Innovations in Measuring Science and Scholarship

Das, Anup-Kumar . Innovations in Measuring Science and Scholarship., 2015 In: Open Access for Researchers, Module 4: Research Evaluation Metrics. UNESCO, Paris, pp. 19-60. [Book chapter]

[thumbnail of R4.2Innovations in Measuring Science and Scholarship.pdf] Text
R4.2Innovations in Measuring Science and Scholarship.pdf
Download (5MB)

English abstract

This Unit deals with analytical tools and indicators used in evaluating scholarly communications. The tools covered are The Web of Science, Scopus, Indian Citation Index (ICI), CiteSeerX, Google Scholar and Google Scholar Citations. Among these all the tools except Indian Citation Index (ICI) are international in scope. ICI is not very much known outside India. It is a powerful tool as far Indian scholarly literature is concerned. As Indian journals publish a sizable amount of foreign literature, the tool will be useful for foreign countries as well. The analytical products with journal performance metrics Journal Citation Reports (JCR) has also been described. In the chapter titled New Platforms for Evaluating Scholarly Communications three websites i.e. SCImago Journal & Country Rank (SJR) [ScimagoJR.com], eigenFACTOR.org, JournalMetrics.com and one software called Publish or Perish (POP) Software have been discussed. This Unit discusses in details aspects such as Citation Databases; Analytical Products with Journal Performance Metrics; and New Platforms for Evaluating Scholarly Communications.

Item type: Book chapter
Keywords: Scholarly communications, Web of Science, Scopus, Indian Citation Index, CiteSeerX, Google Scholar Citations, Journal Citation Reports, JCR, SCImago Journal Rank, SCImago Country Rank, eigenFACTOR, JournalMetrics, Publish or Perish
Subjects: B. Information use and sociology of information
B. Information use and sociology of information > BB. Bibliometric methods
Depositing user: Dr Anup Kumar Das
Date deposited: 20 Mar 2015 17:51
Last modified: 20 Mar 2015 17:51
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10760/24816

References

Adie, E., & Roe, W. (2013). Altmetric: Enriching Scholarly Content with Article-Level Discussion and Metrics. Learned Publishing, 26(1), 11-17.

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

Bogers, T., & Van den Bosch, A. (2008). Recommending Scientific Articles Using Citeulike. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM Conference on Recommender Systems (pp. 287-290).

Campanario, J.M. (2003). Citation Analysis. In: International Encyclopaedia of Information and Library Science, 2nd edition. London: Routledge.

Colledge, Lisa et. al. (2010). SJR and SNIP: two new journal metrics in Elsevier’s Scopus. Serials, 23(3), 215-221.

Das, A.K., Arora, P. & Bhattacharya, S (2012). Webliography of STI Indicator Databases and Related Publications. Journal of Scientometric Research, 1(1), 86-93.

Das, A.K. & Chakraborty, S. (2014). Collaboration in International and Comparative Librarianship. Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-4365-9.

Das, A.K. (2008). Open Access to Knowledge and Information: Scholarly Literature and Digital Library Initiatives – the South Asian Scenario. New Delhi: UNESCO. ISBN: 9788189218218.

Das, A.K., & Mishra, S (2014). Genesis of Altmetrics or Article-level Metrics for Measuring Efficacy of Scholarly Communications: Current Perspectives. Journal of Scientometric Research, 3(2): 82-92.

DORA (2012). The San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA). USA: American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB).

Drott, M. C. (1981). Bradford's Law: Theory, Empiricism and the Gaps Between. Library Trends, 30(1), 41-52.

Egghe, L. (2006). Theory and practise of the g-index. Scientometrics, 69(1), 131-152.

Garfield, Eugene (1994). Expected Citation Rates, Half-Life, and Impact Ratios: Comparing Apples to Apples in Evaluation Research. Current Contents.

Garfield, Eugene (1994). The Concept of Citation Indexing: A Unique and Innovative Tool for Navigating the Research Literature. Current Contents.

Garfield, Eugene (2010). The Evolution of the Science Citation Index. International Microbiology, 10(1): 65-69. doi:10.2436/20.1501.01.10.

Gilmour, Ron & Cobus-Kuo, Laura (2011). Reference Management Software: a Comparative Analysis of Four Products. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship.

Giri, R.S. & Das, A.K. (2011). Indian Citation Index: A New Web Platform for Measuring Performance of Indian Research Periodicals. Library Hi Tech News, 28(3), 33-35.

Harzing, Anne-Wil (2010). The Publish or Perish Book: Your Guide to Effective and Responsible Citation Analysis. Melbourne, Australia: Tarma Software Research.

Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(46), 16569.

Iribarren-Maestro, I.; Lascurain-Sánchez, M.L. & Sanz-Casado, E. (2009). The Use of Bibliometric Techniques in Evaluating Social Sciences and Humanities. In: Celebrating Scholarly Communication Studies: A Festschrift for Olle Persson at his 60th Birthday.

Katz, J. Sylvan (1999). Bibliometric Indicators and the Social Sciences. UK: ESRC/ SPRU, University of Sussex.

Li, X., Thelwall, M., & Giustini, D. (2012). Validating Online Reference Managers for Scholarly Impact Measurement. Scientometrics, 91(2), 461-471.

LSE Public Policy Group (2011). Maximizing the Impacts of Your Research: A Handbook for Social Scientists. London: London School of Economics.

Moed, Henk F. (2005). Citation Analysis in Research Evaluation. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.

Pendlebury, David A. (2008). Using Bibliometrics in Evaluating Research.

Persson, O.; Danell, R. & Schneider, J.W. (2009). How to use Bibexcel for various types of bibliometric analysis. In: Celebrating Scholarly Communication Studies: A Festschrift for Olle Persson at his 60th Birthday.

Piwowar, Heather (2013). Altmetrics: Value all research products. Nature, 493(7431), 159-159.

Piwowar, Heather (2013). Introduction to altmetrics: What, why and where? Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 39(4), 8-9.

Poiter, W. G. (1981). Lotka’s law revisited. Library Trends, 30(1), 21-39.

Priem, J., Piwowar, H. A., & Hemminger, B. M. (2012). Altmetrics in the wild: Using social media to explore scholarly impact. arXiv preprint, arXiv:1203.4745.

Priem, J., Taraborelli, D., Groth, P., & Neylon, C. (2010). Altmetrics: A Manifesto.

Prytherch, R.J. (2005). Harrod’s Librarians’ Glossary and Reference Book: A Dictionary of Over 10,200 Terms, Organizations, Projects and Acronyms in the Areas of Information Management, Library Science, Publishing and Archive Management. 10th ed. Hampshire, England: Ashgate Publishing.

Reitz, Joan M. (2013). Online Dictionary for Library and Information Science.

Smith, L.C. (1981). Citation Analysis. Library Trends, 30(1), 83-106.

Tananbaum, Greg (2013). Article Level Metrics: A SPARC Primer.

Testa, James (2011). The Globalization of Web of ScienceSM: 2005-2010.

Thelwall, Mike (2013). Webometrics and Social Web Research Methods. UK: University of Wolverhampton.

Thomson Reuters (2013). Glossary of Thomson Scientific Terminology.

Wouters, P., & Costas, R. (2012). Users, Narcissism and Control: Tracking the Impact of Scholarly Publications in the 21st Century. Utrecht, Netherlands: SURF Foundation.

Wyllys, R.E. (1981). Empirical and Theoretical Bases of Zipf’s Law. Library Trends, 30(1), 53-64.


Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item
Contact us
Send email Sponsors
Sponsor: AIMS Sponsor: D&P Sponsor: UniNa CAB Get connected
Facebook Facebook Twitter Twitter Linkedin LinkedIn RSS RSS