pintiniblog

CitEc "is an experimental autonomous citation index, that is, it is a software system which is able to automatically extract references out of the full texts of documents and create links between citing references and cited papers. With its last update, the CitEc database has reached almost three million references and more than one million citations between documents available in RePEc. This is an important threshold but still is far of being a complete set of citations." Via The RePEc Blog

Le poids lourd ISI doit désormais compter avec la "concurrence" de Scopus. Il ne faudrait pas l'oublier, à l'heure où certains classements internationaux se basent sur ce dernier (et dans lesquels classements, certains perdent des plumes, et pour cause). A lire cet article paru dans The Charleston Advisor: Using Scopus to Analyze Citations. Via Antoinette

Kloda, Lorie Andrea (2007), Use Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science for Comprehensive Citation Tracking. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 2(3):pp. 87-90. (déposé sur E-LIS) "Objective – To determine whether three competing citation tracking services result in differing citation counts for a known set of articles, and to assess the extent of any differences. Design – Citation analysis, observational study. Setting – Three citation tracking databases: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science. Subjects – Citations from eleven journals each from the disciplines of oncology and condensed matter physics for the years 1993 and 2003. Methods – The researchers selected eleven journals each from the list of journals from Journal Citation Reports 2004 for the categories “Oncology” and “Condensed Matter Physics” using a systematic sampling technique to ensure journals with varying impact factors were included. All references from these 22 journals were retrieved for the years 1993 and 2003 by searching three databases: Web of Science, INSPEC, and PubMed. Only research articles were included for the purpose of the study. From these, a stratified random sample was created to proportionally represent the content of each journal (oncology 1993: 234 references, 2003: 259 references; condensed matter physics 1993: 358 references, 2003: 364 references). In November of 2005, citations counts were obtained for all articles from Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar. Due to the small sample size and skewed distribution of data, non-parametric tests were conducted to determine whether significant differences existed between sets. Main results – For 1993, mean citation counts were highest in Web of Science for both oncology (mean = 45.3, SD = 77.4) and condensed matter physics (mean = 22.5, SD = 32.5). For 2003, mean citation counts were higher in Scopus for oncology (mean = 8.9, SD = 12.0), and in Web of Science for condensed matter physics (mean = 3.0, SD = 4.0). There was not enough data for the set of citations from Scopus for condensed matter physics for 1993 and it was therefore excluded from analysis. A Friedman test to measure for differences between all remaining groups suggested a significant difference existed, and so pairwise post-hoc comparisons were performed. The Wilcoxon Signed Ranked tests demonstrated significant differences “in citation counts between all pairs (p < 0.001) except between Google Scholar and Scopus for CM physics 2003 (p = 0.119).” The study also looked at the number of unique references from each database, as well as the proportion of overlap for the 2003 citations. In the area of oncology, there was found to be 31% overlap between databases, with Google Scholar including the most unique references (13%), followed by Scopus (12%) and Web of Science (7%). For condensed matter physics, the overlap was lower at 21% and the largest number of unique references was found in Web of Science (21%), with Google Scholar next largest (17%) and Scopus the least (9%). Citing references from Google Scholar were found to originate from not only journals, but online archives, academic repositories, government and non-government white papers and reports, commercial organizations, as well as other sources. Conclusion – The study does not confirm the authors’ hypothesis that differing scholarly coverage would result in different citation counts from the three databases. While there were significant differences in mean citation rates between all pairs of databases except for Google Scholar and Scopus in condensed matter physics for 2003, no one database performed better overall. Different databases performed better for different subjects, as well as for different years, especially Scopus, which only includes references starting in 1996. The results of this study suggest that the best citation database will depend on the years being searched as well as the subject area. For a complete picture of citation behaviour, the authors suggest all three be used."

[voir page thématique] ... Informations générales - Bibliometrics (université du Texas) Analyses sciento-bibliométriques - Scopus Custom Data, nouveau service lancé par Elsevier sur sa plateforme Scopus, permet aux institutions (enseignement, gouvernements, etc.) de commander des datasets personnalisés à des fins d'analyses sciento-bibliométriques à grande échelle Revues - Scientometrics - Journal Ranking - Research Evaluation (IngentaConnect) - Transactions on Information Systems (ACM - Association for Computing Machinery) - Cybermetrics (International Journal of Scientometrics, Informetrics and Bibliometrics) - Journal of Informetrics (Elsevier) Outils d'évaluation - Eigenfactor (lire sur Marlene's corner) - Authoratory (tool for data-mining information about authors with articles cited on PubMed Central) Articles - Do Open Access Articles Have Greater Citation Impact? A critical review of the literature (PRC) - Nottale, L. (2005), La crise du système d'évaluation scientifique - Rennard, J.-P. (2006), Internet and Free Access to Scholarly Publications (déposé sur Archivesic) - Harnad, S., Future UK RAEs to be Metrics-Based - Harnad, S., Let 1000 RAE Metric Flowers Bloom: Avoid Matthew Effect as Self-Fulfilling Prophecy - Harnad, S. (2007), Open Access Scientometrics and the UK Research Assessment Exercise. In: Proceedings of 11th Annual Meeting of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics. Madrid, Spain. - Glänzel, Wolfgang (2006), On the Opportunities and Limitations of the H-index. In Science Focus, 1(1) pp. 10-11, Library of Chinese Academy of Sciences. - Tonta, Yaşar and Ünal, Yurdagül and Al, Umut (2007), The Research Impact of Open Access Journal Articles. In Proceedings ELPUB 2007, the 11th International Conference on Electronic Publishing, focusing on challenges for the digital spectrum, pp. 1-11, Vienna (Austria). - Victor Kryssanov, We cite as we communicate: A communication model for the citation process (déposé sur arXiv, mars 2007) - Open Access Scientometrics and the UK Research Assessment Exercise (S. Harnad, pre-print déposé sur arXiv) - The effect of open access and downloads ('hits') on citation impact: a bibliography of studies - Heather A. Piwowar, Roger S. Day, and Douglas B. Fridsma, Sharing Detailed Research Data Is Associated with Increased Citation Rate, PLoS ONE, March 21, 2007 - Top ten journals in information science? (mars 2007) - Sridhar, M. S. (2006) Basic Statistics for Libraries and for Analysis of Research Data (déposé sur E-LIS) - Towards a better list of citation superstars: compiling a multidisciplinary list of highly cited researchers (Podlubny, Igor; Kassayova, Katarina, in Research Evaluation; Dec2006, Vol. 15 Issue 3, p154-162) - Life and times of the impact factor: retrospective analysis of trends for seven medical journals (1994-2005) and their Editors' views (JRSM) - A Comparison of On-Line Computer Science Citation Databases (sur arXiv) - Map of science in the journal Nature - Tiew, Wai Sin (2000) Characteristics of Self-Citation in Journal of Natural Rubber Research 1988-1997: a Ten-Year Bibliometric Study. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science 5(1):pp. 95-104. - Morrison, Heather (2006) Usage statistics and scholarly communications. In Strauch, Katina P. and Steinle, Kim and Bernhardt, Beth R. and Daniels, Tim, Eds. Proceedings 26th Annual Charleston Conference, Charleston, SC (US). via E-LIS - Chantier Indicateurs de production scientifique et technologique des opérateurs du programme 150 "Formations supérieures et recherche universitaire" - Why is a new Journal of Informetrics needed? (Philipp Mayr, Walther Umstaetter) via arXiv - Citation advantage of Open Access articles likely explained by quality differential and media effects by Philip M. Davis (arXiv) - Brody, T. (2006) Evaluating Research Impact through Open Access to Scholarly Communication. PhD, Electronics and Computer Science, University of Southampton - The Universal Author Identifier System (UAI_Sys) by Dimitris A. Dervos, and Nikolaos Samaras, and Georgios Evangelidis, and Jaakko Hyvärinen, and Ypatios Asmanidis, (2006) - Cronin, Blaise and Meho, Lokman I. (2006) Using the H-index to Rank Influential Information Scientists. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 57(9):pp. 1275-1278. - Dervos, Dimitris A. and Samaras, Nikolaos and Evangelidis, Georgios and Folias, Theodore (2006) A New Framework for the Citation Indexing Paradigm. In Grove, Andrew, Eds. Proceedings 69th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (ASIST) 43, Austin (US). - The rise and rise of citation analysis (Meho, Lokman I. (2007)) via E-LIS - Concentration of the Most-Cited Papers in the Scientific Literature: Analysis of Journal Ecosystems (John P. A. Ioannidis, PLoS One) - On the Behavior of Journal Impact Factor Rank-Order Distribution (R. Mansilla, E. Köppen, G. Cocho, P. Miramontes - arXiv) - The Open Research Web: A Preview of the Optimal and the Inevitable (Shadbolt, N., Brody, T., Carr, L. and Harnad, S. (2006), in Jacobs, N., Eds. Open Access: Key Strategic, Technical and Economic Aspects, chapter 21. Chandos) (via ECS EPrints) - Earlier Web Usage Statistics as Predictors of Later Citation Impact (Brody, T., Harnad, S. and Carr, L. (2006). Journal of the American Association for Information Science and Technology (JASIST) 57(8) pp. 1060-1072) (via ECS EPrints) - Journal publishing and author self-archiving: Peaceful Co-Existence and Fruitful Collaboration (Berners-Lee, T., De Roure, D., Harnad, S. and Shadbolt, N. (2005)) (via ECS EPrints) - Open Citation Linking: The Way Forward (Hitchcock, S., Brody, T., Gutteridge, C., Carr, L., Hall, W., Harnad, S., Bergmark, D. and Lagoze, C. (2002). D-Lib Magazine 8(10)) (via ECS EPrints) - "Pair"tinence et autres im"pair"fections (affordance.info) - Scopus reviewed and compared: the coverage and functionality of the citation database Scopus, including comparisons with Web of Science and GS (Utrecht University Library) - Bias in the journal impact factor (Vanclay, Jerome) (via arXiv) - A New Era in Citation and Bibliometric Analyses: Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar (Meho, Lokman I. and Yang, Kiduk, 2006) (via E-LIS) - Indicateurs de sciences et de technologies 2006 (Observatoire des sciences et des techniques, France) (via Prosper) - Evaluation de la recherche en SHS (en France, un rapport du Comité national d'évaluation de la recherche) (via Prosper) - A new technique for building maps of large scientific domains based on the cocitation of classes and categories (Moya Anegón, Félix and Vargas Quesada, Benjamín and Herrero Solana, Victor and Chinchilla Rodríguez, Zaida and Corera Álvarez, Elena and Muñoz Fernández, Francisco José (2004), Scientometrics 61(1): pp. 129-145) via E-LIS - Ranking Scientific Publications Using a Simple Model of Network Traffic (Dylan Walker, Huafeng Xie, Koon-Kiu Yan, Sergei Maslov, via arXiv) - Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts (Zhao, Dangzhi (2006) Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts. In Andrew, Grove, Eds. Proceedings 69th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (ASIST), Austin, TX (US)) (E-LIS) - The Impact of Electronic Publishing on Tracking Research Library Investments in Serials (by Martha Kyrillidou, Director, Statistics & Service Quality Programs, ARL Bimonthly Report, 249, dec. 06) - Open Access Publishing and Citation Archives: Background and Controversy (CRS, Library of Congress) - Visual display of international scientific collaboration networks (Chinchilla-Rodriguez, Zaida and Moya-Anegon, Felix and Vargas-Quesada, Benjamin and Gonzalez-Molina, Antonio (2006) Visual display of international scientific collaboration networks. In Guerrero-Bote, Vicente, Eds. Proceedings I International Conference on Multidisciplinary Information Sciences and Technology, InSciT 2006, pp. 593-597, Merida (Spain).) (E-LIS) - Why is Southampton's G-Factor (web impact metric) so high? (Open Access Archivangelism) - Open Research Metrics + liens vers ressources historiques (Open Access Archivangelism) - A toolkit for Research Communities: helping Authors choose the right mode of publication to maximise impact (This paper presents tools, strategies and paths to help authors to choose the right mathod of publication to maximize impact. A wide range of studies and statistics are already giving evidence that papers published in an open, freely accessible journal (and/or repository) have more impact.) (E-LIS) - Making science count: Open Access and its impact on the visibility of science (This presentation investigates e-journal market value and volume, Citations, impact factors and their role. Central question is: Are traditional (i.e., subscription-based) journals more likely to be cited than OA journals?) (E-LIS) - Citation Analysis: A Comparison of Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science (Yang, Kiduk and Meho, Lokman I. (2006) Citation Analysis: A Comparison of Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science. In Grove, Andrew, Eds. Proceedings 69th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (ASIST) 43, Austin, TX (US)) (E-LIS) - Les indicateurs de production scientifique des établissements : pour quoi faire ? comment faire ? - Evaluation Research: An Overview (Ronald R. Powell, Library Trends, vol. 55, n° 1, Summer 2006, pp. 102-120) (via souscription UCL) - An Examination of Citation Counts in a New Scholarly Communication Environment (This paper presents a case study comparing the citation counts provided by Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar for articles from the Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (JASIST) published in 1985 and in 2000 using a paired t-test to determine statistical significance.) - Critical assessment of Web of Science, Scopus & Google Scholar - Citations et Facteurs d’impact : quel avenir pour l’évaluation ? - Du bon usage du facteur d'impact - Open Access Journals in the ISI Citation Databases (2004) - INCISO: Elaboration automatique d’un index de citations des revues espagnoles en sciences sociales (2006) - It is time to find a better way to assess the scientific literature (06/2006) - The ISI Impact Factor - E-prints in Library and Information Science/Bibliometric methods - Constructing experimental indicators for Open Access documents - Webometrics : ten years of expansion - The Web Impact Factor : a critical review - Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science - dLIST/Subject Bibliometrics - On the Behavior of Journal Impact Factor Rank-Order Distribution - Measuring Total Reading of Journal Articles - IndicaSciences - L'évaluation de la recherche (CNRS, 2002) - Social and Human Sciences Online Periodicals (UNESCO) - G-Factor (web impact metric) - Usage Impact Factor: the effects of sample characteristics on usage-based impact metrics - Usage Impact Factor: the effects of sample characteristics on usage-based impact metrics - Can Electronic Journal Usage Data Replace Citation Data as a Measure of Journal Use? An Empirical Examination - Ranking the Research Productivity of LIS Faculty and Schools: An Evaluation of Data Sources and Research Methods - Net Impact Factor and Immediacy Index of ten frontline ISI journals: A case study based on citations to in-press or unpublished articles (The study has made efforts to identify some journals, from which many ‘in-press’ or ‘unpublished’ items are highly cited and find out, if they had counted for a particular year in JCR, how much net effect they can make on Impact Factor and Immediacy Index of those journals.) Evaluation de la recherche - Nottale, L. (2005), La crise du système d'évaluation scientifique - AERES (France) - Avis de l'Académie des technologies sur l'évaluation de la recherche (France) - Evaluation Research: An Overview (Powell, Ronald R. Library Trends, Summer2006, Vol. 55 Issue 1, p102-120, 19p) (sur abonnement) Autres ressources - Scholar's Copyright Addendum Engine

Hajjem, C., Harnad, S. and Gingras, Y. (2005) Ten-Year Cross-Disciplinary Comparison of the Growth of Open Access and How it Increases Research Citation Impact. IEEE Data Engineering Bulletin 28(4) pp. 39-47. Matsubayashi, Mamiko and Kurata, Keiko and Sakai, Yukiko and Morioka, Tomoko and Kato, Shinya and Mine, Shinji and Ueda, Shuichi (2006) Current Status of Open Access in Biomedical Field - the Comparison of Countries Related to the Impact of National Policies. 2006 Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Austin, Texas. Source: OA Archivangelism

"Vers une remise en question des modalités traditionnelles d'évaluation des savoirs scientifiques?"* Extrait: "Plusieurs systèmes d'évaluation coexistent depuis une quarantaine d'années, renvoyant selon les cas à une expertise par les pairs (peer-reviewing) avant publication ou à une mesure de l'impact d'un article, par la mesure des citations par exemple, après publication dans une revue. Ces deux systèmes font actuellement l'objet de nombreuses critiques par les chercheurs de toutes disciplines et plusieurs initiatives ont été développées, utilisant les ressources électroniques (que ce soit les revues électroniques en libre accès ou les archives ouvertes, véritables « réservoirs » de pré-publications), pour rendre toutes les étapes de la procédure d'évaluation transparentes et plus interactives." Source: Archivesic * Muriel Lefebvre (Communication avec actes. Communication scientifique et valorisation de la recherche à l'heure d'Internet Toulouse Urfist Toulouse - SCD Toulouse 1 (Ed.))

"Mesur" est un projet du Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) financé sur deux ans par la fondation Andrew W. Mellon. L'objectif principal du projet est d'enrichir les outils nécessaires à l'évaluation de l'impact des publications académiques (et donc des auteurs) avec des mesures issues des données d'utilisation provenant de sources variées (bibliographies, citations, etc.). Source: liste de discussion OAI

"UK Scholarly Journals 2006 Baseline Report" analyse les données portant sur les publications académiques et scientifiques en Grande-Bretagne. A noter le chapitre consacré aux citations et facteurs d'impact (le rapport indique aussi les différences entre articles parus en OA et articles parus dans les périodiques "à abonnement"). Source: Internet Resources Newsletter

- "Repositories for Institutional Open Access: Mandated Deposit Policies" - "Optimizing OA Self-Archiving Mandates: What? Where? When? Why? How?" Source: Open Access News

Entre 2001 et 2005, Thomson Scientific a indexé plus de 55000 articles comprenant au moins un auteur en Belgique. Voir les pourcentages par discipline et l'impact relatif comparé au reste du monde: Science in Belgium, 2001-05 Source: in-cites (Essential Science Indicators, Thomson Scientific) Via: ResourceShelf