| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Ahlgren, Per, et al.
(författare)
-
Measuring impact of twelve information scientists using the DCI index
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Journal of The American Society For Information Science And Technology. - : Wiley. - 1532-2882 .- 1532-2890. ; 61:7, s. 1424-1439
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The Discounted Cumulated Impact (DCI) index has recently been proposed for research evaluation. In the present work an earlier dataset by Cronin and Meho (2007) is reanalyzed, with the aim of exemplifying the salient features of the DCI index. We apply the index on, and compare our results to, the outcomes of the Cronin-Meho (2007) study. Both authors and their top publications are used as units of analysis, which suggests that, by adjusting the parameters of evaluation according to the needs of research evaluation, the DCI index delivers data on an author's (or publication's) "lifetime" impact or current impact at the time of evaluation on an author's (or publication's) capability of inviting citations from highly cited later publications as an indication of impact, and on the relative impact across a set of authors (or publications) over their "lifetime" or currently.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Colliander, Cristian, 1980-, et al.
(författare)
-
The effects and their stability of field normalization baseline on relative performance with respect to citation impact : a case study of 20 natural science departments
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Journal of Informetrics. - : Elsevier BV. - 1751-1577 .- 1875-5879. ; 5:1, s. 101-113
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In this paper we study the effects of field normalization baseline on relative performance of 20 natural science departments in terms of citation impact. Impact is studied under three baselines: journal, ISI/Thomson Reuters subject category, and Essential Science Indicators field. For the measurement of citation impact, the indicators item-oriented mean normalized citation rate and Top-5% are employed. The results, which we analyze with respect to stability, show that the choice of normalization baseline matters. We observe that normalization against publishing journal is particular. The rankings of the departments obtained when journal is used as baseline, irrespective of indicator, differ considerably from the rankings obtained when ISI/Thomson Reuters subject category or Essential Science Indicators field is used. Since no substantial differences are observed when the baselines Essential Science Indicators field and ISI/Thomson Reuters subject category are contrasted, one might suggest that people without access to subject category data can perform reasonable normalized citation impact studies by combining normalization against journal with normalization against Essential Science Indicators field.
|
|
| 6. |
- Ding, Jielan, et al.
(författare)
-
The link between ethnic diversity and scientific impact : the mediating effect of novelty and audience diversity
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Scientometrics. - : Springer Nature. - 0138-9130 .- 1588-2861. ; 126:9, s. 7759-7810
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Understanding the nature and value of scientific collaboration is essential for sound management and proactive research policies. One component of collaboration is the composition and diversity of contributing authors. This study explores how ethnic diversity in scientific collaboration affects scientific impact, by presenting a conceptual model to connect ethnic diversity, based on author names, with scientific impact, assuming novelty and audience diversity as mediators. The model also controls for affiliated country diversity and affiliated country size. Using path modeling, we apply the model to the Web of Science subject categories Nanoscience & Nanotechnology, Ecology and Information Science & Library. For all three subject categories, and regardless of if control variables are considered or not, we find a weak positive relationship between ethnic diversity and scientific impact. The relationship is weaker, however, when control variables are included. For all three fields, the mediated effect through audience diversity is substantially stronger than the mediated effect through novelty in the relationship, and the former effect is much stronger than the direct effect between the ethnic diversity and scientific impact. Our findings further suggest that ethnic diversity is more associated with short-term scientific impact compared to long-term scientific impact.
|
|
| 7. |
- Ahlgren, Per, et al.
(författare)
-
Bibliometric analysis of two subdomains in philosophy: free will and sorites
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Scientometrics. - : Springer Netherlands. - 0138-9130 .- 1588-2861. ; 103:1, s. 47-73
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In this study we tested the fruitfulness of advanced bibliometric methods for mapping subdomains in philosophy. The development of the number of publications on free will and sorites, the two subdomains treated in the study, over time was studied. We applied the cocitation approach to map the most cited publications, authors and journals, and we mapped frequently occurring terms, using a term co-occurrence approach. Both subdomains show a strong increase of publications in Web of Science. When we decomposed the publications by faculty, we could see an increase of free will publications also in social sciences, medicine and natural sciences. The multidisciplinary character of free will research was reflected in the cocitation analysis and in the term co-occurrence analysis: we found clusters/groups of cocited publications, authors and journals, and of co-occurring terms, representing philosophy as well as non-philosophical fields, such as neuroscience and physics. The corresponding analyses of sorites publications displayed a structure consisting of research themes rather than fields. All in all, both philosophers involved in this study acknowledge the validity of the various networks presented. Bibliometric mapping appears to provide an interesting tool for describing the cognitive orientation of a research field, not only in the natural and life sciences but also in philosophy, which this study shows.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Yang, Guoliang, et al.
(författare)
-
Using multi-level frontiers in DEA models to grade countries/territories
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Journal of Informetrics. - : Elsevier. - 1751-1577 .- 1875-5879. ; 10:1, s. 238-253
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Several investigations to and approaches for categorizing academic journals/institutions/countries into different grades have been published in the past. To the best of our knowledge, most existing grading methods use either a weighted sum of quantitative indicators (including the case of one properly defined quantitative indicator) or quantified peer review results. Performance measurement is an important issue of concern for science and technology (S&T) management. In this paper we address this issue, leading to multi-level frontiers resulting from data envelopment analysis (DEA) models to grade selected countries/territories. We use research funding and researchers as input indicators, and take papers, citations and patents as output indicators. Our research results show that using DEA frontiers we can unite countries/territories by different grades. These grades reflect the corresponding countries' levels of performance with respect to multiple inputs and outputs. Furthermore, we use papers, citations and patents as single output (with research funding and researchers as inputs), respectively, to show country/territory grade changes. In order to increase the insight in this approach, we also incorporate a simple value judgment (that the number of citations is more important than the number of papers) as prior information into the DEA models to study the resulting changes of these Countries/Territories' performance grades.
|
|
| 10. |
- Ahlgren, Per, 1960-, et al.
(författare)
-
A bibliometric analysis of battery research with the BATTERY 2030+ roadmap as point of departure
- 2022
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- In this bibliometric study, we analyze the six battery research subfields identified in the BATTERY 2030+ roadmap: Battery Interface Genome, Materials Acceleration Platform, Recyclability, Smart functionalities: Self-healing, Smart functionalities: Sensing, and Manufacturability. In addition, we analyze the entire research field related to BATTERY 2030+ as a whole, using two operationalizations. We (a) evaluate the European standing in the subfields/the BATTERY 2030+ field in comparison to the rest of the world, and (b) identify strongholds of the subfields/the BATTERY 2030+ field across Europe. For each subfield and the field as a whole, we used seed articles, i.e. articles listed in the BATTERY 2030+ roadmap or cited by such articles, in order to generate additional, similar articles located in an algorithmically obtained classification system. The output of the analysis is publication volumes, field normalized citation impact values with comparisons between country/country aggregates and between organizations, co-publishing networks between countries and organizations, and keyword co-occurrence networks. For the results related to (a), the performance of EU & associated (countries) is similar to China and the aggregate Japan-South Korea-Singapore and well below North America regarding citation impact and with respect to the field as a whole. Exceptions are, however, the subfields Battery Interface Genome and Recyclability. For the results related to (b), there is a large variability in the EU & associated organizations regarding volume in the different subfields. For citation impact, examples of high-performing EU & associated organizations are ETH Zurich and Max Planck Society for the Advancement of Science.
|
|
