Personal Research Database

Full Text: 2005\Scientometrics63, 163.pdf

Abstract: In the present study full-text analysis and traditional bibliometric methods are combined to improve the efficiency of the individual methods in the mapping of science. The methodology is applied to map research papers from a special issue of Scientometrics. The outcomes substantiate that such hybrid methodology can be applied to both research evaluation and information retrieval. The subject classification given by the guest-editors of the special issue is used for validation purposes. Because of the limited number of papers underlying the study the paper is considered a pilot study that will be extended in a later study on the basis of a larger corpus.

Keywords: Word Analysis, Combined Cocitation, Science, Information, Impact, Websites, Database, Growth, Field, Tool

? Okubo, Y. (2005), Introduction to scientometrics: Application to research evaluation and science studies. Scientometrics, 63 (1), 181-183.

Full Text: 2005\Scientometrics63, 181.pdf

Keywords: Evaluation, Research, Research Evaluation, Scientometrics

? Braun, T. (2005), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research. The use of publication and patent statistics in studies of S&T systems. Scientometrics, 63 (1), 185-188.

Full Text: 2005\Scientometrics63, 185.pdf

Keywords: Patent, Publication, Quantitative, Research, Science, Science and Technology, Statistics

? Ackermann, E. (2005), Bibliometrics of a controversial scientific literature: Polywater research, 1962-1974. Scientometrics, 63 (2), 189-208.

Full Text: 2005\Scientometrics63, 189.pdf

Abstract: This study examines the bibliometrics of the controversial scientific literature of Polywater research, focusing on publication types (books, journal publications, conference proceedings, and technical reports). Publication (P) frequency is used to measure publication ‘shape’ or pattern and output, citations per publication (CPP) for impact, author self-citations (SC) and uncited publications (UP) for their effect on P and CPP. Findings show an epidemic publication pattern, journal publications with the highest P, books with the highest CPP, and insignificant SC and UP. Comparisons to several non-controversial scientific literatures suggest that these findings may be common to other controversial scientific literatures.

Keywords: Anomalous Water, Basic Research, Bibliometrics, Citations, Field, Growth, Indicators, Journal, Netherlands, Publication, Publications, Research, Science, Self-Citation, Statistics

? Bailón-Moreno, R., Jurado-Alameda, E., Ruiz-Baños, R.R. and Courtial, J.P. (2005), Bibliometric laws: Empirical flaws of fit. Scientometrics, 63 (2), 209-229.

Full Text: S\Scientometrics63, 209.pdf

Abstract: The bibliometric laws of Zipf, Bradford, and Lotka, in their various mathematical expressions, frequently present difficulties in the fitting of empirical values. The empirical flaws of fit take place in the frequency of the words, in the productivity of the authors and the journals, as well as in econometric and demographic aspects. This indicates that the underlying fractal model should be revised, since, as shown, the inverse power equations (of the Zipf-Mandelbrot type) are not adequate, as they need to include exponential terms. These modifications not only affect Bibliometrics and Scientometrics, but also, for the generality of the fractal model, apply to Economy, Demography, and even Natural Sciences in general.

Keywords: Exact Formulation, Bradford’s Law, Lotka’s Law

? Bailón-Moreno, R., Jurado-Alameda, E., Ruiz-Baños, R.R. and Courtial, J.P. (2005), The unified scientometric model. Fractality and transfractality. Scientometrics, 63 (2), 231-257.

Full Text: S\Scientometrics63, 231.pdf

Abstract: A unified scientometric model has been developed on the basis of seven principles: the actor-network principle, the translation principle, the spatial principle, the quantativity principle, the composition principle, the centre-periphery or nucleation principle, and the unified principle of cumulative advantages. The paradigm of the fractal model has been expanded by introducing the concept of fractality index and transfractality. In this work, as the first demonstration of the power of the model proposed, all the bibliometric laws known and all their mathematical expressions are deduced, both the structural distributions (Zipf, Bradford and Lotka) as well as the Price’s Law of the exponential growth of science and Brookes’ and Avramescu’s Laws of ageing.

Keywords: Scientific Literature, Exact Formulation, Bradford’s Law, Lotka’s Law, Obsolescence, Growth, Dynamics, Translation, Cocitations, Networks

? Bailón-Moreno, R., Jurado-Alameda, E., Ruiz-Baños, R. and Courtial, J.P. (2005), Analysis of the field of physical chemistry of surfactants with the Unified Scienctometric Model. Fit of relational and activity indicators. Scientometrics, 63 (2), 259-276.

Full Text: 2005\Scientometrics63, 259.pdf

Abstract: By the information system of CoPalRed©, and with the treatment of 63,543 bibliographical references of scientific articles, the field of surfactants has been analysed in the light of the Unified Scientometric Model. It was found that the distributions of actors (countries, centres, and research laboratories, journals, researchers, key words of documents) fit Zif’s Unified Law better than the Zipf-Mandelbrot Law. The model showed an especially good fit for relational indicators such as density and centrality. Using the Unified Bradford Law, the three zones fit were: core, straight fraction, and Groos droop. The fractality index was used to verify that Science can present fractal as well as transfractal structures. In conclusion, the Unified Scientometric Model is, for its flexibility and its integrating capacity, an appropriate model for representing Science, joining non-relational with relational Scientometrics under the same paradigm.

Keywords: Co-Word Analysis, Dynamics, Journals, Research, Scientific Networks

? Egghe, L. (2005), An explanation of disproportionate growth using linear 3-dimensional informetrics and its relation with the fractal dimension. Scientometrics, 63 (2), 277-296.

Full Text: 2005\Scientometrics63, 277.pdf

Abstract: We study new and existing data sets which show that growth rates of sources usually are different from growth rates of items. Examples: references in publications grow with a rate that is different (usually higher) from the growth rate of the publications themselves; article growth rates are different from journal growth rates and so on. In this paper we interpret this phenomenon of “disproportionate growth”; in terms of Naranan’s growth model and in terms of the self-similar fractal dimension of such an information system, which follows from Naranan’s growth model. The main part of the paper is devoted to explain disproportionate growth. We show that the “simple” 2-dimensional informetrics models of source-item relations are not able to explain this but we also show that linear 3-dimensional informetrics (i.e. adding a new source set) is capable to model disproportionate growth. Formulae of such different growth rates are presented using Lotkaian informetrics and new and existing data sets are presented and interpreted in terms of the used linear 3-dimensional model.

Keywords: Fractal Dimension, Growth, Information, Informetrics, Journal, Model, Publications

? Bornmann, L. and Daniel, H.D. (2005), Selection of research fellowship recipients by committee peer review. Reliability, fairness and predictive validity of Board of Trustees’ decisions. Scientometrics, 63 (2), 297-320.

Full Text: 2005\Scientometrics63, 297.pdf

Abstract: In science, peer review is the best-established method of assessing manuscripts for publication and applications for research fellowships and grants. However, the fairness of peer review, its reliability and whether it achieves its aim to select the best science and scientists has often been questioned. The paper presents the first comprehensive study on committee peer review for the selection of doctoral (Ph.D.) and post-doctoral research fellowship recipients. We analysed the selection procedure followed by the Boehringer Ingelheim Fonds (B.I.F.), a foundation for the promotion of basic research in biomedicine, with regard to the reliability, fairness and predictive validity of the procedure - the three quality criteria for professional evaluations. We analysed a total of 2,697 applications, 1,954 for doctoral and 743 for post-doctoral fellowships. In 76% of the cases, the fellowship award decision was characterized by agreement between reviewers. Similar figures for reliability have been reported for the grant selection procedures of other major funding agencies. With regard to fairness, we analysed whether potential sources of bias, i.e., gender, nationality, major field of study and institutional affiliation, could have influenced decisions made by the B.I.F. Board of Trustees. For post-doctoral fellowship applications, no statistically significant influence of any of these variables could be observed. For doctoral fellowship applications, we found evidence of an institutional, major field of study and gender bias, but not of a nationality bias. The most important aspect of our study was to investigate the predictive validity of the procedure, i.e., whether the foundation achieves its aim to select as fellowship recipients the best junior scientists. Our bibliometric analysis showed that this is indeed the case and that the selection procedure is thus highly valid: research articles by B.I.F. fellows are cited considerably more often than the ‘average’ paper (average citation rate) published in the journal sets corresponding to the fields ‘Multidisciplinary’, ‘Molecular Biology & Genetics’, and ‘Biology & Biochemistry’ in Essential Science Indicators (ESI) from the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA). Most of the fellows publish within these fields.

Keywords: Grant Proposals, Stands Today, Science, Bias, Manuscript, Journals, Quality, Attributes, Articles, Ratings

? Kim, M.J. (2005), Korean science and international collaboration, 1995-2000. Scientometrics, 63 (2), 321-339.

Full Text: S\Scientometrics63, 321.pdf

Abstract: This paper investigates Korean scientific output, focusing on international collaboration patterns, through an analysis of journal publications. For the study, 44,534 publications, published by researchers affiliated with Korean institutions and indexed by SCI during the six years 1995-2000, were considered. The study period was divided into two periods to compare the international collaboration for three years 1995-1997 and 1998-2000. The results show a clear decrease in Korea’s international collaboration level between the study periods even though the number of researchers as well as the total R&D expenditure decreased considerably after Korea’s economic change. The decrease of international collaboration in Korean science was inversely associated with different determinants such as scientific size as well as national scientific infrastructure. This decreasing trend of international collaboration in Korean science was largely caused by discipline-to-discipline variations in coverage of the SCI database. Among the top-ten collaborating countries, only the Chinese and the Canadian share of collaborative publications with Korea increased between the two periods under consideration.

Keywords: Bibliometric Analysis, Co-Authorship, Patterns, Publications, Cooperation, Physics

? Lewison, G. and Hartley, J. (2005), What’s in a title? Numbers of words and the presence of colons. Scientometrics, 63 (2), 341-356.

Full Text: 2005\Scientometrics63, 341.pdf

Abstract: Much has been written about titles in scientific journal articles but little research has been carried out. We aimed to assess in two studies how factors like the length of a title and its structure might vary in different scientific fields, and whether or not these features have changed over time. Statistical analyses were made of 216,500 UK papers from science journals, and of 133,200 international oncology papers. Factors examined included title length, the use of colons in the titles, and the number of authors. All of these factors increased over time for both sets of papers, although there were some disciplinary differences in the findings. In both studies, titles with colons occurred more frequently with single than with multiple authors except when the numbers of co-authors were large. Certain features of titles can be related to different disciplines, different journals, the numbers of authors and their nationalities.

Keywords: Articles, Authors, Differences, Factors, Impact, Journal, Journals, Length, Oncology, Papers, Research, Scholarship, Science, Scientific Journal, Titular Colonicity, UK

? van Leeuwen, T.N. and Moed, H.F. (2005), Characteristics of Journal Impact Factors: The effects of uncitedness and citation distribution on the understanding of journal impact factors. Scientometrics, 63 (2), 357-371.

Full Text: 2005\Scientometrics63, 357.pdf

Abstract: In this study, journal impact factors play a central role. In addition to this important bibliometric indicator, which evolves around the average impact of a journal in a two-year timeframe, related aspects of journal impact measurement are studied. Aspects like the output volume, the percentage of publications not cited, and the citation frequency distribution within a set timeframe are researched, and put in perspective with the ‘classical’ journal Impact Factor.

In this study it is shown that these aspects of journal impact measurement play a significant role, and are strongly inter-related. Especially the separation between journals on the basis of the differences in output volume seems to be relevant, as can be concluded from the different results in the analysis of journal impact factors, the degree of uncitedness, and the share of a journal its contents above or below the impact factor value.

Keywords: Medical Journals, Institute, Science, Indicators, Criterion, Quality

? Zitt, M., Ramanana-Rahary, S. and Bassecoulard, E. (2005), Relativity of citation performance and excellence measures: From cross-field to cross-scale effects of field-normalisation. Scientometrics, 63 (2), 373-401.

Full Text: S\Scientometrics63, 373.pdf

Abstract: As citation practices strongly depend on fields, field normalisation is recognised as necessary for fair comparison of figures in bibliometrics and evaluation studies. However fields may be defined at various levels, from small research areas to broad academic disciplines, and thus normalisation values are expected to vary. The aim of this project was to test the stability of citation ratings of articles as the level of observation - hence the basis of normalisation - changes. A conventional classification of science based on ISI subject categories and their aggregates at various scales was used, namely at five levels: all science, large academic discipline, sub-discipline, speciality and journal. Among various normalisation methods, we selected a simple ranking method (quantiles), based on the citation score of the article in each particular aggregate (journal, speciality, etc.) it belonged to at each level. The study was conducted on articles in the full SCI range, for publication year 1998 with a four-year citation window. Stability is measured in three ways: overall comparison of article rankings, individual trajectory of articles, survival of the top-cited class across levels. Overall rank correlations on the observed empirical structure are benchmarked against two fictitious sets that keep the same embedded structure of articles but reassign citation scores either in a totally ordered or in a totally random distribution. These sets act respectively as a ‘worst case’ and ‘best case’ for the stability of citation ratings. The results show that: (a) the average citation rankings of articles substantially change with the level of observation (b) observation at the journal level is very particular, and the results differ greatly in all test circumstances from all the other levels of observation (c) the lack of cross-scale stability is confirmed when looking at the distribution of individual trajectories of articles across the levels, (d) when considering the top-cited fractions, a standard measure of excellence, it is found that the contents of the ‘top-cited’ set is completely dependent on the level of observation. The instability of impact measures should not be interpreted in terms of lack of robustness but rather as the co-existence of various perspectives each having their own form of legitimacy. A follow-up study will focus on the micro levels of observation and will be based on a structure built around bibliometric groupings rather than conventional groupings based on ISI subject categories.

Keywords: Impact-Factors, Scientific Journals, Indicators, Science, Distributions, Publication, Quality, System

? De Marchi, M. (2005), Nota bene - Reviewing some OECD’s R&D definitions. Scientometrics, 63 (2), 403-405.

Full Text: 2005\Scientometrics63, 403.pdf

Abstract: The definitions of Experimental Development and Applied Research currently suggested by OECD bring about inconsistent R&D data. Here, coherent definitions, based on the criterion of generality, are proposed.

Keywords: Definitions, Research

? Braun, T. (2005), Strange referencing and some remarks. Scientometrics, 63 (2), 407-410.

Full Text: 2005\Scientometrics63, 407.pdf

Keywords: Nations

? Leydesdorff, L. (2005), The scientific impact of China. Scientometrics, 63 (2), 411-412

Full Text: 2005\Scientometrics63, 411.pdf

Keywords: China, Impact, Scientific Impact

? Trimble, V. (2005), Productivity and impact analysis: Rediscovering the obvious. Scientometrics, 63 (2), 413-416

Full Text: 2005\Scientometrics63, 413.pdf

Keywords: Analysis, Impact, Impact Analysis, Productivity

? Vinkler, P. (2005), Science indicators, economic development and the wealth of nations. Scientometrics, 63 (2), 417-419.

Full Text: 2005\Scientometrics63, 417.pdf

Keywords: Development, Impact, Science, Science Indicators

? McAleer, M. and Slottje, D. (2005), A new measure of innovation: The patent success ratio. Scientometrics, 63 (3), 421-429.

Full Text: 2005\Scientometrics63, 421.pdf

Abstract: Patents have become increasingly important, especially over the past two decades. As patent office procedures have adapted to remain abreast of changing economic and scientific circumstances, it has also become increasingly important to define and analyse innovation more precisely. This paper introduces a simple new measure of innovation, the patent success ratio (PSR), or the ratio of successful patent applications to total patent applications. It has been argued in the extensive literature on innovation and technology policy that patents can serve as an accurate proxy for innovative activity or innovation. This paper suggests that PSR is a more accurate measure of how innovative activity has changed over time. A sensitivity analysis is conducted to assess the usefulness of the new PSR measure of innovation using annual US data for the period 1915-2001.

Keywords: Analysis, Innovation, Literature, Patent, Patents, Policy, Ratio, Sensitivity, Success, US

? Rousseau, R. (2005), Median and percentile impact factors: A set of new indicators. Scientometrics, 63 (3), 431-441.

Full Text: 2005\Scientometrics63, 431.pdf

Abstract: 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.

Keywords: Attention, Citation, Citations, Impact, Impact Factor, Impact Factors, Journal, Journal Impact, Journal Impact Factor, Knowledge, Number, Science

? Bar-Ilan, J. and Echermane, A. (2005), The anthrax scare and the Web: A content analysis of Web pages linking to resources on anthrax. Scientometrics, 63 (3), 443-462.

Full Text: 2005\Scientometrics63, 443.pdf

Abstract: The purpose of this study was to develop a method for characterizing the page and linking patterns related to dramatic events on the Web. As a specific case, we characterized Web pages linking to the set of pages on anthrax indexed by the Yahoo directory (generally acknowledged as a high quality directory). The sample of Web pages was collected shortly after anthrax became a matter of widespread concern (November 2001). The findings show that at that time the “typical” source page was either a news item or a page with a list of links. Most of the examined links were not navigational but linked to the target page in order to provide additional content. Many Web sites added hyperlinks to pages providing presumably authoritative and high quality information on anthrax rather than supplying the information themselves. The results show that Web authors link extensively to presumably “high quality” pages. The methods presented here can be utilized in order to characterize pages and linking patterns of Web pages linking to a set of predefined pages, and the findings of this specific study can serve as a basis for comparison.

Keywords: Analysis, Authors, Communication, Consumer Health Information, Content Analysis, Eating Disorders, Information, Internet, Quality, Search Engines, World-Wide-Web

? Altvater-Mackensen, N., Balicki, G., Bestakowa, L., Bocatius, B., Braun, J., Brehmer, L., Brune, V., Eigemeier, K., Erdem, F., Fritscher, R., Jacobs, A., Klingsporn, B., Kosinski, M., Kuntze, J., Lee, J.R., Osterhage, A., Probost, M., Risch, T., Schmitt, T., Stock, W.G., Sturm, A., Weller, K. and Werner, K. (2005), Science and technology in the region: The output of regional science and technology, its strengths and its leading institutions. Scientometrics, 63 (3), 463-529.

Full Text: 2005\Scientometrics63, 463.pdf

Abstract: We operationalize scientific output in a region by means of the number of articles (as in the SciSearch database) per year and technology output by means of the number of patent applications (as in the database of the European Patent Office) per priority year. All informetric analyses were done using the DIALOG online-system. The main research questions are the following: Which scientific and technological fields or topics are most influent within a region and which institutions or companies are mainly publishing articles or holding patents? Do the distributions of regional science and technology fields and of publishing institutions follow the well-known informetric function? Are there - as it is expected - only few fields and few institutions which dominate the region? Is there a connection between the economic power of a region and the regional publication and patent output? Examples studied in detail are seven German regions: Aachen, Dusseldorf, Hamburg, Koln (Cologne), Leipzig - Halle - Dessau, Munchen (Munich), and Stuttgart. Three different indicators were used, science and technology attraction of a region (number of scientific articles and patents), science and technology intensity (articles and patents per 1,000 inhabitants), and science and technology density (articles and patents per 1 billion EURO gross value added). Top region concerning both attraction and intensity is Munich, concerning density it is Aachen.

Keywords: Centers, Indicators, Innovation, Knowledge, Patent, Power, Priority, Publication, Publishing, Research, Science, Science and Technology, Scientific Output, Specialization, Spillovers, Topics, Value-Added

? Yalpani, M., Heydari, A. and Mehrdad, M. (2005), Application of scientometric methods to chemical research in Iran: Reflections on Iran’s current science policy. Scientometrics,