Sun, 27 Jul 2008 06:12:25 BST CiteULike: JSicot's scientometrie http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/tag/scientometrie CiteULike.org en-gb Copyright © 2004-2008 citeulike.org http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2886059 <i>Scientometrics, Vol. 41, No. 1. (January 1998), pp. 61-67.</i><br /><br />Abstract  In the paper we will present the adjustments we implemented on the mapping procedure. We consider them as important improvements to make the maps more user-friendly. The improvements concern the implementation of graphical user interfaces, and the addition of ‘map-external’ information. This interface enables the users of the maps to focus onto their specific areas of interest and to determine the position of actors in the field. In addition the ‘map-external’ information contributes to an objective validation of the maps. The presentation will include a demonstration of the electronic maps and added tools. Advanced mapping of science and technology E Noyons A Van Raan doi:10.1007/BF02457967 Scientometrics, Vol. 41, No. 1. (January 1998), pp. 61-67. 2008-06-12T07:22:19-00:00 1998 Scientometrics 41 1 61 67 mapping science scientometrie http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2886058 <i>Scientometrics, Vol. 57, No. 2. (13 June 2003), pp. 257-280.</i><br /><br />Abstract  Evaluation studies of scientific performance conducted during the past years more and more focus on the identification of research of the 'highest quality', 'top' research, or 'scientific excellence'. This shift in focus has lead to the development of new bibliometric methodologies and indicators. Technically, it meant a shift from bibliometric impact scores based on average values such as the average impact of all papers published by some unit to be evaluated towards indicators reflecting the topof the citation distribution, such as the number of 'highly cited' or 'top' articles. In this study we present a comparative analysis of a number of standard and new indicators of research performance or 'scientific excellence', using techniques applied in studies conducted by CWTS in recent years. It will be shown that each type of indicator reflects a particular dimension of the general concept of research performance. Consequently, the application of one single indicator only may provide an incomplete picture of a unit's performance. It is argued that one needs to combine the various types of indicators in order to offer policy makers and evaluators valid and useful assessment tools. The Holy Grail of science policy: Exploring and combining bibliometric tools in search of scientific excellence Thed Van Leeuwen Martijn Visser Henk Moed Ton Nederhof Anthony Van Raan doi:10.1023/A:1024141819302 Scientometrics, Vol. 57, No. 2. (13 June 2003), pp. 257-280. 2008-06-12T07:21:41-00:00 2003 Scientometrics 57 2 257 280 scientometrie http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/699560 <i>Scientometrics, Vol. 62, No. 1. (January 2005), pp. 133-143.</i> Fatal attraction: Conceptual and methodological problems in the ranking of universities by bibliometric methods Anthony van Raan doi:10.1007/s11192-005-0008-6 Scientometrics, Vol. 62, No. 1. (January 2005), pp. 133-143. 2006-06-18T06:11:03-00:00 2005 Scientometrics 62 1 133 143 ranking scientometrie university http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/276731 <i>(3 Aug 2005)</i><br /><br />I propose the index $h$, defined as the number of papers with citation number higher or equal to $h$, as a useful index to characterize the scientific output of a researcher. An index to quantify an individual's scientific output JE Hirsch (3 Aug 2005) 2005-08-08T10:17:12-00:00 2005 h_index scientometrie 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/2349494 <i>Social Science Research Network Working Paper Series (29 January 2008)</i><br /><br />The growth and increasing complexity of global science poses a grand challenge to scientists: How to organise the worldwide evaluation of research programmes and peers? For the 21st century we need not just information on science, but also meta-level scientific information that is delivered to the digital workbench of every researcher. Access, usage and citation metrics will be one major information service that researchers will need on an everyday basis to handle the complexity of science.Scientometrics has been built on centralised commercial databases of high functionality but restricted scope, mainly providing information that may be used for research assessment. Enter digital libraries and repositories: Can they collect reliable metadata at source, ensure universal metric coverage and defray costs? This systematic appraisal of the future role of digital libraries and repositories for metric research evaluation proceeds by investigating the practical inadequacies of current metric evaluation before defining the scope for libraries and repositories as new players. Subsequently the notion of metrics as research information services is developed. Finally, the future relationship between a) libraries and repositories and b) metrics databases, commercial or non-commercial, is addressed.Service reviewed include: Leiden Ranking, Webometrics Ranking of World Universities, COUNTER, MESUR, Harzing POP, CiteSeer, Citebase, RePEc LogEc and CitEc, Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar. Access, Usage and Citation Metrics: What Function for Digital Libraries and Repositories in Research Evaluation? Chris Armbruster Social Science Research Network Working Paper Series (29 January 2008) 2008-02-07T15:31:24-00:00 2008 Social Science Research Network Working Paper Series bibliometrie digital_libraries ir research_assessment scientometrie http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2100470 <i>LIBRI, Vol. 55, No. 4. (2005)</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 a specific article is cited by others as it has a "cited by" feature. We will begin with an overview of how to use it for citation analysis, and then progress through advanced search techniques. This study also compares the citation counts provided by Web of Science and Google Scholar for articles in the field of Webometrics. We make several suggestions for improvement it. Finally, it concludes that Google Scholar provides a free alternative or complement to other citation indexes. Google Scholar : the new generation of citation indexes Alireza Noruzi LIBRI, Vol. 55, No. 4. (2005) 2007-12-12T20:58:46-00:00 2005 LIBRI 55 4 citations gscholar scientometrie http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2032158 <i>Cybermetrics, Vol. 11, No. 1. (November 2007)</i><br /><br />We propose the b index as a measure of scientific excellence at the micro and meso levels, as a promising supplement to the h index and its variants (such as g index and R index). The b index as a measure of scientific excellence. A promising supplement to the h index. L Bornmann R Mutz H-D Daniel Cybermetrics, Vol. 11, No. 1. (November 2007) 2007-11-30T20:23:41-00:00 2007 Cybermetrics 11 1 b_index h_index scientometrie 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/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/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/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/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/1372982 <i>Scientometrics, Vol. 66, No. 3. (2006), pp. 561-577.</i><br /><br />Supplying library users with literature by a seamless linking of media is the goal of (scientific) libraries. By the digitization of primary and secondary data and the convergence of products and providers, libraries have already come very close to achieving this ideal. A digital library is the realization of this goal. However, many librarians are in danger of running out of imagination. What will come after the digital library? Will information professionals still be needed? What services can libraries offer? Bibliometric analysis is an example of new business areas in libraries. This paper will discuss what shape this service could take in practice, who needs it and what target groups exist in the scientific environment. Concrete examples of bibliometric analysis from the Central Library of Research Centre Jülich will round off the overview. Bibliometric analysis - A new business area for information professionals in libraries? Rafael Ball Dirk Tunger Scientometrics, Vol. 66, No. 3. (2006), pp. 561-577. 2007-06-08T15:05:44-00:00 2006 Scientometrics 66 3 561 577 bibliometrie library scientometrie http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1372972 <i>(2007)</i> Visibilité de la production scientifique : une étude scientométrique au Pôle Universitaire Lyonnais Camille Claverie Stéphanie Pouchot Thierry Lafouge Benoît Epron (2007) 2007-06-08T15:04:29-00:00 2007 pul research_assessment scientific_impact scientometrie 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/1372803 <i>(2006)</i> Making science count : Open Access and its impact on the visibility of science Derek Law (2006) 2007-06-08T13:09:22-00:00 2006 open_access scientific_impact scientometrie 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/1372782 <i>Scientometrics, Vol. 57, No. 2. (2003)</i> The Holy Grail of science policy: Exploring and combining bibliometric tools in search of scientific excellence Thed Van Leeuwen Martijn Visser Henk Moed Ton Nederhof AFJ Van Raan Scientometrics, Vol. 57, No. 2. (2003) 2007-06-08T13:07:44-00:00 2003 Scientometrics 57 2 bibliometrie research_assessment scientometrie http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1372777 <i>(2007)</i> Open Access Scientometrics and the UK Research Assessment Exercise Stevan Harnad (2007) 2007-06-08T13:07:20-00:00 2007 open_access research_assessment scientometrie uk http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1372771 <i>(2006)</i> International Workshop on Institutional Repositories and Enhanced and Alternative Metrics of Publication Impact Frank Scholze Susanne Dobratz (2006) 2007-06-08T13:06:32-00:00 2006 ir scientific_impact scientometrie