Thu, 24 Jul 2008 23:39:49 BST CiteULike: JSicot's citation_impact http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/tag/citation_impact CiteULike.org en-gb Copyright © 2004-2008 citeulike.org http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2770600 <i>New Library World, Vol. 109, No. 1/2. (2008), pp. 65-74.</i><br /><br />Purpose – This literature review aims to provide a synthesis of available key information about the citation impact of Open Access journals in LIS and science in general. Citation impact is defined as a surrogate measure of citation counts. Design/methodology/approach – Based on a literature review, this paper discusses the methodology of the data collections for citation counts. The literature review is structured to address the literature about citation impact of Open Access journals. Findings – The literature review indicates that there is quite a uniform way about methodology of citation counts and substantial research about motivation for URL citations to LIS articles. Originality/value – This literature review is a comprehensive study of the main research about citation impact of Open Access journals, focused on LIS journals. Citation impact of Open Access journals Nana Turk doi:10.1108/03074800810846010 New Library World, Vol. 109, No. 1/2. (2008), pp. 65-74. 2008-05-08T10:21:33-00:00 2008 New Library World 109 1/2 65 74 citation_impact open open_access open_journal_systems http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2431169 <i>The 11th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics (2007)</i> Downloads vs. Citations: Relationships, Contributing Factors and Beyond Heting Chu Thomas Krichel The 11th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics (2007) 2008-02-26T19:45:57-00:00 2007 The 11th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics citation_impact scientometrie http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2213542 <i>Cybergeo (17 December 2007)</i><br /><br />La numérisation des ressources documentaires et la généralisation des procédures de l'évaluation scientifique renouvellent la question des usages de la bibliométrie. L'article recense les principaux outils de référence et les indicateurs en vogue. Il démontre que ces outils ne restituent que très imparfaitement la réalité de la production de recherche en sciences humaines et sociales. Il analyse les stratégies de publication émergentes sur internet et préconise des solutions pour un accès libre et partagé à l'information scientifique. Citation, Citation, Citation : Bibliometrics, the web and the Social Sciences and Humanities - Citation, Citation, Citation : la bibliométrie, Internet et les sciences humaines et sociales Christine Kosmopoulos Denise Pumain Cybergeo (17 December 2007) 2008-01-10T08:47:51-00:00 2007 Cybergeo bibliometrie citation_impact social_sciences http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2088581 <i>(6 Dec 2007)</i><br /><br />We study the dependence of citation counts of e-prints published on the arXiv:astro-ph server on their position in the daily astro-ph listing. Using the SPIRES literature database we reconstruct the astro-ph listings from July 2002 to December 2005 and determine citation counts for e-prints from their ADS entry. We use Zipf plots to analyze the citation distributions for each astro-ph position. We find that e-prints appearing at or near the top of the astro-ph mailings receive significantly more citations than those further down the list. This difference is significant at the 7 sigma level and on average amounts to two times more citations for papers at the top than those further down the listing. We propose three possible non-exclusive explanations for this positional citation effect and try to test them. We conclude that self-promotion by authors plays a role in the observed effect but cannot exclude that increased visibility at the top of the daily listings contributes to higher citation counts as well. We can rule out that the positional dependence of citations is caused by the coincidence of the submission deadline with the working hours of a geographically constrained set of intrinsically higher cited authors. We discuss several ways of mitigating the observed effect, including splitting astro-ph into several subject classes, randomizing the order of e-prints, and a novel approach to sorting entries by relevance to individual readers. The Importance of Being First: Position Dependent Citation Rates on arXiv:astro-ph JP Dietrich (6 Dec 2007) 2007-12-11T08:28:08-00:00 2007 citation_impact http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2052448 <i>The Charleston Advisor (October 2007)</i> Using Scopus to Analyze Citations Kimberly Hill Joanne Sparks The Charleston Advisor (October 2007) 2007-12-03T20:45:31-00:00 2007 The Charleston Advisor citation_impact scopus http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1630546 <i>Scientometrics, Vol. 72, No. 3. (September 2007), pp. 427-437.</i> Does self-citation pay? Fowler James Aksnes Dag doi:10.1007/s11192-007-1777-2 Scientometrics, Vol. 72, No. 3. (September 2007), pp. 427-437. 2007-09-07T10:35:20-00:00 2007 Scientometrics 0138-9130 72 3 427 437 Springer citation_impact self_citation http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1687726 <i>Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, Vol. 3, No. 2. (2007), pp. 87-90.</i><br /><br />Objective – To determine whether three competing citation tracking services result in differing citation counts for a known set of articles, and to assess the extent of any differences. Design – Citation analysis, observational study. Setting – Three citation tracking databases: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science. Subjects – Citations from eleven journals each from the disciplines of oncology and condensed matter physics for the years 1993 and 2003. Methods – The researchers selected eleven journals each from the list of journals from Journal Citation Reports 2004 for the categories “Oncology” and “Condensed Matter Physics” using a systematic sampling technique to ensure journals with varying impact factors were included. All references from these 22 journals were retrieved for the years 1993 and 2003 by searching three databases: Web of Science, INSPEC, and PubMed. Only research articles were included for the purpose of the study. From these, a stratified random sample was created to proportionally represent the content of each journal (oncology 1993: 234 references, 2003: 259 references; condensed matter physics 1993: 358 references, 2003: 364 references). In November of 2005, citations counts were obtained for all articles from Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar. Due to the small sample size and skewed distribution of data, non-parametric tests were conducted to determine whether significant differences existed between sets. Main results – For 1993, mean citation counts were highest in Web of Science for both oncology (mean = 45.3, SD = 77.4) and condensed matter physics (mean = 22.5, SD = 32.5). For 2003, mean citation counts were higher in Scopus for oncology (mean = 8.9, SD = 12.0), and in Web of Science for condensed matter physics (mean = 3.0, SD = 4.0). There was not enough data for the set of citations from Scopus for condensed matter physics for 1993 and it was therefore excluded from analysis. A Friedman test to measure for differences between all remaining groups suggested a significant difference existed, and so pairwise post-hoc comparisons were performed. The Wilcoxon Signed Ranked tests demonstrated significant differences “in citation counts between all pairs (p < 0.001) except between Google Scholar and Scopus for CM physics 2003 (p = 0.119).” The study also looked at the number of unique references from each database, as well as the proportion of overlap for the 2003 citations. In the area of oncology, there was found to be 31% overlap between databases, with Google Scholar including the most unique references (13%), followed by Scopus (12%) and Web of Science (7%). For condensed matter physics, the overlap was lower at 21% and the largest number of unique references was found in Web of Science (21%), with Google Scholar next largest (17%) and Scopus the least (9%). Citing references from Google Scholar were found to originate from not only journals, but online archives, academic repositories, government and non-government white papers and reports, commercial organizations, as well as other sources. Conclusion – The study does not confirm the authors’ hypothesis that differing scholarly coverage would result in different citation counts from the three databases. While there were significant differences in mean citation rates between all pairs of databases except for Google Scholar and Scopus in condensed matter physics for 2003, no one database performed better overall. Different databases performed better for different subjects, as well as for different years, especially Scopus, which only includes references starting in 1996. The results of this study suggest that the best citation database will depend on the years being searched as well as the subject area. For a complete picture of citation behaviour, the authors suggest all three be used. Use Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science for Comprehensive Citation Tracking Lorie Kloda Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, Vol. 3, No. 2. (2007), pp. 87-90. 2007-09-23T19:00:11-00:00 2007 Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 3 2 87 90 citation_impact gscholar scopus wos http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1370414 <i>Journal of eclectronic publishing, Vol. 10, No. 2. (April 2007)</i> Backlinks: Alternatives to the Citation Index for Determining Impact Frank Lester Journal of eclectronic publishing, Vol. 10, No. 2. (April 2007) 2007-06-07T13:44:59-00:00 2007 Journal of eclectronic publishing 10 2 Ann Arbor, MI: Scholarly Publishing Office citation_impact impact_factor http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1379662 <i>(2000)</i> Historians and Electronic Resources: A Citation Analysis Suzanne Graham (2000) 2007-06-12T04:01:55-00:00 2000 citation_impact history http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1443103 <i>Physics World (December 2006)</i> The rise and rise of citation analysis Lokman Meho Physics World (December 2006) 2007-07-08T18:51:24-00:00 2006 Physics World citation_impact http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/567514 <i>(2005)</i><br /><br />This is a second signal-detection analysis of the accuracy of a robot in detecting open access (OA) articles (by checking by hand how many of the articles the robot tagged OA were really OA, and vice versa). A first analysis, on a smaller sample (Biology: 100 OA, 100 non-OA), had found a detectability (d') of 2.45 and bias of 0.52 (hits 93%, false positives 16%; Biology %OA: 14%; OA citation advantage: 50%). The present analysis on a larger sample (Biology: 272 OA, 272 non-OA) found a detectability of 0.98 and bias of 0.78 (hits 77%, false positives, 41%; Biology %OA: 16%; OA citation advantage: 64%) An analysis in Sociology (177 OA, 177 non-OA) found near-chance detectability (d' = 0.11) and an OA bias of 0.99 (hits, 54%, false alarms, 49%; prior robot estimate Sociology %OA: 23%; present estimate 15%). It was not possible from these data to estimate the Sociology OA citation advantage. CONCLUSIONS: The robot significantly overcodes for OA. In Biology 2002, 40% of identified OA was in fact OA. In Sociology 2000, only 18% of identified OA was in fact OA. Missed OA was lower: 12% in Biology 2002 and 14% in Sociology 2000. The sources of the error are impossible to determine from the present data, since the algorithm did not capture URLs for documents identified as OA. In conclusion, the robot is not yet performing at a desirable level and future work may be needed to determine the causes, and improve the algorithm. Evaluation of Algorithm Performance on Identifying OA K Antelman N Bakkalbasi D Goodman C Hajjem S Harnad (2005) 2006-03-29T06:29:58-00:00 2005 citation_impact open_access open_archive scientometrie http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/710741 <i>(2006)</i><br /><br />In the literature there are a large number of publications in sociology, in computer science or in information sciences, as well as in studies of collaboration in science describing the studies of social networks with unweighted ties because measures involving unweighted ties are easier to calculate. It is not surprising that there are few studies on networks with weighted ties since they not only need more complex formulas but need a process of quantification when quantitative empirical data are not directly available. However quantitative empirical data are directly available under the condition of using bibliometric or webometric data. In conclusion new complex measures of the degree centrality are introduced including weighted ties possible for use of the analysis of co-authorship or citation networks. Both co-authorship relations and citations are well quantified data (weighted ties). These new measures are applied to a co-authorship network as an example. A New Centrality Measure for Social Network Analysis Applicable to Bibliometric and Webometric Data H Kretschmer T Kretschmer (2006) 2006-06-26T06:49:52-00:00 2006 bibliometrie citation_impact scientometrie web_statistics http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/781544 <i>Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 23, No. 1. (2002), pp. 127-148.</i><br /><br />Using a citation network of 60 references on expatriate failure rates, I demonstrate how commonplace is the violation of the principles for good academic referencing. Inappropriate references undermine scholarship and its credibility. In the case of expatriate failure rates, miscitation has promoted a firmly entrenched myth unsubstantiated by any empirical evidence. I discuss the implications of referencing errors for academics and practitioners and demonstrate how these errors can be avoided. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Are our referencing errors undermining our scholarship and credibility? The case of expatriate failure rates Anne-Wil Harzing doi:10.1002/job.125 Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 23, No. 1. (2002), pp. 127-148. 2006-08-01T10:01:18-00:00 2002 Journal of Organizational Behavior 23 1 127 148 citation_impact research_assessment http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/733312 <i>J Med Libr Assoc, Vol. 93, No. 2. (April 2005), pp. 223-228.</i><br /><br />PURPOSE: The purpose was to determine the impact of online journals on the citation patterns of medical faculty. This study looked at whether researchers were more likely to limit the resources they consulted and cited to those journals available online rather than those only in print. SETTING: Faculty publications from the college of medicine at a large urban university were examined for this study. The faculty publications from a regional medical college of the same university were also examined in the study. The number of online journals available for faculty, staff, and students at this institution has increased from an initial core of 15 online journals in 1998 to over 11,000 online journals in 2004. METHODOLOGY: Searches by author affiliation were performed in the Web of Science to find all articles written by faculty members in the college of medicine at the selected institution. Searches were conducted for the following years: 1993, 1996, 1999, and 2002. Cited references from each faculty-authored article were recorded, and the corresponding cited journals were coded into four categories based on their availability at the institution in this study: print only, print and online, online only, and not owned. Results were analyzed using SPSS. RESULTS: The number of journals cited per year continued to increase from 1993 to 2002. The results did not indicate that researchers were more likely to cite online journals or were less likely to cite journals only in print. At the regional location where the number of print-only journals was minimal, use of the print-only journals did decrease in 2002, although not significantly. CONCLUSION/DISCUSSION: It is possible that electronic access to information (i.e., online databases) has had a positive impact on the number of articles faculty will cite. Results of this study suggest, at this point, that faculty are still accessing the print-only collection, at least for research purposes, and are therefore not sacrificing quality for convenience. Online journals' impact on the citation patterns of medical faculty. SL De Groote M Shultz M Doranski J Med Libr Assoc, Vol. 93, No. 2. (April 2005), pp. 223-228. 2006-07-03T18:15:12-00:00 2005 J Med Libr Assoc 1536-5050 93 2 223 228 citation_impact online_publishing http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1332433 <i>HELLENIC ORTHODONTIC REVIEW, Vol. 6 (2003)</i> Impact factor, citation index and circulation Semra Ciger HELLENIC ORTHODONTIC REVIEW, Vol. 6 (2003) 2007-05-25T14:31:36-00:00 2003 HELLENIC ORTHODONTIC REVIEW 6 citation_impact impact_factor http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1094024 <i>Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 58, No. 1. (January 2007), pp. 39-50.</i> Understanding journal usage: A statistical analysis of citation and use John Mcdonald Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 58, No. 1. (January 2007), pp. 39-50. 2007-02-08T01:46:19-00:00 2007 Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 58 1 39 50 citation_impact researchers_uses scientific_publishing http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/556373 <i>(15 Mar 2006)</i><br /><br />An analysis of 2,765 articles published in four math journals from 1997 to 2005 indicated that articles deposited in the arXiv received 35% more citations on average than non-deposited articles (an advantage of about 1.1 citations per article), and that this difference was most pronounced for highly-cited articles. The most plausible explanation is not the Open Access or Early View, but Self-Selection, which has led to higher quality articles being deposited in the arXiv. Yet in spite of their citation advantage, arXiv-deposited articles received 23% fewer downloads from the publisher's website (about 10 fewer downloads per article) in all but the most recent two years after publication. The data suggest that arXiv and the publisher's website may be fulfilling distinct functional needs of the reader. Does the arXiv lead to higher citations and reduced publisher downloads for mathematics articles? Philip Davis Michael Fromerth (15 Mar 2006) 2006-03-18T08:00:31-00:00 2006 arxiv citation_impact open_archive http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1375735 <i>CERN Workshop on Innovations in Scholarly Communication : Implementing the benefits of OAI (OAI3) (2004)</i><br /><br />Conclusions of the breakout session "Open access citation index". What’s wrong with the Science Citation Index? Because of it’s power it has some pernicious side effects: A relatively small group of people decides which journals are to be included. There are somewhere between 24.000 (Harnad) and 40.000 (Garfield) journals. 7.000 or 8.000 are included in SCI. Open access citation index Jean-Claude Guédon CERN Workshop on Innovations in Scholarly Communication : Implementing the benefits of OAI (OAI3) (2004) 2007-06-10T10:40:25-00:00 2004 CERN Workshop on Innovations in Scholarly Communication : Implementing the benefits of OAI (OAI3) citation_impact open_access http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/322773 <i>D-Lib Magazine (September 2005)</i><br /><br />Citation analysis is an important tool used to trace scholarly research, measure impact, and justify tenure and funding decisions. Web of Science, which indexes peer-reviewed journal literature, has been the major research database for citation tracking. Changes in scholarly communication, including preprint/postprint servers, technical reports available via the internet, and open access e-journals are developing rapidly, and traditional citation tracking using Web of Science may miss much of this new activity. Two new tools are now available to count citations: Scopus and Google Scholar. This paper presents a case study comparing the citation counts provided by Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar for articles from the Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (JASIST) published in 1985 and in 2000 using a paired t-test to determine statistical significance. Web of Science provided the largest citation counts for the 1985 articles, although this could not be tested statistically. For JASIST articles published in 2000, Google Scholar provided statistically significant higher citation counts than either Web of Science or Scopus, while there was no significant difference between Web of Science and Scopus. The implications for measuring impact in a changing scholarly communication environment are examined. An Examination of Citation Counts in a New Scholarly Communication Environment Kathleen Bauer Nisa Bakkalbasi D-Lib Magazine (September 2005) 2005-09-16T15:30:35-00:00 2005 D-Lib Magazine citation_impact scholary_communication http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/296440 <i>BMJ, Vol. 329, No. 7465. (4 September 2004), pp. 546-547.</i> Relation between online "hit counts" and subsequent citations: prospective study of research papers in the BMJ Thomas Perneger doi:10.1136/bmj.329.7465.546 BMJ, Vol. 329, No. 7465. (4 September 2004), pp. 546-547. 2005-08-17T12:14:46-00:00 2004 BMJ 329 7465 546 547 citation_impact scientometrie web_statistics http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/503542 <i>LIBRI, Vol. 55, No. 4., pp. 170-180.</i><br /><br />Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.com) provides a new method of locating potentially relevant articles on a given subject by identifying subsequent articles that cite a previously published article. An important feature of Google Scholar is that researchers can use it to trace interconnections among authors citing articles on the same topic and to determine the frequency with which others cite a specific article, as it has a "cited by" feature. This study begins with an overview of how to use Google Scholar for citation analysis and identifies advanced search techniques not well documented by Google Scholar. This study also compares the citation counts provided by Web of Science and Google Scholar for articles in the field of "Webometrics." It makes several suggestions for improving Google Scholar. Finally, it concludes that Google Scholar provides a free alternative or complement to other citation indexes. Google Scholar : the new generation of citation indexes A Noruzi LIBRI, Vol. 55, No. 4., pp. 170-180. 2006-02-13T08:11:30-00:00 LIBRI 55 4 170 180 citation_impact gscholar http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/562081 <i>Guardian - Education (22 March 2006)</i><br /><br />A unique British institution was sentenced to the axe this afternoon - though few in the Commons or outside realised it from Gordon Brown's rapid-fire delivery. The research assessment exercise (RAE) - a gargantuan exercise in which every active researcher in every university in the UK is painstakingly assessed by panels of other academics - is to go. The next RAE in 2008 will be the last as part of the chancellor's attempt to "radically simplify" the method of distributing research funding to universities. RAE to be scrapped D Macleod Guardian - Education (22 March 2006) 2006-03-24T08:53:58-00:00 2006 Guardian - Education citation_impact research_assessment http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/270754 <i>Information Processing & Management, Vol. 41, No. 6. (December 2005), pp. 1419-1440.</i><br /><br />We generated networks of journal relationships from citation and download data, and determined journal impact rankings from these networks using a set of social network centrality metrics. The resulting journal impact rankings were compared to the ISI IF. Results indicate that, although social network metrics and ISI IF rankings deviate moderately for citation-based journal networks, they differ considerably for journal networks derived from download data. We believe the results represent a unique aspect of general journal impact that is not captured by the ISI IF. These results furthermore raise questions regarding the validity of the ISI IF as the sole assessment of journal impact, and suggest the possibility of devising impact metrics based on usage information in general. Toward alternative metrics of journal impact: A comparison of download and citation data Johan Bollen Herbert Van de Sompel Joan Smith Rick Luce doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2005.03.024 Information Processing & Management, Vol. 41, No. 6. (December 2005), pp. 1419-1440. 2005-08-01T12:26:07-00:00 2005 Information Processing & Management 41 6 1419 1440 citation_impact impact_factor scientometrie http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/72145 <i>Serials Review, Vol. 30, No. 4. (2004), pp. 310-314.</i><br /><br />The research access/impact problem arises because journal articles are not accessible to all of their would-be users; hence, they are losing potential research impact. The solution is to make all articles Open Access (OA; i.e., accessible online, free for all). OA articles have significantly higher citation impact than non-OA articles. There are two roads to OA: the "golden" road (publish your article in an OA journal) and the "green" road (publish your article in a non-OA journal but also self-archive it in an OA archive). Only 5% of journals are gold, but over 90% are already green (i.e., they have given their authors the green light to self-archive); yet only about 10-20% of articles have been self-archived. To reach 100% OA, self-archiving needs to be mandated by researchers' employers and funders, as the United Kingdom and the United States have recently recommended, and universities need to implement that mandate. The Access/Impact Problem and the Green and Gold Roads to Open Access Stevan Harnad Tim Brody Francois Vallieres Les Carr Steve Hitchcock Yves Gingras Charles Oppenheim Heinrich Stamerjohanns Eberhard Hilf doi:10.1016/j.serrev.2004.09.013 Serials Review, Vol. 30, No. 4. (2004), pp. 310-314. 2005-01-04T15:02:08-00:00 2004 Serials Review 30 4 310 314 citation_impact open_access open_archive http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/695507 <i>(2006)</i><br /><br />In this paper we introduce a new data gathering method “Web/URL Citation” and use it and Google Scholar as a basis to compare traditional and Web-based citation patterns across multiple disciplines. For this, we built a sample of 1,650 articles from 108 Open Access (OA) journals published in 2001 in four science and four social science disciplines. We recorded the number of citations to the sample articles using several methods based upon the ISI Web of Science, Google Scholar and the Google search engine (Web/URL citations). For each discipline, we found significant correlations between ISI citations and both Google Scholar and Google Web/URL citations; with similar results when using total or average citations, and when comparing within and across (most) journals. We also investigated disciplinary differences. Google Scholar citations were more numerous than ISI citations in our four social science disciplines as well as in computer science, suggesting that Google Scholar is a more comprehensive tool for citation tracking in the social sciences and perhaps also in fast-moving fields where conference papers are highly valued and published online. The results for Web/URL citations suggested that counting a maximum of one hit per site produces a better measure for assessing the impact of OA journals or articles, because replicated web citations are very common within individual sites. The results can be considered as additional evidence that there is some commonality between traditional and Web-extracted citations. Google Scholar Citations and Google Web/URL Citations: A Multi-Discipline Exploratory Analysis K Kousha M Thelwall (2006) 2006-06-14T07:54:33-00:00 2006 citation_impact google gscholar scientometrie http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1062262 <i>Library Journal, No. 15. (January 2007)</i> Who Cited This? G Golderman B Connolly Library Journal, No. 15. (January 2007) 2007-01-23T15:17:10-00:00 2007 Library Journal 15 citation_impact impact_factor scientific_impact http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1373021 <i>Inform Process Manag, No. 41. (2005), pp. 1395-1402.</i><br /><br />It has been shown (S. Lawrence, 2001, Nature, 411, 521) that journal articles which have been posted without charge on the internet are more heavily cited than those which have not been. Using data from the NASA Astrophysics Data System (ads.harvard.edu) and from the ArXiv e-print archive at Cornell University (arXiv.org) we examine the causes of this effect. The Effect of Use and Access on Citations Michael Kurtz Guenther Eichhorn Alberto Accomazzi Carolyn Grant Markus Demleitner Edwin Henneken Stephen Murray Inform Process Manag, No. 41. (2005), pp. 1395-1402. 2007-06-08T15:11:01-00:00 2005 Inform Process Manag 41 1395 1402 citation_impact researchers_uses http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1372995 <i>Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 57, No. 8. (2006), pp. 1060-72.</i> Earlier Web usage statistics as predictors of later citation impact Tim Brody Stevan Harnad Carr Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 57, No. 8. (2006), pp. 1060-72. 2007-06-08T15:08:21-00:00 2006 Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 57 8 1060 72 citation_impact online_publishing scientific_impact http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1372994 <i></i> Does the arXiv lead to higher citations and reduced publisher downloads for mathematics articles? Philip Davis Michael Fromerth Cs 2007-06-08T15:08:20-00:00 arxiv citation_impact http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1372991 <i>Nature, Vol. 415, No. 6868. (2002)</i> Errors in citation statistics Anonyme Nature, Vol. 415, No. 6868. (2002) 2007-06-08T15:07:31-00:00 2002 Nature 415 6868 bibliometrie citation_impact http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1372990 <i>Biomedical Digital Libraries, Vol. 4, No. 1. (2007)</i> The strike rate index a new index for journal quality based on journal size and the h-index of citations William Barendse Biomedical Digital Libraries, Vol. 4, No. 1. (2007) 2007-06-08T15:07:30-00:00 2007 Biomedical Digital Libraries 4 1 citation_impact impact_factor scientometrie http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1372989 <i>(2006)</i> Ten-Year Cross-Disciplinary Comparison of the Growth of Open Access and How it Increases Research Citation Impact C Hajjem S Harnad Y Gingras (2006) 2007-06-08T15:07:30-00:00 2006 citation_impact open_access open_archive scientific_impact scientific_research scientometrie http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1372985 <i>(2005)</i> OA Impact Advantage = EA + (AA) + (QB) + QA + (CA) + UA Stevan Harnad (2005) 2007-06-08T15:06:57-00:00 2005 citation_impact open_archive scientific_impact http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1372983 <i>(2007)</i> Impact of Data Sources on Citation Counts and Rankings of LIS Faculty: Web of Science vs. Scopus and Google Scholar Lokman Meho Kiduk Yang (2007) 2007-06-08T15:06:31-00:00 2007 citation_impact gscholar scopus wos http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1372981 <i>Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 9999, No. 9999. (2007)</i> Can citation analysis of Web publications better detect research fronts? Dangzhi Zhao Andreas Strotmann Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 9999, No. 9999. (2007) 2007-06-08T15:05:44-00:00 2007 Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 9999 9999 citation_impact scientific_publishing http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1372957 <i>(2003)</i><br /><br />Citebase is a new citation-ranked search and impact discovery service that measures citations of scholarly research papers which are openly accessible on the Web, i.e. papers that are assessable continuously online. Other services, such as ResearchIndex, have emerged in recent years to offer citation indexing of Web research papers. In the first detailed user evaluation of an open access Web citation indexing service, Citebase has been evaluated by nearly 200 users from different backgrounds. The paper details the procedures used in the evaluation, and analyses the results of this study, which took place between June and October 2002. It was found that within the scope of its primary components, the search interface and services available from its rich bibliographic records, Citebase can be used simply and reliably for the purpose intended, and that it compares favourably with other bibliographic services. It is shown tasks can be accomplished efficiently with Citebase regardless of the background of the user. More data need to be collected and the process refined before it is as reliable for measuring citation impact of indexed papers. Better explanations and guidance are required for first-time users. Coverage is seen as a limiting factor, even though Citebase indexes over 200,000 papers from arXiv. Non-physicists were frustrated at the lack of papers from other sciences. The principle of citation searching of open access archives has thus been demonstrated and need not be restricted to current users. Since the evaluation, Citebase has become a featured service of the ArXiv physics eprint archives. Evaluating Citebase, an open access Web-based citation-ranked search and impact discovery service Steve Hitchcock Arouna Woukeu Tim Brody Les Carr Wendy Hall Stevan Harnad (2003) 2007-06-08T15:02:21-00:00 2003 arxiv citation_impact citebase open_archive http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1372955 <i>archivesic. (2006)</i> L'évaluation des publications scientifiques : du facteur d'impact à l'indice de notoriété Durand Barthez archivesic. (2006) 2007-06-08T15:01:40-00:00 2006 archivesic. bibliometrie citation_impact impact_factor scientific_impact scientometrie http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1372948 <i>Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 50, No. 2. (1999), pp. 115-31.</i> Combining mapping and citation analysis for evaluative bibliometric purposes: A bibliometric study ECM Noyons HF Moed M Luwel Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 50, No. 2. (1999), pp. 115-31. 2007-06-08T15:00:26-00:00 1999 Journal of the American Society for Information Science 50 2 115 31 citation_impact research_assessment scientometrie http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1372805 <i>(2006)</i> A New Era in Citation and Bibliometric Analyses: Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar Lokman Meho Kiduk Yang (2006) 2007-06-08T13:09:22-00:00 2006 bibliometrie citation_impact gscholar scientometrie scopus wos http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1372799 <i></i> Maximizing the research impact of your publications Arthur Sale 2007-06-08T13:09:00-00:00 citation_impact scientific_impact http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1372784 <i></i><br /><br />The ongoing paradigm change in the scholarly publication system (?science is turning to e-science?) makes it necessary to construct alternative evaluation criteria/metrics which appropriately take into account the unique characteristics of electronic publications and other research output in digital formats. Today, major parts of scholarly Open Access (OA) publications and the self-archiving area are not well covered in the traditional citation and indexing databases. The growing share and importance of freely accessible research output demands new approaches/metrics for measuring and for evaluating of these new types of scientific publications. In this paper we propose a simple quantitative method which establishes indicators by measuring the access/download pattern of OA documents and other web entities of a single web server. The experimental indicators (search engine, backlink and direct access indicator) are constructed based on standard local web usage data. This new type of web-based indicator is developed to model the specific demand for better study/evaluation of the accessibility, visibility and interlinking of open accessible documents. We conclude that e-science will need new stable e-indicators. Constructing experimental indicators for Open Access documents Philipp Mayr 2007-06-08T13:07:44-00:00 citation_impact open_access scientometrie http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1372783 <i>dLIST pre-print (2007)</i> The Rise and Rise of Citation Analysis Lokman Meho dLIST pre-print (2007) 2007-06-08T13:07:44-00:00 2007 dLIST pre-print citation_impact scientometrie http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1372776 <i></i> Open Access Citation Information Rachel Hardy Charles Oppenheim Tim Brody Steve Hitchcock 2007-06-08T13:07:20-00:00 citation_impact open_access http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1372772 <i>D-Lib Magazine, Vol. 10, No. 6. (2004)</i> Comparing the Impact of Open Access (OA) vs. Non-OA Articles in the Same Journals Stevan Harnad Tim Brody D-Lib Magazine, Vol. 10, No. 6. (2004) 2007-06-08T13:06:32-00:00 2004 D-Lib Magazine 10 6 citation_impact open_archive scientific_impact http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1372740 <i>(2006)</i> Effect of E-printing on Citation Rates in Astronomy and Physics Edwin Henneken Michael Kurtz Guenther Eichhorn Alberto Accomazzi Carolyn Grant Donna Thompson Stephen Murray (2006) 2007-06-08T13:03:23-00:00 2006 astronomy citation_impact e-prints physics http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1372735 <i>PLoS Biology, Vol. 4, No. 5. (2006)</i> Open Access Increases Citation Rate Catriona Maccallum Hemai Parthasarathy PLoS Biology, Vol. 4, No. 5. (2006) 2007-06-08T13:02:50-00:00 2006 PLoS Biology 4 5 citation_impact open_access http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1372730 <i>Biomedical Digital Libraries, Vol. 3, No. 1. (2006)</i><br /><br />Researchers turn to citation tracking to find the most influential articles for a particular topic and to see how often their own published papers are cited. For years researchers looking for this type of information had only one resource to consult: the Web of Science from Thomson Scientific. In 2004 two competitors emerged ? Scopus from Elsevier and Google Scholar from Google. The research reported here uses citation analysis in an observational study examining these three databases; comparing citation counts for articles from two disciplines (oncology and condensed matter physics) and two years (1993 and 2003) to test the hypothesis that the different scholarly publication coverage provided by the three search tools will lead to different citation counts from each. Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science Nisa Bakkalbasi Kathleen Bauer Janis Glover Lei Wang Biomedical Digital Libraries, Vol. 3, No. 1. (2006) 2007-06-08T13:02:49-00:00 2006 Biomedical Digital Libraries 3 1 citation_impact gscholar scopus wos http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1372727 <i>(1998), pp. 116-23.</i> CiteSeer: An Autonomous Web Agent for Automatic Retrieval and Identification of Interesting Publications Kurt Bollacker Steve Lawrence Lee Giles (1998), pp. 116-23. 2007-06-08T13:02:17-00:00 1998 116 23 citation_impact citeseer harvesting open_archive http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1372726 <i>BMJ, Vol. 330, No. 7500. (2005), pp. 1097-8.</i> Open access, impact, and demand Peter Suber BMJ, Vol. 330, No. 7500. (2005), pp. 1097-8. 2007-06-08T13:02:17-00:00 2005 BMJ 330 7500 1097 8 citation_impact open_access scientific_impact http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1372724 <i>PLoS Biology, Vol. 4, No. 5. (2006)</i> Citation Advantage of Open Access Articles Gunther Eysenbach PLoS Biology, Vol. 4, No. 5. (2006) 2007-06-08T13:02:17-00:00 2006 PLoS Biology 4 5 citation_impact open_access