On the inequality of citation counts of all publications of individual authors

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 101203
Author(s):  
Ke Dong ◽  
Jiang Wu ◽  
Kaili Wang
Keyword(s):  
Citation Counts

Reintroducing John Maurice Clark to the Accounting Academy

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deirdre M. Collier
Keyword(s):  
20Th Century ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Differential Analysis ◽  
Managerial Accounting ◽  
Accounting History ◽  
Citation Counts ◽  
Book Studies ◽  
Short Time

ABSTRACT This paper reintroduces economist John Maurice Clark to the accounting academic community while investigating his role in the development of managerial accounting. Clark was a prominent American economist during the early half of the 20th century, whose first major book, Studies in the Economics of Overhead Costs (Clark 1923a), has been described by diverse authors as foundational to the field of managerial accounting, especially overhead estimation and differential analysis. An overview of Clark's life is provided, followed by discussion of the importance of his work to accounting. Citation counts of his work in various accounting journals reveal that although widely referenced by accounting scholars for a short time after the publication of Overhead Costs, his name then disappeared from the literature, and indicates that his work is underappreciated. The paper discusses why this lacuna in accounting history is significant, and gives possible explanations for why Clark's work has been overlooked.

scholarly journals Author self-citation in orthodontics is associated with author origin and gender

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Christos Livas ◽  
Konstantina Delli ◽  
Nikolaos Pandis
Keyword(s):  
Negative Binomial ◽  
Case Reports ◽  
Citation Rate ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Negative Binomial Regression ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Journal Citation Reports ◽  
Citation Counts ◽  
And Gender ◽  
Study Type

Abstract Background The aims of this bibliometric study were to determine author self-citation trends in high-impact orthodontic literature and to investigate possible association between self-citation and publication characteristics. Methods Six orthodontic journals with the highest impact factor as ranked by 2017 Journal Citation Reports were screened for a full publication year (2018) for original research articles, reviews, and case reports. Eligible articles were scrutinized for article and author characteristics and citation metrics. Univariable and multivariable negative binomial regression was used to examine associations between self-citation incidence and publication characteristics. Results Medians for author self-citation rate of the most self-citing authors and self-citations were 3.03% (range 0–50) and 1 (range 0–19), respectively. In the univariable analysis, there was no association between self-citation counts and study type (P = 0.41), article topic (P = 0.61), number of authors (P = 0.62), and rank of authors (P = 0.56). Author origin (P = 0.001), gender (P = 0.001) and journal (P = 0.05) were associated with self-citation counts and in the multivariable analysis only origin and gender remained strong self-citation predictors. Asian authors and females self-cited significantly less often than all other regions and male authors. Conclusions Authors in orthodontics do not self-cite at a frequency that suggests potential citation manipulation. Author origin and gender were the only variables associated with citations counts. More bibliometric research is necessary to draw solid conclusions about author self-citation trends in orthodontic literature.

Citation Metrics in Psychological Science

2021 ◽  
pp. 174569162096412
Author(s):  
Nina Radosic ◽  
Ed Diener
Keyword(s):  
Citation Count ◽  
National Research Council ◽  
The United States ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Faculty Members ◽  
Psychological Science ◽  
Enormous Variation ◽  
Citation Counts ◽  
Citation Metrics ◽  
Number Of Citations

We present norms for faculty citation counts based on 811 faculty members at 30 PhD-granting psychology departments in the United States across the range of the National Research Council rankings. The metrics were highly skewed, with most scientists having a low to moderate number of citations of their work and a few scientists having extremely high numbers. However, the median per-year citation count was 149, showing widespread scientific contributions across scholars. Some individuals in lower ranked departments are more highly cited than the average scholar in higher ranked departments, with enormous variation in citation counts in both the low- and high-ranking departments. Citation counts overall have risen in recent years, and the citations of early-career scholars are increasing at a faster rate than their senior colleagues did at the same point in their careers. We found that citation counts at the beginning of scientists’ careers substantially predict lifetime citation success. Young scholars’ citation counts are associated with obtaining positions at higher ranked universities. Finally, we found no significant differences for subfields of psychology. In sum, although a few highly productive scientists have a very large influence, trends reveal that contributions to psychological science are growing over time, widespread, and not limited to a few stars and elite departments.

A Citation-Based Analysis of Economists and Economics Programs

1996 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 46-59 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marshall H. Medoff
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Graduate Programs ◽  
The United States ◽  
Principal Finding ◽  
Citation Counts

This paper uses citation counts, over the period 1971–1992, to rank the top 250 academic economists in the United States. Schools were ranked by the number of top 250 economists a university had on their faculty. Graduate programs were ranked by those Ph.D. programs which have produced the greatest number of the top 250 academic economists. The paper's principal finding is that five universities, Harvard, Stanford, Chicago, MIT, and Princeton are the elite among all Universities.

Influence of selected factors in journals’ citations

2019 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
pp. 90-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rabishankar Giri
Keyword(s):  
Information Science ◽  
Dominant Role ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Total Citation ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Citation Indexes ◽  
Citation Counts ◽  
Log Normal

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the influence of selected factors in journal citations. Various factors can affect citations distribution of journals. Among them, skewness of citations distribution, author self-citation, journal self-citation and recitations (RCs) have been studied. Design/methodology/approach The present study based on 16 systematically selected journals indexed in Scopus under the subject category “Library and Information Science.” The study was confined to original research and review articles that were published in the selected journals in the year 2011. The temporal citation window from 2011 to 2014 was taken for analysis. Tools like, Scopus author ID, ORCID and author profiles from Google Scholar were used to minimize the error due to homonyms, spelling variances and misspelling in authors’ names. Findings It is found that citations distribution in majority of the journals under the study is highly skewed and more likely to follow log-normal distribution. The nature of authorship in papers was found to have positive effect on citation counts. Self-citing data show that higher ranked journals have rather less direct impact on total citation counts than their lower counterpart. RCs are also found to be more in top-tier journals. Though the influence of self-citations and RCs were relatively less at individual level on total citations of journals but combined, they can play a dominant role and can affect total citation counts of journals at significant level. Research limitations/implications The present study is based on Scopus database only. Therefore, citation data can be affected by the inherent limitation of Scopus. Readers are encouraged to further the study by taking into account large sample and tracing citations from an array of citation indexes, such as Web of Science, Google citations, Indian Citation Index, etc. Originality/value This paper reinforces that the citations received by journals can be affected by the factors selected in this study. Therefore, the study provides better understanding of the role of these selected factors in journal citations.

scholarly journals Citation counts in transportation research

2013 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 205-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thor-Erik Sandberg Hanssen ◽  
Finn Jørgensen
Keyword(s):  
Citation Counts ◽  
Transportation Research

scholarly journals What Are the Drivers of Citations?: Application in Tourism and Hospitality Journals

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (19) ◽  
pp. 9288
Author(s):  
Eunhye Park ◽  
Woohyuk Kim
Keyword(s):  
Topic Modeling ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Sharing Economy ◽  
Online Media ◽  
Research Topics ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative ◽  
Hospitality And Tourism ◽  
Citation Counts ◽  
Tourism And Hospitality ◽  
Topic Structure

In line with the qualitative and quantitative growth of academic papers, it is critical to understand the factors driving citations in scholarly articles. This study discovered the up-to-date academic structure in the tourism and hospitality literature and tested the comprehensive sets of factors driving citation counts using articles published in first-tier hospitality and tourism journals found on the Web of Science. To further test the effects of research topic structure on citation counts, unsupervised topic modeling was conducted with 9910 tourism and hospitality papers published in 12 journals over 10 years. Articles specific to online media and the sharing economy have received numerous citations and that recently published papers with particular research topics (e.g., rural tourism and eco-tourism) were frequently cited. This study makes a major contribution to hospitality and tourism literature by testing the effects of topic structure and topic originality discovered by text mining on citation counts.

scholarly journals Down with High Citation Counts

OEconomia ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 461-471
Author(s):  
James Forder
Keyword(s):  
High Citation ◽  
Citation Counts

scholarly journals Citation Counts as a Measure for Scientific Impact

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jari Burgers
Keyword(s):  
Rank Order ◽  
Citation Count ◽  
Kendall’S Tau ◽  
Kendall's Tau ◽  
Scientific Impact ◽  
Total Citation ◽  
Citation Counts ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Lower Correlation ◽  
Ranked List

This thesis presents a look into citation counts as a measure for scientific impact which in turn is used to determine the replication value (RV). first, by comparing citation sources (WoS, Crossref, Scopus and Scite) from which citation counts can be retrieved. Secondly, by removing contradicting citations from the citation count, and comparing this new citation count without contradicting citations with the original total citation count. In both cases, based on the citation count, rank order lists are formed which are compared with the use of two tests. First, Kendall’s tau is calculated to see how well the compared pairs of lists correlate. Second, the rank biased overlap (RBO) is calculated to see how well pairs of lists overlap. The RBO is different than Kendall’s tau because it is able to give more weight to citation counts at the top of the list emphasizing the importance of high ranked articles as opposed to low ranked articles. Both measures indicate a significant correlation and overlap between ranked lists originating from Scopus and Crossref and WoS, and a lower correlation and overlap between Scite and all other sources. Based on the difference between Scite and all other sources, Scite is not yet the best choice as a citation source for determining scientific impact. Both measures also indicate a strong correlation and overlap between the ranked list formed from the total citation counts and the ranked list formed from the total citation count minus the contradicting citations. Based on this high correlation and overlap, taking out contradicting citations is not needed when determining scientific impact.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document