Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 42 items for

  • Author or Editor: Ronald Rousseau x
Clear All Modify Search

Abstract

Vanclay's proposal (Vanclay (). Impact factor: outdated artefact or stepping-stone to journal certification? Scientometrics doi: 10.1007/s11192-011-0561-0) is discussed. We agree that a major overhaul is necessary: journal evaluation must be performed using instruments and not artefacts.

Restricted access

Without Abstract

Restricted access

Abstract  

Lack of standard procedures hinders progress in scientometric and bibliometric research. Provoked by a recent publication in the journal Scientometrics, we consider in particular the problem of how to handle - in a standardised way - data that, by and large, follow a Lotka, Zipf or Mandelbrot distribution

Restricted access

Summary In a recent article Sombatsompop et al. (2004) proposed a new way of calculating a synchronous journal impact factor. Their proposal seems quite interesting and will be discussed in this note. Their index will be referred as the Median Impact Factor (MIF). I explain every step in detail so that readers with little mathematical background can understand and apply the procedure. Illustrations of the procedure are presented. Some attention is given to the estimation of the median cited age in case it is larger than ten year. I think the idea introduced by Sombatsompop, Markpin and Premkamolnetr has a great theoretical value as they are - to the best of my knowledge - the first ones to consider impact factors not using years as a basic ingredient, but an element of the actual form of the citation curve. The MIF is further generalized to the notion of a percentile impact factor.

Restricted access

Abstract

It is shown that the observations made in a recent contribution by Savanur and Srikanth (Scientometrics 84:365–371, ) are not new. On the contrary much more refined collaboration measures have been proposed already in 1991 by Egghe.

Restricted access

Summary  

The Liberman-Wolf bonding number can not be considered as an acceptable measure for the internal bonding of a research group or community. This is shown by a construction where adding the same number of articles with the same number of co-authors to two existing groups (with a given number of articles with one or two collaborators) reverses the original order in these groups' bonding numbers.

Restricted access