Discipline Bias of Document Citation Impact Indicators: Analyzing Articles in Korean Citation Index

Recently, more and more countries are entering the global race for university competitiveness. On the one hand, global rankings are a convenient tool for quantitative analysis. On the other hand, their indicators are often difficult to quickly calculate and they often contradict each other. The author of this paper hoped to use widely available indicators for a quick analysis of the University’s publication strategy and opted for the normalized citation indicators available in the SciVal analytical tool, namely, Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) and Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI). The author demonstrated the possibility of applying the correlation analysis to the impact indicators of a document and a journal on a sample of social and humanitarian fields at Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia (PFUR, “RUDN” in Russian). A dot diagram of university (or country) documents was used to form a two-factor matrix (SNIP and FWCI) that was further divided into four quadrants. Such an analysis illustrated the present situation in that discipline. An analysis of the RUDN university publications revealed problems and prospects in the development of social sciences and humanities. A serious problem observed was that high-quality results were often published in low-impact journals that narrowed the results’ potential audience and, accordingly, the number of citations. A particular attention was paid to the application of the results in practice.

Download Full-text

Is It a Home Run? Measuring Relative Citation Rates in Accounting Research

Accounting Horizons ◽

10.2308/acch-52570 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 34 (1) ◽

pp. 67-91 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Patricia M. Dechow ◽

Richard G. Sloan ◽

Jean (Jieyin) Zeng

Keyword(s):

Citation Index ◽

Citation Impact ◽

Social Science Citation Index ◽

Performance Evaluations ◽

General Interest ◽

Total Citation ◽

The Social ◽

Citation Metrics ◽

Published Research

SYNOPSIS We propose a new set of citation metrics for evaluating the relative impact of scholarly research in accounting. Our metrics are based on current practices in bibliometrics and normalize citations by both field (accounting) and year of publication. We show that our normalized citation metrics dominate other commonly used metrics in accounting when predicting the long-term citation impact of recently published research. We conduct our analysis using citations from the Social Science Citation Index for the top six general interest accounting journals. More generally, our metrics can be readily constructed using any citation database and for any subfield of accounting. The metrics simply require the total citation counts for a benchmark set of papers published in the same calendar year. The use of these metrics should enable more informed performance evaluations of junior accounting researchers.

Download Full-text

Metamaterials Research: A Scientometric Assessment of Global Publications Output during 2007-16

DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology ◽

10.14429/djlit.37.11573 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 37 (5) ◽

pp. 320

Author(s):

Dhawan S. M. ◽

Gupta B. M. ◽

Manmohan Singh ◽

Asha Rani

Keyword(s):

Computer Science ◽

Materials Science ◽

Citation Index ◽

Citation Impact ◽

Highly Cited Papers ◽

The World ◽

Publication Share ◽

Scopus Database ◽

Scientometric Assessment ◽

Highly Cited

<div class="page" title="Page 1"><div class="layoutArea"><div class="column"><p><span>The paper examines 9858 global publications output on metamaterials research, as covered in Scopus database during 2007-16. The study reveals that metamaterials research registered 15.27% growth and averaged citation impact to 10.08 citations per paper. The global share of top 10 most productive countries in metamaterials research is 84.97 % and their individual global share ranged from 3.30% to 25.57%. China accounted for the largest global share (25.71%), followed by USA (23.96%), U.K. (6.06%), India (5.26%), etc. Five of top 10 countries scored relative citation index above the world average i.e. more than 1: Germany (2.06), USA (1.81), U.K. (1.49), Canada (1.03) and Spain (1.01). The international collaborative publications share of top 10 most productive countries varied from 6.14% to 59.80%. Physics and astronomy, among subjects, contributed the largest publication share (59.36%), followed by engineering (56.71%), materials science (33.30%), computer science (20.32%), mathematics (6.74%) and chemistry (4.46%). The top 20 most productive organisations and authors together contributed 24.69% and 13.17% global publications share respectively and 35.72% and 25.96% global citation share respectively. The top 20 journals accounted for 45.97% share of global output (5743 papers) reported in journals. Of the total global output on metamaterials research, 52 papers were found as highly cited papers averaging 535.64 citations per paper in 10 years. These 52 highly cited papers involved the participation of 310 authors and 142 organisations and were </span><span>published in 20 journals. </span></p></div></div></div>

Download Full-text