sennoma's Feed

SSRN-Whose Metrics? On Building Citation, Usage and Access Metrics as Information Service for Scholars by Chris Armbruster

sennoma — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 12:39:00 -0400

As the Internet has enhanced the collection and provision of citation, usage and access metrics, the challenge lies neither in the technology nor the method, but in constructing databases that deliver services of value to the scholar. However, the development of metrics has hitherto been driven by the needs of external research assessment (governments and funders), while publishers and libraries have focused on their own needs (e.g. journal impact and usage factors). Scholars often criticize research assessment and the use of particular metrics as a zero-sum game whose undesirable consequences far outweigh the benefits. However, this is not to be confused with a general prejudice against metrics, which are principally compatible with the scholarly recognition and rewards system. But it does indicate that current metric information services often do not serve the needs of scholars. The question everybody should be asking is: What kind of metric information services would serve scholars? The argument proceeds in six steps. First, the problematic and controversial nature of assessment metrics is discussed. Second, the limited value of current metric information services is outlined. Third, the notion of metrics as research information services is clarified. Fourth, some examples of such services are offered. Fifth, the potential value is sketched from the perspective of a postdoc. Sixth, it is indicated that societies and publishers could begin building more metric information services since tried-and-tested technology and methods are available already. Tagged by sennoma under scientometrics, bibliometrics, scholarlycommunication, publishing,

Citation Tracker: Monitoring Citations to your Publications - A Computer Scientist in a Business School

sennoma — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 11:16:00 -0400

Tagged by sennoma under scientometrics,

How citation distortions create unfounded authority: analysis of a citation network -- Greenberg 339: b2680 -- BMJ

sennoma — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 04:21:00 -0400

Objective To understand belief in a specific scientific claim by studying the pattern of citations among papers stating it. Design A complete citation network was constructed from all PubMed indexed English literature papers addressing the belief that β amyloid, a protein accumulated in the brain in Alzheimer’s disease, is produced by and injures skeletal muscle of patients with inclusion body myositis. Social network theory and graph theory were used to analyse this network. Main outcome measures Citation bias, amplification, and invention, and their effects on determining authority. Results The network contained 242 papers and 675 citations addressing the belief, with 220 553 citation paths supporting it. Unfounded authority was established by citation bias against papers that refuted or weakened the belief; amplification, the marked expansion of the belief system by papers presenting no data addressing it; and forms of invention such as the conversion of hypothesis into fact through citation alone. Extension of this network into text within grants funded by the National Institutes of Health and obtained through the Freedom of Information Act showed the same phenomena present and sometimes used to justify requests for funding. Conclusion Citation is both an impartial scholarly method and a powerful form of social communication. Through distortions in its social use that include bias, amplification, and invention, citation can be used to generate information cascades resulting in unfounded authority of claims. Construction and analysis of a claim specific citation network may clarify the nature of a published belief system and expose distorted methods of social citation. Tagged by sennoma under scientometrics, oa, oaos.need,

A rose by any other name - Theoretically Speaking - Mike Fowler's blog on Nature Network

sennoma — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 01:30:00 -0400

Tagged by sennoma under deathtotheimpactfactor, scientometrics,

PLoS ONE: A Principal Component Analysis of 39 Scientific Impact Measures

sennoma — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 06:01:00 -0400

Tagged by sennoma under scientometrics, deathtotheimpactfactor,

Bibliometrics and Citation Analysis (Scarecrow Press, Inc.)

sennoma — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 03:09:00 -0400

Can the methods of science be directed toward science itself? How did it happen that scientists, scientific documents, and their bibliographic links came to be regarded as mathematical variables in abstract models of scientific communication? What is the role of quantitative analyses of scientific and technical documentation in current science policy and management? Bibliometrics and Citation Analysis: From the Science Citation Index to Cybermetrics answers these questions through a comprehensive overview of theories, techniques, concepts, and applications in the interdisciplinary and steadily growing field of bibliometrics. Tagged by sennoma under scientometrics, bibliometrics,

eFoundations: Influence, connections and outputs

sennoma — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 01:46:00 -0400

if we really want to develop "some sensible measure of scholarly impact on the social Web" then we have to step back and consider three questions:\n\n * what do we want to measure?\n * what can we measure?\n * how can bring these two things close enough together to create something useful?\nThese two are clearly related, at least in the sense that someone's level of engagement in a community (their connectedness if you like) clearly increases the exposure of their work but is also indicative of the credibility they have within that community. Having said that, my gut feeling is that credibility, at least for the purposes of scholarly communication, can only really be measured by some kind of a peer-review (i.e. human) process. Tagged by sennoma under peerreview, scientometrics, scholarlycommunication,

Inter Research » ESEP » v8 » n1

sennoma — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 04:45:00 -0400

Browman HI, Stergiou KI INTRODUCTION: Factors and indices are one thing, deciding who is scholarly, why they are scholarly, and the relative value of their scholarship is something else entirely Campbell P Escape from the impact factor Lawrence PA Lost in publication: how measurement harms science Todd PA, Ladle RJ Hidden dangers of a ‘citation culture’ Taylor M, Perakakis P, Trachana V The siege of science Cheung WWL The economics of post-doc publishing Tsikliras AC Chasing after the high impact Zitt M, Bassecoulard E Challenges for scientometric indicators: data demining, knowledge flows measurements and diversity issues Harzing AWK, van der Wal R Google Scholar as a new source for citation analysis Pauly D, Stergiou KI Re-interpretation of ‘influence weight’ as a citation-based Index of New Knowledge (INK) Giske J Benefitting from bibliometry Butler L Using a balanced approach to bibliometrics: quantitative performance measures in the Australian Research Quality Framework Bornmann L, Mutz R, Neuhaus C, Daniel HD Citation counts for research evaluation: standards of good practice for analyzing bibliometric data and presenting and interpreting results Harnad S Validating research performance metrics against peer rankings Tagged by sennoma under scientometrics, deathtotheimpactfactor,

PLoS ONE: Looking for Landmarks: The Role of Expert Review and Bibliometric Analysis in Evaluating Scientific Publication Outputs

sennoma — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 11:41:00 -0400

Tagged by sennoma under scientometrics, peerreview,

PLoS ONE : accelerating the publication of peer-reviewed science

sennoma — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 10:29:00 -0400

Tagged by sennoma under plos, scientometrics, oa.numbers,

Usage-based measurements of journal quality - research project enters its second stage | UKSG

sennoma — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 10:53:00 -0400

In 2007 the United Kingdom Serials Group (UKSG), in association with the online usage metrics organisation COUNTER, published the results of a wide-ranging study which explored how online journal usage statistics might form the basis of a new metric of journal quality. The study combined a web-based survey of opinion with a series of in-depth interviews with stakeholders from the author, publisher and librarian communities. The aim of these twin avenues of research was to examine the ways in which journal quality is currently assessed, and the degree to which any additional usage-based metrics might prove valuable to each stakeholder community, along with practical ways in which such metrics might be derived and constructed to provide the maximum utility for all, within defined resource constraints. Building upon the encouraging reactions revealed in the market research, Stage 2 of the project is developing a programme of data modelling and analysis that will use real usage data from a number of content providers, with the aim of identifying potential candidate metrics for longer term scaled up testing. Tagged by sennoma under scientometrics, bibliometrics,

philosophi.ca : MLA Digital Work

sennoma — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 05:49:00 -0400

E.g.: "Blogs are an emergent form for the academy. They are particularly hard to evaluate since they don’t resemble any traditional academic form. A good blogger (or team of bloggers) however, do a great service to the community by tracking a field and commenting on it. The better blogs will include short reviews, announcements, interesting interventions and notes about timely matters like exhibits. Blogs, as I have learned, take habits of attention. Each post might take half an hour to an hour to research and post. They may appear to be light and quick, but the good bloggers acquire a voice and engage an audience. In some ways running a blog is like moderating a discussion list. How often does Willard McCarty post a provocative note to HUMANIST to promote discussion? The work of facilitating the conversations we value in the humanities should not be dismissed as service. It is possible the most lasting academic work of this age will be the social networking that allows others a voice. This is comparable to the work of translation or editorial work where transparency leads to illegitimacy – if you do such a good job that no one notices you then no one things you are doing good work." Tagged by sennoma under scholarlycommunication, reputationsystems, scientometrics,

The (Statistical) Significance of the Impact Factor ~~ (A Computer Scientist in a Business School)

sennoma — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 04:55:00 -0400

Tagged by sennoma under impactfactor, scientometrics, bibliometrics,

Is the USA Losing Ground in Science? A Global Perspective on World Science (updated for 2006)

sennoma — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 04:50:00 -0400

Tagged by sennoma under science.numbers, scientometrics,

Article-Level Metrics at PLoS (presentation to NISO) « everyONE – the PLoS ONE community blog

sennoma — Wed, 27 May 2009 03:26:00 -0400

Tagged by sennoma under oaos.talks, scientometrics, bibliometrics,

PLoS ONE: The e-Index, Complementing the h-Index for Excess Citations

sennoma — Wed, 06 May 2009 04:14:00 -0400

Tagged by sennoma under bibliometrics, scientometrics, deathtotheimpactfactor,

OAN: Eliminating quality bias in explaining the OA impact advantage

sennoma — Fri, 01 May 2009 07:40:00 -0400

Tagged by sennoma under oa, scientometrics, bibliometrics,

OAN: Using citation data to shed light on access restrictions

sennoma — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 05:54:00 -0400

Patrick Gaulé, Access to the scientific literature in India, CEMI Working Paper 2009-004, February 23, 2009. Abstract: This paper uses an evidence-based approach to assess the difficulties faced by developing country scientists in accessing the scientific literature. I compare backward citations patterns of Swiss and Indian scientists in a database of 43'150 scientific papers published by scientists from either country in 2007. Controlling for fields and quality with citing journal fixed effects, I find that Indian scientists (1) have shorter references lists (2) are more likely to cite articles from open access journals and (3) are less likely to cite articles from expensive journals. The magnitude of the effects is small which can be explained by informal file sharing practices among scientists. Tagged by sennoma under oa, scientometrics, refswanted,

Assessing the Impact of Research

sennoma — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 04:28:00 -0400

Tagged by sennoma under scientometrics, bibliometrics,

Latest journal ranking in the biological sciences - FriendFeed

sennoma — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 11:01:00 -0400

Tagged by sennoma under scientometrics, bibliometrics,