The introduction of bibliometric indicators to compare the scientific performance of countries soon raised questions about what document types should be counted for comparison. The present study deals with the development of different document types published in journals related to Physics and recorded in the Science Citation Index. We first take a look at the evolution of the production and citation of papers by document type as well as at the specialization of countries in different document types. We then highlight some characteristics of the ISI document type category "Proceedings" followed by an analysis of publishers and average number of "Proceedings" pages.
denominator, thereby creating the problem of ‘citations for free’, by inclusion in the calculation of citations towards documenttypes that are not part of the calculation (e.g., the inclusion of references towards letters, meeting abstracts, editorials, while
Authors:Juan Miguel Campanario, Jesús Carretero, Vera Marangon, Antonio Molina, and Germán Ros
We studied the effect on journal impact factors (JIF) of citations from documents labeled as articles and reviews (usually peer reviewed) versus citations coming from other documents. In addition, we studied the effect on JIF of the number of citing records. This number is usually different from the number of citations. We selected a set of 700 journals indexed in the SCI section of JCR that receive a low number of citations. The reason for this choice is that in these instances some citations may have a greater impact on the JIF than in more highly-cited journals. After excluding some journals for different reasons, our sample consisted of 674 journals. We obtained data on citations that contributed to the JIF for the years 1998–2006. In general, we found that most journals obtained citations that contribute to the impact factor from documents labeled as articles and reviews. In addition, in most of journals the ratio between citations that contributed to the impact factor and citing records was greater than 80% in all years. Thus, in general, we did not find evidence that citations that contributed to the impact factor were dependent on non-peer reviewed documents or only a few citing records.
that may influence the JIF: documenttype, the paper's age, the author's social status (due to the author's institution, for instance), subject matter, and the time interval of observation (i.e., the citation window). In a previous publication (Mutz and
, in 11 selected years, and their documenttypes are shown in Table 1 . Since this study aims to investigate papers with references, such as articles and review papers, 1,341 (66%), 719 (82.7%) and 354 (40.2%) papers in JASIST, IPM and JOD
Authors:Kun-Yang Chuang, Ming-Huang Wang, and Yuh-Shan Ho
trends were identified.
Documenttype and language of publication
Of the 265 papers in the ESI database, most of them were articles (204; 77%), followed by reviews (42; 16%), and papers of proceedings (19; 7.2%). All of these
—publication year, citation, documenttype, country/territory, institute name, language, source title and subject area—for different distribution status in order to explore the difference and how data mining and CRM technologies and applications have developed in
This paper presents a study of possible changes in patterns of document types in economics journals since the mid-1980s. Furthermore,
the study includes an analysis of a possible relation between the profile of a journal concerning composition of document
types and factors such as place of publication and JIF. The results provide little evidence that the journal editors have
succeeded in manipulating the distribution of document types. Furthermore, there is little support for the hypothesis that
journal editors decrease the number of publications included in the calculation of JIF or for that matter for the hypothesis
that journal editors increase the number of publications not included in the calculation of JIF. The results of the analyses
show that there is a clear distinction of journals based on place of publication and JIF
The publication and coauthorship patterns between 1980–1994 of 15 highly productive Mexican scientists were studied in relation
to their 565 research papers involving only national institutions and 232 published with colleagues from abroad. Three scientists
were selected from each of the following areas: Biomedicine, Chemistry, Physics, Astronomy and Astrophysics and Geosciences.
Parameters studied were: vehicles used for publication; document types; number of authors; collaborating countries; and author
position. The results are discussed in relation to Mexico's peripheral position with regard to the scientific center, and
the increasing internationalization of Mexican science.