, The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations, Frey BS, 2003, PUBLIC CHOICE, V116, P205 Clark B. R., 1998, Creating Entrepreneurial Universities: Organizational Pathways of Transformation, Moed H. F., 2007, Science and Public Policy, V34, P575 Stephan PE, 1996, JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC LITERATURE, V34, P1199 Jimenez-Contreras E, 2003, RESEARCH POLICY, V32, P123 OUCHI WG, 1979, MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, V25, P833 IDEAS, 2008, IDEAS rankings, Amabile TM, 1996, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V39, P1154 Handelsblatt, 2010, Handlesblatt-Ranking schlagt hohe Wellen, Fuyuno I, 2006, NATURE, V441, P792 Judge Timothy A., 2007, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V50, P491 MINER LE, 1981, SRA-JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF RESEARCH ADMINISTRATORS, V12, P21 The Thomson Corporation, 2008, ISI web of knowledge journal citation report, Posner Richard A., 2010, JOURNAL OF INSTITUTIONAL ECONOMICS, V6, P1 Durso TW, 1997, SCIENTIST, V11, P13 Fehr E, 2004, SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, V106, P453 Rost Katja, 2010, CORPORATE GOVERNANCE-AN INTERNATIONAL REVIEW, V18, P212 Locke Edwin A., 2009, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVES, V23, P17 Hendriks C. M., 2004, P80 SPANGENBERG JFA, 1990, RESEARCH POLICY, V19, P239 Neckermann S., 2010, Working Paper No. 411, Monastersky R., 2005, Chronicle of Higher Education, V52, PA12 Van Fleet DD, 2000, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, V26, P839 STAW BM, 1990, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V33, P534 NELSON RR, 1959, JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY, V67, P297 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Simonton D. K., 2004, Creativity in Science: Chance, Logic, Genius, and Zeitgeist, Armstrong JS, 1997, Sci Eng Ethics, V3, P63 Strathern M., 1966, Cambridge Anthropology, V19, P1 Sokal A. D, 1996, A physicist experiments with cultural studies, The Thomson Corporation, 2008, ISI web of knowledge essential science indicators, Smith R, 1997, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V314, P463 Amabile TM, 1998, HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW, V76, P76 Ehrenberg R. G., 2000, Tuition Rising: Why College Costs So Much, Stephan Paula E., 2008, CESIFO ECONOMIC STUDIES, V54, P313 Frost Jetta, 2010, ORGANIZATIONAL DYNAMICS, V39, P126 Brook R., 2003, Science Between Evaluation and Innovation: A Conference on Peer Review, P61 Cole S., 1992, Making Science: Between Nature and Society, Albers Soenke, 2009, GERMAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, V10, P352 Nelson Richard R., 2006, INDUSTRIAL AND CORPORATE CHANGEConference on Information, Intellectual Property, and Economic Welfare, MAY 15-16, 2006, Turin, ITALY, V15, P903 Abramo Giovanni, 2009, RESEARCH POLICY, V38, P206 Butler L, 2003, RESEARCH POLICY8th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, JUL 16-20, 2001, SYDNEY, AUSTRALIA, V32, P143 Frey B. S., 2010, Nature, V465, P871 MERTON RK, 1968, SCIENCE, V159, P56 Weingart P, 2005, SCIENTOMETRICSConference on Bibliometric Analysis in Science and Research, NOV 05-07, 2003, Julich, GERMANY, V62, P117 GANS JS, 1994, JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES, V8, P165 Lee Frederic S., 2007, CAMBRIDGE JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, V31, P309 Janis I. L., 1972, Victims of Groupthink: a Psychological Study of Foreignpolicy Decisions and Fiascoes, DAHL Robert, 1989, Democracy and Its Critics, Butler L., 2007, Science and Public Policy, V34, P565 Horrobin DF, 1996, LANCET, V348, P1293 Hennessey B. A., 1998, American Psychologist, V53, P647 Leibniz G. W, 1931, Samtliche Schriften und Briefe (Akademie-Ausgabe), V1, P569 POLANYI M, 1962, MINERVA, V1, P54 FREY BS, 2008, J PSYCHOL, V216, P198 Moed HF, 2002, NATURE, V415, P731 Bhagwat Jui G, 2004, Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR, V1, P493 Weibel Antoinette, 2010, JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION RESEARCH AND THEORY, V20, P387 Carson L., 1999, Random Selection in Politics, Heintz B., 2008, Governance von und durch Wissen, P110 Benz Matthias, 2007, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT REVIEWAnnual Conference of the Associational-of-German-Speaking Business Economics, JUN, 2003, Zurich, SWITZERLAND, V32, P92 NICHOLS S, 2006, ED POLICY ANAL ARCH, V14, P1 Laband DN, 2003, KYKLOS, V56, P161 Wenneras C., 1999, Peer Review in Health Sciences, P79 Tsang Eric W. K., 2007, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT LEARNING & EDUCATION, V6, P128 Stokes D. E., 1997, Pasteur's Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation, Dryzek O., 2002, Deliberative Democracy and Beyond, Eizenhardt K. M., 1985, Management Science, V31, P134 Roach Michael, 2010, RESEARCH POLICY, V39, P422 Mudambi Ram, 2007, JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT, V24, P442 Garfield E, 2006, JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, V295, P90 HOLMSTROM B, 1991, JOURNAL OF LAW ECONOMICS & ORGANIZATION, V7, P24 Ethiraj Sendil K., 2009, ORGANIZATION SCIENCE, V20, P4 Lane Julia, 2010, NATURE, V464, P488 Ackermann B. A., 2004, Deliberation Day, Hargreaves Heap S. P, 2002, Science Bought and Sold: Essays in the Economics of Science, P387 Marginson S., 2000, The Enterprise University: Power, Governance and Reinvention in Australia, Adler R., 2008, Report from the International Mathematical Union (IMU) in cooperation with the International Council of Industrial and Applied Mathematics (ICIAM) and the Institute of Mathematical Statistics (IMS), Donovan C., 2007, Science and Public Policy, V34, P585 Gerhart B., 2003, Compensation: Theory, Evidence, and Strategic Implications, Heilig Julian Vasquez, 2008, EDUCATIONAL EVALUATION AND POLICY ANALYSIS, V30, P75 Schweitzer ME, 2004, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V47, P422 Fishkin J., 1991, Democracy and Deliberation, Lazear Edward P., 2007, JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES, V21, P91 Miller CC, 2006, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, V49, P425 Hamermesh Daniel S., 2007, CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS-REVUE CANADIENNE D ECONOMIQUE, V40, P715 Shanghai Jiao Tong University, 2007, Academic Ranking of World Universities, LINDSEY D, 1991, SCIENTOMETRICS, V22, P313 Sorenson O, 2004, RESEARCH POLICY, V33, P1615 Holcombe Randall G., 2004, ECON JOURNAL WATCH, V1, P498 PETERS DP, 1982, BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES, V5, P187 Mahoney M. J., 1977, Cognitive Therapy Research, V1, P161 Willmott H, 2003, STUDIES IN HIGHER EDUCATIONHigher-Education Close-Up Conference, JUL 06-08, 1998, LANCASTER, ENGLAND, V28, P129 CICCHETTI DV, 1991, BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES, V14, P119 Arrow K., 1962, The Rate and Direction of Scientific Activity: Economic and Societal Factors, P609 Weller A. C., 2001, Editorial Peer Review: Its Strengths and Weaknesses, Kuhn Thomas S, 1962, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Adler Nancy J., 2009, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT LEARNING & EDUCATION, V8, P72 EARLEY PC, 1989, JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, V74, P24 Bedeian AG, 2003, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT INQUIRY, V12, P331 OUCHI WG, 1977, ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCE QUARTERLY, V22, P95 Gagne M, 2005, JOURNAL OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR, V26, P331 Franzoni C., 2010, Working paper, Perrin B, 1998, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EVALUATION, V19, P367 Habermas Juergen, 2006, COMMUNICATION THEORY, V16, P411 Singh Gangaram, 2007, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT INQUIRY, V16, P319 Duxbury N., 1999, Random Justice: On Lotteries and Legal Decision Making, DASGUPTA P, 1994, RESEARCH POLICY, V23, P487 Amabile T. M., 1996, Creativity in Context: Update to the Social Psychology of Creativity, Kotiaho JS, 1999, NATURE, V400, P307 Bedeian Arthur G., 2004, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT LEARNING & EDUCATION, V3, P198 Emery F. E., 1989, Toward Real Democracy and Toward Real Democracy: Further Problems, Starbuck WH, 2005, ORGANIZATION SCIENCE, V16, P180 Worrell Dan L., 2009, ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT LEARNING & EDUCATION, V8, P127 Hayek F. A., 1979, Law, Legislation and Liberty, Volume 3: The Political Order of a Free People, V3, Donoghue F, 2008, LAST PROFESSORS: THE TWILIGHT OF THE HUMANITIES IN THE CORPORATE UNIVERSITY, P1 Nelson RR, 2004, RESEARCH POLICY, V33, P455 Brezis E. S., 2007, Science and Public Policy, V2007, P691 Burnheim J., 1985, Is Democracy Possible? The Alternative to Electoral Politics, Garfield E, 1997, BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, V314, P1765 GOTTFREDSON SD, 1978, AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGIST, V33, P920 Todd P., 2008, Ethics Sci. Environ. Polit., V8, P13 Fishkin J., 2005, The Deliberative Democracy Handbook: Strategies for Effective Civic Engagement in the Twenty-First Century, P80 Frey B, 1997, Not just for the money. An economic theory of personal motivation, Van Raan AFJ, 2005, SCIENTOMETRICSConference on Bibliometric Analysis in Science and Research, NOV 05-07, 2003, Julich, GERMANY, V62, P133 Frey B. S., 2006, Review of International Organizations, V1, P27 Eizenberger R., 1996, American Psychologist, V51, P1153 Lawrence PA, 2003, NATURE, V422, P259 Campanario JM, 1996, SCIENTOMETRICS, V37, P3 Taylor M., 2008, Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, V8, P17 Dowlen O., 2008, The Political Potential of Sortition: A Study of the Random Selection of Citizens for Public Office, ======================================================================== *View Full Record: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;UT=WOS:000339933800008 *Order Full Text [ ] Title: Performance analysis of scientific researchers in biomedicine Authors: Gamba, G Author Full Names: Gamba, Gerardo Source: REVISTA DE INVESTIGACION CLINICA, 65 (5):420-435; SEP-OCT 2013 Language: Spanish Document Type: Article Author Keywords: h-index, Impact factor, Publications, Author, Citation KeyWords Plus: IMPACT FACTOR Abstract: Background. There is no data about the performance of scientific researchers in biomedicine in our environment that can be use by individual subjects to compare their execution with their pairs. Material and methods. Using the Scopus browser the following data from 115 scientific researchers in biomedicine were obtained: actual institution, number of articles published, place on each article within the author list as first, last or unique author, total number of citations, percentage of citations due to the most cited paper, and h-index. Results were analyzed with descriptive statistics and simple lineal regressions. Results. Most of scientific researches in the sample are from the National Institutes of the Health Ministry or some of the research institutes or faculties at the Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico. Total number of publications was < 50 in 26%, from 50 to 100 in 36.5%, from 101 to 150 in 18.2%, from 151 to 200 in 9.5%, and more than 200 papers in 9.5%. The researcher was considered to be the main author, by being the first, the last or the unique author, from the 22 to 91% of the papers, with 75% being main author in more than 50% of the manuscripts. Total citations varied from 240 to 10,866. There is a significant correlation between the number of papers and citations, with R2 of 0.46. In the most cited paper, the researchers were considered the main author in 43%. The h-index varied from 7 to 57. Eight researchers had h-index of less than 10. Most are between 11 and 20, 25% are between 21 and 0 and only 10.4% had an h-index of more than 30. There is a significant correlation between number of published papers and h-index, with R2 of 0.57. Conclusions. This work provides an analysis of scientific publications in a sample of 115 scientific researchers in biomedicine in Mexico City, which can be used to compare the productivity of individual subjects with their pairs. Addresses: [Gamba, Gerardo] Inst Nacl Ciencias Med & Nutr Salvador Zubiran, Inst Nacl Salud, Mexico City 14080, DF, Mexico. [Gamba, Gerardo] Inst Nacl Ciencias Med & Nutr Salvador Zubiran, Unidad Fisiol Mol, Mexico City 14080, DF, Mexico. [Gamba, Gerardo] Univ Nacl Autonoma Mexico, Inst Invest Biomed, Mexico City 04510, DF, Mexico. E-mail Addresses: gamba at biomedicas.unam.mx Cited Reference Count: 6 Times Cited: 0 Publisher: INST NACIONAL NUTRICION, VASCO DE QUIROZA 15, COLONIA SECCION XVI, TLALPAN, MEXICO 14000 D F, MEXICO ISSN: 0034-8376 Web of Science Categories: Medicine, General & Internal Research Areas: General & Internal Medicine IDS Number: AM5XH Unique ID: WOS:000339933800008 Cited References: Lipsky Peter E., 2007, NATURE CLINICAL PRACTICE RHEUMATOLOGY, V3, P189 Siegel Rebecca, 2013, CA-A CANCER JOURNAL FOR CLINICIANS, V63, P11 Xu BE, 2000, JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY, V275, P16795 Wilson FH, 2001, SCIENCE, V293, P1107 Hirsch JE, 2005, PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V102, P16569 Alberts Bruce, 2013, SCIENCE, V340, P787 ======================================================================== -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jm6 at SUN.AC.ZA Sat Aug 30 03:12:52 2014 From: jm6 at SUN.AC.ZA (Mouton, Johann, Prof ) Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2014 07:12:52 +0000 Subject: Post-doctoral fellowships at CREST, Stellenbosch University South Africa Message-ID: The DST-NRF Centre of Excellence in Scientometrics and Science, Technology and Innovation Policy hosted by CREST at Stellenbosch University, South Africa are inviting applications for three POSTDOCTORAL FELLOWSHIPS in * Scientometrics/ Bibliometrics * STI Policy * Research Evaluation The fellowships will commence in January 2015. The initial fellowship is for 2-years and renewable for another subsequent term of 2 years. The indicate fellowshop value is approximately US $30 000 (tax exempt) per year. Postdoctoral fellowship applications are open to anyone who has completed their PhD in the last five years. A degree in library and information science, bibliometrics, scientometrics, science and technology studies or applied statistics will be a recommendation. Postdoctoral applicants must send a letter of application and comprehensive curriculum vitae, including list of publications and the names and contact details of at least two referees, to Marthie van Niekerk mvn3 at sun.ac.za . Applicants should request their referees to forward confidential reports by the closing date direct to the same address. Closing date for applications: 15 October 2014 For more information on the work of CREST consult our website at www.sun.ac.za/crest or contact contact Prof Johann Mouton at jm6 at sun.ac.za The integrity and confidentiality of this email is governed by these terms / Hierdie terme bepaal die integriteit en vertroulikheid van hierdie epos. http://www.sun.ac.za/emaildisclaimer -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET Sun Aug 31 02:13:40 2014 From: loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET (Loet Leydesdorff) Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2014 08:13:40 +0200 Subject: CFP for DISC 2014 (Daegu, Dec. 2014) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: From: Han Woo Park [mailto:han.woo.park.korea at gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2014 5:39 AM To: Loet Leydesdorff Subject: Fwd: CFP for DISC 2014 (Daegu, Dec. 2014) Dear Loet, Can you please post a reminder for the DISC 2014 to your favorite mailing lists? Methodological workshops are fixed now as attached and linked. http://www.slideshare.net/hanpark/disc-2014-cfp-v3 Best wishes, On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 10:33 PM, Leslie Tkach-Kawasaki wrote: *** Sorry for cross-posting *** Dear Colleagues, Daegu is *the* destination for conferences this year! Please consider submitting an abstract for DISC 2014, to be held in Daegu, December 11 to 14, 2014. Deadline for abstracts: September 5, 2014 CFP for the Conference: http://www.slideshare.net/hanpark/disc-2014-cfp-v3 Methodological Workshops will be held during the conference as well: http://asia-triplehelix.org/DISC2014 Personal Note: The methodological workshops at DISC 2013 were outstanding. Special note: Cash awards for outstanding papers. Plus, publication opportunities in the following journals: TFSC (Technological Forecasting and Social Change) accepted Special Issue on DISC 2014. http://www.journals.elsevier.com/technological-forecasting-and-social-change/call-for-papers/call-for-papers-open-big-data-as-social-change-triple-helix/ The JCEA (Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia) is also organizing another Special Issue. Here is DISC 2013 special issue. http://eastasia.yu.ac.kr/documents/currentissue.html Looking forward to seeing you there. Best regards, Leslie Tkach-Kawasaki (Member, International Advisory Board, DISC 2014) (Associate Professr, University of Tsukuba, Japan) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: DISC 2014_CFP_v10.pptx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.presentationml.presentation Size: 3538844 bytes Desc: DISC 2014_CFP_v10.pptx URL: From amsciforum at GMAIL.COM Sun Aug 31 08:21:53 2014 From: amsciforum at GMAIL.COM (Stevan Harnad) Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2014 08:21:53 -0400 Subject: "Open Access" Heatmap Message-ID: On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 2:50 AM, Richard Poynder wrote: perhaps this open access heatmap might be of interest...: > http://www.scinoptica.com/pages/topics/open-access-heatmap.php *1.* To make this OA journal heatmap more informative, it should be compared with the heatmap of the number of *subscription journals* from each of these countries. *2*, Then (to help the eye and brain) a heatmap of the *ratio* of OA to nonOA journals. *3*. That will give an idea of the OA journal situation worldwide (i.e., Gold OA) (though of course it will not be controlled for journal *quality* or *age*: the spam journals will be in there too). *4*. And if the interest is in an OA heatmap rather than just Gold OA heatmap, it will need to be accompanied by a heatmap of Green OA self-archiving -- first, perhaps, the very approximate one using Google Scholar, for all *free online articles.* *5*. And then *5* controlled for free online articles *per publication year * *6*. Then a WoS or SCOPUS heatmap for total articles output per year *7*. Then the ratio of *5* to *6*. *8*. Then separating Green articles from Gold articles and controlling for publication year, country size, etc. Lots going on in OA, of which the heatmap of OA journals gives only a minute glimpse... For a bit more -- likewise only partial glimpses, and already dated, Google the work of (a) Gargouri et al , (b) Bjork et al , (c) Eric Archambault and (d) Lee Giles . Stevan Harnad On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 2:50 AM, Richard Poynder wrote: > Forwarding from Shauna Gordon-McKeon: > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Shauna Gordon-McKeon > To: Ulrich Herb > Cc: open-science , " > open-access at lists.okfn.org" , " > goal at eprints.org" > Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2014 10:47:01 -0400 > Subject: Re: [open-science] Open Access Heatmap > > > > Thanks for sharing. > > > > I'd be curious to see a heatmap that looks at percentage of journals that > are open access. Is there a source for the total number of journals > produced by a country, that can be used to get the percentage? > > > > > > > > On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Ulrich Herb > wrote: > > Dear lists, > > > perhaps this open access heatmap might be of interest for you: > http://www.scinoptica.com/pages/topics/open-access-heatmap.php > > > best regards > > > Ulrich > -- > scinoptica science consulting & publishing consulting > POB 11 54 > D-66266 Kleinblittersdorf > Germany > http://www.scinoptica.com/pages/en/start.php > +49-(0)157 30306851 > http://twitter.com/#!/scinoptica > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 valentina.markusova at GMAIL.COM Sun Aug 31 13:45:46 2014 From: valentina.markusova at GMAIL.COM (Valentina Markusova) Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2014 21:45:46 +0400 Subject: "Open Access" Heatmap In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Wonderful map and source of information. Thank you Stepa! Valentina Markusova On Aug 31, 2014, at 4:21 PM, Stevan Harnad wrote: > Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html > On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 2:50 AM, Richard Poynder wrote: > > perhaps this open access heatmap might be of interest...: http://www.scinoptica.com/pages/topics/open-access-heatmap.php > > 1. To make this OA journal heatmap more informative, it should be compared with the heatmap of the number of subscription journals from each of these countries. > > 2, Then (to help the eye and brain) a heatmap of the ratio of OA to nonOA journals. > > 3. That will give an idea of the OA journal situation worldwide (i.e., Gold OA) (though of course it will not be controlled for journal quality or age: the spam journals will be in there too). > > 4. And if the interest is in an OA heatmap rather than just Gold OA heatmap, it will need to be accompanied by a heatmap of Green OA self-archiving -- first, perhaps, the very approximate one using Google Scholar, for all free online articles. > > 5. And then 5 controlled for free online articles per publication year > > 6. Then a WoS or SCOPUS heatmap for total articles output per year > > 7. Then the ratio of 5 to 6. > > 8. Then separating Green articles from Gold articles and controlling for publication year, country size, etc. > > Lots going on in OA, of which the heatmap of OA journals gives only a minute glimpse... > > For a bit more -- likewise only partial glimpses, and already dated, Google the work of (a) Gargouri et al, (b) Bjork et al, (c) Eric Archambault and (d) Lee Giles. > > Stevan Harnad > > > On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 2:50 AM, Richard Poynder wrote: > Forwarding from Shauna Gordon-McKeon: > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Shauna Gordon-McKeon > To: Ulrich Herb > Cc: open-science , "open-access at lists.okfn.org" , "goal at eprints.org" > Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2014 10:47:01 -0400 > Subject: Re: [open-science] Open Access Heatmap > > > > Thanks for sharing. > > > > I'd be curious to see a heatmap that looks at percentage of journals that are open access. Is there a source for the total number of journals produced by a country, that can be used to get the percentage? > > > > > > > > On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Ulrich Herb wrote: > > Dear lists, > > > perhaps this open access heatmap might be of interest for you: http://www.scinoptica.com/pages/topics/open-access-heatmap.php > > > best regards > > > Ulrich > -- > scinoptica science consulting & publishing consulting > POB 11 54 > D-66266 Kleinblittersdorf > Germany > http://www.scinoptica.com/pages/en/start.php > +49-(0)157 30306851 > http://twitter.com/#!/scinoptica > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > GOAL mailing list > GOAL at eprints.org > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: