Scientometric indicators: a few challenges : data mine-clearing; knowledge flows measurements ; diversity issues

Zitt, Michael Scientometric indicators: a few challenges : data mine-clearing; knowledge flows measurements ; diversity issues., 2006 . In International Workshop on Webometrics, Informetrics and Scientometrics & Seventh COLLNET Meeting, Nancy (France), May 10 - 12, 2006. (Unpublished) [Conference paper]

[img]
Preview
PDF
zitt.pdf

Download (144kB) | Preview

English abstract

Rather perhaps than a revolution, scientometrics and bibliometrics are encountering a strong development in demand and new forms of supply. Some signs of this new context are: - on the supply side, the availability of publication sources and statistics, due to Thomson-ISI and Internet developments among others, and the relatively easy way to draw quick statistics from this background. - on the demand side, the coming of age of university evaluation practices, which recognize, among other means, the pertinence of bibliometrics. Along with these responses to increasing research management needs, the internalization of bibliometric tools by other disciplines, such as economics, for cognitive purposes, is also on the rise. This situation results in contrasting perspectives: on the one hand, it can favour spectacular "hit-parades" and some frenzy of numbers; on the other hand, it paves the way for more cautious and sophisticated evaluation systems, rooted in a better understanding of the dynamics of science.

Item type: Conference paper
Keywords: scientometrics, bibliometrics
Subjects: B. Information use and sociology of information > BB. Bibliometric methods
B. Information use and sociology of information
Depositing user: Heather G Morrison
Date deposited: 22 May 2006
Last modified: 02 Oct 2014 12:03
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10760/7577

References

Adams J. and Smith D. Funding research Diversity. London (UK): Universities UK, Evidence Ltd, 2003.

Barré R. (2006). The emergence of ‘Positioning Indicators’Towards a European STI Indicators Platform (ESTIP)? Second PRIME annual conference, 7th February 2006

Bjorneborn L. and Ingwersen P. (2001). Perspectives of webometrics, Scientometrics, vol 50, n°1, pp. 65-82.

Bonaccorsi A. (2002) Matching properties. Research regimes and institutional systems in science in: "Science as an institution, the institution of science" Conference Siena, Italy, jan. 25-26, p.

Butler L. (2003). Explaining Australia's increased share of ISI publications - the effects of a funding formula based on publication counts, Research Policy, vol 32, n°1, pp. 143-155.

Callon M. (1986). The sociology of an actor-network : the case of the electric vehicle. In: Callon M., Law J. and Rip A. (eds). Mapping the dynamics of science and technology, London: Macmillan Press, pp. 19-34.

Cronin B. (2004). Normative shaping of scientific practice: The magic of Merton, Scientometrics, vol 60, n°1, pp. 41-46.

Egghe L. (1991). The exact place of Zipf's law and Pareto's law amongst the classical informetric laws, Scientometrics, vol 20, n°1, pp. 93-106.

Etzkowitz H. and Leydesdorff L. (1997). Universities and the global knowledge economy: a triple helix of university-industry-government relations. London: Pinter, 1997.

Gibbons M., Limoges C., Nowotny H., Schartzman S., Scott P. and Trow M. The New production of knowledge. London: Sage, 1994.

Glanzel W., Danell R. and Persson O. (2003). The decline of Swedish neuroscience: Decomposing a bibliometric national science indicator, Scientometrics, vol 57, n°2, pp. 197-213.

Hicks D. (2004). The four literatures of Social Science. In: Glaenzel W., Moed H. and Schmoch U. (eds). Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 473-496.

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, vol 102, n°46, pp. 16569-16572.

Katz S.J. (1999). The self-similar science system, Research Policy, vol 28, n°5, pp. 501-517.

Larédo P., Callon M., Mustar P., Birac A.M. and Fourest B. (1992). Defining the Strategic Profile of Research Labs: the Research Compass Card Method. In: Van Raan A., de Bruin R., Moed H., Nederhof A. and Tijssen R. (eds). Science and Technology in a policy context, Leiden: DSWO Press, pp. 184-199.

Lewison G., Rippon I., de Francisco A. and Lipworth S. (2004). Outputs and expenditures on health research in eight disease areas using a bibliometric approach, 1996-2001, Research Evaluation, vol 13, n°3, pp. 181-188.

Liu N.C. and Cheng Y. (2005). Academic ranking of world universities - methodologies and problems in: 1st Intl Conf. on World-Class Universities (WCU-1) Shanghai (CHN), June 16-18, 2005

Moed H.F. and Van Leeuwen T.N. (1995). Improving the accuracy of institute for scientific information's journal impact factors, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, vol 46, n°6, pp. 461-467.

Murugesan P. and Moravcsik M.J. (1978). Variation of the nature of citation measures with journal and scientific specialties, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, vol 29, pp. 141-155.

Pinski G. and Narin F. (1976). Citation influence for journal aggregates of scientific publications : theory, with application to the literature of physics, Information processing and management, vol 12, pp. 297-312.

Price D.J.d.S. Little science, big science. New York: Columbia University Press, 1963.

Rinia E.J., van Leeuwen T.N., Bruins E.E.W., vanVuren H.G. and van Raan A.F.J. (2001). Citation delay in interdisciplinary knowledge exchange, Scientometrics, vol 51, n°1, pp. 293-309.

Rousseau R. (1990). Relations between continuous versions of bibliometric laws, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, vol 41, pp. 197-203.

Schubert A., Glaenzel W. and Braun T. (1988). Against absolute methods : relative scientometric indicators and relational charts as evaluation tools. In: Van Raan A.F.J. (ed). Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science and Technology, Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 137-169.

van Raan A.F.J. (2000). On growth, ageing, and fractal differentiation of science, Scientometrics, vol 47, n°2, pp. 347-362.

Watts D.J. and Strogatz S.H. (1998). Collective dynamics of "small-world" networks, Nature, vol 393, pp. 440-442.

Wouters P. (1997). Citation cycles and peer review cycles, Scientometrics, vol 38, n°1, pp. 39-55.

Zitt M., Ramanana-Rahary S. and Bassecoulard E. (2003). Correcting glasses help fair comparisons in international science landscape: Country indicators as a function of ISI database delineation, Scientometrics, vol 56, n°2, pp. 259-282.

Zitt M., Bauin S. and Filliatreau G. (2004).Indicateurs bibliométriques des institutions publiques de recherche françaises (2000 -hors sciences humaines et sociales), Production coopérative d'indicateurs de politique scientifique des Institutions de Recherche françaises, 41.p.

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, vol 63, n°2, pp. 373-401.

Zitt M. (2005). Facing diversity of science: a challenge for bibliometric indicators - comments on A. Van Raan's focus article, Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, vol 3, n°1, pp. 38-49.

Zitt M. and Filliatreau G. (2006). Being a world-class university: Big is (made) Beautiful. In: Sadlack J. and Liu N.C. (eds). The World-Class University and Ranking: Aiming beyond Status Shanghai (CHN),6p + figures

Zitt M. and Bassecoulard E. (2006). Delineating complex scientific fields by hybrid lexical-citation method: an application to nanoscience, Information Processing and Management, in press.


Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item