Authors:Mingyang Wang, Guang Yu, Shuang An, and Daren Yu
’ quality on citationimpact prediction based on papers published in the field of astronomy and astrophysics in 1980 (Wang et al. 2011 ). The impact of one paper is expressed by its knowledge diffusion properties in our work. And the speed of one paper is
Hypothesis 1 The higher the number of authors per paper, the higher the citationimpact.
Hypothesis 2 The higher the number of external institutions per paper, the greater the paper's citationimpact.
Hypothesis 3 The
profiles, citationimpact, international collaboration, as well as subfields distributions of publications and patents. Citation links between publications and patents are actually studied from two different perspectives—publications cited by patents and
There is a rich literature on how science and technology are related to each other. Patent citation analysis is amongst the
most frequently used to tool to track the strengths of links. In this paper we explore the relationship between patent citations
and citation impact in nanoscience. Our observations indicate that patent-cited papers perform better in terms of standard
bibliometric indicators than comparable publications that are not linked to technology in this way. More specifically, we
found that articles cited in patents are more likely to be cited also by other papers. The share of highly cited papers is
the most striking result. Instead of the average of 4% of all papers, 13.8% of the papers cited once or twice in patents fall
into this category and even 23.5% of the papers more frequently cited in patents receive citation rates far above the standard.
Our analyses further demonstrate the presence and the relevance of bandwagon effects driving the development of science and
Authors:Omwoyo Bosire Onyancha and Jan Resenga Maluleka
's publications output and citationimpact was conducted. Fifteen most productive countries, in terms of the number of published articles, were selected for the current study. Data was extracted from the Thomson Reuters citation indexes, namely: Arts and
This study develops and tests an integrated conceptual model of journal evaluation from varying perspectives of citation analysis. The main objective is to obtain a more complete understanding of the external factors affecting journal citation impact; that is, a theoretical construct measured by a number of citation indicators. Structural equation modelling (SEM) with partial least squares (PLS) is used to test the conceptual model with empirical data from journals in clinical neurology. Interrelationships among journal citation impact and four external factors (journal characteristics, journal accessibility, journal visibility and journal internationality) have been successfully explored, and the conceptual model of journal evaluation has been examined.
Based on the citation data of journals covered by the China Scientific and Technical Papers and Citations Database (CSTPCD), we obtained aggregated journal-journal citation environments by applying routines developed specifically for this
purpose. Local citation impact of journals is defined as the share of the total citations in a local citation environment,
which is expressed as a ratio and can be visualized by the size of the nodes. The vertical size of the nodes varies proportionally
to a journal’s total citation share, while the horizontal size of the nodes is used to provide citation information after
correction for the within-journal (self-) citations. In the “citing” environment, the equivalent of the local citation performance
can also be considered as a citation activity index. Using the “citing” patterns as variables one is able to map how the relevant
journal environments are perceived by the collective of authors of a journal, while the “cited” environment reflects the impact
of journals in a local environment. In this study, we analyze citation impacts of three Chinese journals in mathematics and
compare local citation impacts with impact factors. Local citation impacts reflect a journal’s status and function better
than (global) impact factors. We also found that authors in Chinese journals prefer international instead of domestic ones
as sources for their citations.
Authors:Wolfgang Glänzel, Frizo Janssens, and Bart Thijs
A novel subject-delineation strategy has been developed for the retrieval of the core literature in bioinformatics. The strategy
combines textual components with bibliometric, citation-based techniques. This bibliometrics-aided search strategy is applied
to the 1980–2004 annual volumes of the Web of Science. Retrieved literature has undergone a structural as well as quantitative
analysis. Patterns of national publication activity, citation impact and international collaboration are analysed for the
1990s and the new millennium.
One often uses the average citation impact factor in order to perform international comparisons between the levels of scientific
performance within given disciplines. In averaging over all (or all cited) papers one may gives undue weight to papers with
few citations while, in fact, the standing of a country within a given field would be better assessed by looking only at the
“successful” papers in that discipline. The present papers suggests that one should do so by averaging citations only over
the ten (or twenty) percent of the most cited papers in a discipline and use these in order to establish a ranking between
countries. The case of Israel is used as an illustration of this approach.
According to the definition of reliability-based citation impact factor (R-impact factor) proposed by KUO & RUPE and the cumulative
citation age distribution model, a mathematical expression of the relationship between R-impact factor and impact factor is
established in this paper. By simulation of the change processes of the R-impact factor and impact factor in the manipulation
process of the impact factor, it is found that the effect of manipulation can be partly corrected by the R-impact factor in
some cases. Based on the Journal Citation Report database, impact factors of 4 normal journals and 4 manipulated journals
were collected. The journals’ R-impact factors and self-cited rates in the previous two years were calculated for each year
during the period 2000 to 2007, and various characteristics influenced by the manipulation were analyzed. We find that the
R-impact factor has greater fairness than the impact factor for journals with relatively short cited half-lives. Finally,
some issues about using the R-impact factor as a measure for evaluating scientific journals are discussed.