[Sigmetrics] New papers

[Bornmann, Lutz]

You might be interested in three new papers:

Elango, B., Bornmann, L., & Kannan, G. (in press). Detecting the historical roots of tribology research: a bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics: http://arxiv.org/abs/1601.00141
Abstract: In this study, the historical roots of tribology are investigated using a newly developed scientometric method called Referenced Publication Years Spectroscopy. The study is based on cited references in tribology research publications. The Science Citation Index Expanded is used as data source. The results show that RPYS has the potential to identify the important publications : Most of the publications which have been identified in this study as highly cited (referenced) publications are landmark publications in the field of tribology.

Bornmann, L. (in press). Is collaboration among scientists related to the citation impact of papers because their quality increases with collaboration? An analysis based on data from F1000Prime and normalized citation scores. Journal of the Association of Information Science and Technology: http://arxiv.org/abs/1602.00419
Abstract: In recent years, the relationship of collaboration among scientists and the citation impact of papers have been frequently investigated. Most of the studies show that the two variables are closely related: an increasing collaboration activity (measured in terms of number of authors, number of affiliations, and number of countries) is associated with an increased citation impact. However, it is not clear whether the increased citation impact is based on the higher quality of papers which profit from more than one scientist giving expert input or other (citation-specific) factors. Thus, the current study addresses this question by using two comprehensive datasets with publications (in the biomedical area) including quality assessments by experts (F1000Prime member scores) and citation data for the publications. The study is based on nearly 10,000 papers. Robust regression models are used to investigate the relationship between number of authors, number of affiliations, and number of countries, respectively, and citation impact - controlling for the papers' quality (measured by F1000Prime expert ratings). The results point out that the effect of collaboration activities on impact is largely independent of the papers' quality. The citation advantage is apparently not quality-related; citation specific factors (e.g. self-citations) seem to be important here.

Bornmann, L. & Haunschild, R. (in press). Relative Citation Ratio (RCR): An empirical attempt to study a new field-normalized bibliometric indicator. Journal of the Association of Information Science and Technology: http://arxiv.org/abs/1511.08088
Abstract: Hutchins, Yuan, M., and Santangelo (2015) proposed the Relative Citation Ratio (RCR) as a new field-normalized impact indicator. This study investigates the RCR by correlating it on the level of single publications with established field-normalized indicators and assessments of the publications by peers. We find that the RCR correlates highly with established field-normalized indicators, but the correlation between RCR and peer assessments is only low to medium

---------------------------------------

Dr. Lutz Bornmann
Division for Science and Innovation Studies
Administrative Headquarters of the Max Planck Society
Hofgartenstr. 8
80539 Munich
Tel.: +49 89 2108 1265
Mobil: +49 170 9183667
Email: bornmann at gv.mpg.de<mailto:bornmann at gv.mpg.de>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.asis.org/pipermail/sigmetrics/attachments/20160202/d45d3d67/attachment.html>