Zhao, Dangzhi Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts., 2006 . In 69th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (ASIST), Austin (US), 3-8 November 2006. [Conference paper]
Preview |
PDF
zhao_assist06proceedings.pdf Download (75kB) | Preview |
English abstract
We conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more sophisticated methods.
Item type: | Conference paper |
---|---|
Keywords: | citation analysis ; citation counting methods |
Subjects: | B. Information use and sociology of information > BB. Bibliometric methods |
Depositing user: | Norm Medeiros |
Date deposited: | 14 Dec 2006 |
Last modified: | 02 Oct 2014 12:05 |
URI: | http://hdl.handle.net/10760/8607 |
References
Downloads
Downloads per month over past year
Actions (login required)
View Item |