Citation metrics have value because they aim to make scientific assessment a level playing field, but urgent transparency-based adjustments are necessary to ensure that measurements yield the most accurate picture of impact and excellence. One problematic area is the handling of self-citations, which are either excluded or inappropriately accounted for when using bibliometric indicators for research evaluation. In this talk, in favour of openly tracking self-citations, I report on a study of self-referencing behaviour among various academic disciplines as captured by the curated bibliometric database Web of Science. Specifically, I examine the behaviour of thousands of authors grouped into 15 subject areas like Biology, Chemistry, Science and Technology, Engineering, and Physics. In this talk, I focus on the methodological set-up of the study and discuss data science related problems like author name disambiguation and bibliometric indicator modelling. This talk bases on the following publication: Kacem, A., Flatt, J. W., & Mayr, P. (2020). Tracking self-citations in academic publishing. Scientometrics, 123(2), 1157–1165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03413-9
Research impact beyond scholarly communication: the big challenge of Scientometrics 2.0
By Pei-Shan Chi &Wolfgang Glänzel
The last two decades in the evolution of bibliometrics mark a significant turn towards the quantification and measurement of scientific communication beyond the scholarly one and towards a broader assessment of its various impacts on science and society. We summarize the background and the main characteristics of this evolution, refer to latest results in our related studies, and focus on the latent and real challenges in the use of the new metrics designed for the measurement of the broader impact of research. In addition to the critical review several examples are given to illustrate the large potential and added value of the new metrics when used judiciously and correctly. In conclusion we will address and elaborate the framework of preconditions that are essential for improving coverage and reliability of both data sources and the metrics derived from those.
We gebruiken cookies op deze website. Bent u akkoord met het opslaan van cookies voor deze site? JaNeeOns privacybeleid
Privacy & Cookies
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
Laatst geüpdatet: 21 april 2022 door j.lind
Challenges of scholarly communication: bibliometric transparency and impact (online)
Wanneer
Evenement type
Analysing self-citations in a large bibliometric database
By Philipp Mayr-Schlegel
Citation metrics have value because they aim to make scientific assessment a level playing field, but urgent transparency-based adjustments are necessary to ensure that measurements yield the most accurate picture of impact and excellence. One problematic area is the handling of self-citations, which are either excluded or inappropriately accounted for when using bibliometric indicators for research evaluation. In this talk, in favour of openly tracking self-citations, I report on a study of self-referencing behaviour among various academic disciplines as captured by the curated bibliometric database Web of Science. Specifically, I examine the behaviour of thousands of authors grouped into 15 subject areas like Biology, Chemistry, Science and Technology, Engineering, and Physics. In this talk, I focus on the methodological set-up of the study and discuss data science related problems like author name disambiguation and bibliometric indicator modelling. This talk bases on the following publication: Kacem, A., Flatt, J. W., & Mayr, P. (2020). Tracking self-citations in academic publishing. Scientometrics, 123(2), 1157–1165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03413-9
Research impact beyond scholarly communication: the big challenge of Scientometrics 2.0
By Pei-Shan Chi & Wolfgang Glänzel
The last two decades in the evolution of bibliometrics mark a significant turn towards the quantification and measurement of scientific communication beyond the scholarly one and towards a broader assessment of its various impacts on science and society. We summarize the background and the main characteristics of this evolution, refer to latest results in our related studies, and focus on the latent and real challenges in the use of the new metrics designed for the measurement of the broader impact of research. In addition to the critical review several examples are given to illustrate the large potential and added value of the new metrics when used judiciously and correctly. In conclusion we will address and elaborate the framework of preconditions that are essential for improving coverage and reliability of both data sources and the metrics derived from those.
More information.
BMI nieuws