You are looking at 31 - 40 of 72 items for
- Author or Editor: Wolfgang Glänzel x
- Refine by Access: All Content x
In the present study we propose a solution for a common problem in benchmarking tasks at institutional level. The usage of bibliometric indicators, even after standardisation, cannot disguise that comparing institutes remains often like comparing apples with pears. We developed a model to assign institutes to one of 8 different groups based on their research profile. Each group has a different focus: 1. Biology, 2. Agricultural Sciences, 3. Multidisciplinary, 4. Geo & Space Sciences, 5. Technical and natural Sciences, 6. Chemistry, 7. General and Research Medicine, 8. Specialised Medicine. Two applications of this methodology are described. In the first application we compare the composition of clusters at national level with the national research profiles. This gives a deeper insight in the national research landscape. In a second application we look at the dynamics of institutes by comparing their subject clustering at two different points in time.
The notion of ‘core documents’, first introduced in the context of co-citation analysis and later re-introduced for bibliographic coupling and extended to hybrid approaches, refers to the representation of the core of a document set according to given criteria. In the present study, core documents are used for the identification of new emerging topics. The proposed method proceeds from independent clustering of disciplines in different time windows. Cross-citations between core documents and clusters in different periods are used to detect new, exceptionally growing clusters or clusters with changing topics. Three paradigmatic types of new, emerging topics are distinguished. Methodology is illustrated using the example of four ISI subject categories selected from the life sciences, applied sciences and the social sciences.
An attempt is made to find statistical evidences of the relation between international co-authorship and citation impact. It was found that international co-authorship, in average, results inpublications with higher citation rates than purely domestic papers. No correlation has beenfound, however, between the strength of co-authorship links and the relative citation eminence ofthe resulting publications. International co-authorship links in chemistry, as represented by thewell-known Salton's measure, displayed a characteristic pattern reflecting geopolitical, historical,linguistic, etc. relations among countries. A new indicator, representing also the asymmetry ofco-authorship links was used to reveal main "attractive" and "repulsive" centres of co-operation.
A two-level hierarchic system of fields and subfields of the sciences, social sciences and arts and humanities is proposed. The system was specifically designed for scientometric (evaluation) purposes with the ultimate goal of classifying every single document into a well-defined category. This goal was achieved using a three-step iterative process. The basic concepts and some preliminary results are presented.
In a recent study, de Lange and Glänzel introduced a model for the bibliometric analysis of the extent of multinational co-authorship links. They showed that this model can be considered a generalisation of the "fractionation approach" by Nederhof and Moed. The authors analysed international collaboration links (the Multilateral Collaboration Index) as a function of the share of internationally co-authored papers. The measurement of the deviation of individual countries from (sub-)field peculiarities proved, however, complicated. The intensifying international collaboration and, in several fields, the substantial growth of number of multinational papers (involving three or more countries) in the 90s necessitates a detailed analysis of co-publication distributions, that is, of the distributions of partner countries in a given country"s publication output. The main objective of the study is to elaborate such a measure to be used in addition to the share of international publications and the Multilateral Collaboration Index. In addition, a detailed analysis of national citation impact of domestic, bilateral and multilateral papers in the major science fields is conducted. The model, we develop and the statistical analysis that it allows, support the practical conclusion that the ratio of the number of international links and international papers turns out to be roughly proportional to the ratio of full and fractional publication counts.
A bibliometric analysis of Spanish cardiovascular research is presented. The study focuses on the productivity, visibility and citation impact in an international, notably European context. Special attention is given to international collaboration. The underlying bibliographic data are collected from Thomson Reuters’s Web of Science on the basis of a ‘hybrid’ search strategy combining core journals, lexical terms and citation links especially developed for the field of cardiology.
We suggest that a h-type index - equal to h if you have published h papers, each of which has at least h citations - would be a useful supplement to journal impact factors.