In this essentially empirical study a comparative analysis of the age of references in scientific papers in three subject fields is performed. Comparisons are made: 1. among national and leading journals in the same scientific field, 2. for a number of high quality journals in physics and chemistry, and 3. between several groups of authors (according to the countries of origin), contributing to the same journals in chemistry. Variations found in the journals citing half-life values suggest that, if properly interpreted, the citing half-life might reflect the journal's quality and might serve as a certain indicator for the citing practices of specific groups of authors.
This paper presents an empirical study of the relations between scientific output and collaboration performed on two scales: (1) an individual scale, for members of a study model, and (2) a group scale, for three samples varying in the level of productivity. The rank approach was applied in the preparation of the study model resulting in the selection of a set of the most prolific authors. In the course of that process, multiple authorship problem was solved by a dual approach, consisting of normal count and modified straight count procedures. As shown by the analysis of collaborative patterns, either on individual or on group scales, scientific output is highly dependent on the frequency of collaboration among the same authors. Expressed as the collaboration measure, it might serve as an indicator in comparative analyses of scientific productivity in a given field of science.
Methodological implications of four accounting procedures applied in multiple authorship treatment relating to author productivity distribution were investigated. The emphasis was given to the individual author rank and inequality pattern of data. It was found that similar pattern of inequality holds in three of the four analysed cases, in spite of the fact that significant changes were observed on the individual level. By introducing the concept of dual approach a plausible interpretation of that phenomenon was obtained.
Authors:Nevenka Pravdić, Alena Aganović-Boras and Dubravka Kritovac
The meaning of the term the intellectual island effect which was introduced byArunachalam et al. is broadened as to characterize the status of science on the periphery in general. A practical solution is proposed, based on bibliometric data of the research output and relying on two criteria: the extent of coverage by world significant secondary literature and the extent of scatter of that literature. Reliability of the publication data retrieved from the Citation Indexes is discussed; a measure is offered to assess the adequacy of the Citation Indexes as the data sources.