Archives des mots-clés : research impact

F1000, Mendeley and Traditional Bibliometric Indicators

Posté le par

This article compares the Faculty of 1000 (F1000) quality filtering results and Mendeley usage data with traditional bibliometric indicators, using a sample of 1397 Genomics and Genetics articles published in 2008 selected by F1000 Faculty Members (FMs). Both Mendeley user counts and F1000 article factors (FFas) correlate significantly with citation counts and associated Journal Impact Factors. However, the correlations for Mendeley user counts are much larger than those for FFas.

It may be that F1000 is good at disclosing the merit of an article from an expert practitioner point of view while Mendeley user counts may be more closely related to traditional citation impact. Articles that attract exceptionally many citations are generally disorder or disease related, while those with extremely high social bookmark user counts are mainly historical or introductory.

URL : http://2012.sticonference.org/Proceedings/vol2/Li_F1000_541.pdf

La visibilité des revues scientifiques francophones sur le plan international : le cas des SIC et d’Études de Communication

Posté le par

“Les Sciences de l’Information et de la Communication sont une discipline spécifiquement française. Les anglo-saxons ont maintenus la différence entre, d’une part, la Library and Information Science et les Communication and Media Studies. Appartenant au champ des SIC la revue Études de Communication aborde à la fois des thématiques propres au champ de la LIS et au champ des media studies. La visibilité des revues francophones à l’international, dans un monde qui s’anglicise de plus en plus, est problématique. Quand le champ scientifique dans lequel s’inscrit une revue n’existe pas en-dehors de la francophonie cette problématique s’intensifie. Il s’agit ici de définir la notion de visibilité et ses enjeux, en général et dans le champ plus spécifique des SIC, de s’interroger sur la place du français dans le monde scientifique et d’envisager un cas pratique, celui d’Études de Communication, avec ses caractéristiques et ses solutions.”

URL : http://memsic.ccsd.cnrs.fr/mem_00741376

In science “there is no bad publicity”: Papers criticized in technical comments have high scientific impact

Posté le par

Technical comments are special types of scientific publications whose aim is to correct or criticize previously published papers. Often, comments are negatively perceived by the authors of the criticized articles because believed to make the commented papers less worthy or trusty to the eyes of the scientific community.

Thus, there is a tendency to think that criticized papers are predestined to have low scientific impact. We show here that such belief is not supported by empirical evidence. We consider thirteen major publication outlets in science and perform a large-scale analysis of the citation patterns of criticized publications.

We find that commented papers have not only average citation rates much higher than those of non commented articles, but also unexpectedly over-populate the set of the most cited publications within a journal. Since comments are published soon after criticized papers, comments can be viewed as early indicators of the future impact of criticized papers.

Our results represent one the most clear observations of the popular wisdom of “any publicity is good publicity”, according to which success might follow from negative criticisms, but for which there have been very few empirical validations so far.

Our results go also beyond, touching core topics of research in philosophy of science, because they emphasize the fundamental importance of scientific disputes for the production and dissemination of knowledge.

URL : http://arxiv.org/abs/1209.4997

A measure of total research impact independent of…

Statut

A measure of total research impact independent of time and discipline :

“Authorship and citation practices evolve with time and differ by academic discipline. As such, indicators of research productivity based on citation records are naturally subject to historical and disciplinary effects. We observe these effects on a corpus of astronomer career data constructed from a database of refereed publications. We employ a simple mechanism to measure research output using author and reference counts available in bibliographic databases to develop a citation-based indicator of research productivity. The total research impact (tori) quantifies, for an individual, the total amount of scholarly work that others have devoted to his/her work, measured in the volume of research papers. A derived measure, the research impact quotient (riq), is an age independent measure of an individual’s research ability. We demonstrate that these measures are substantially less vulnerable to temporal debasement and cross-disciplinary bias than the most popular current measures. The proposed measures of research impact, tori and riq, have been implemented in the Smithsonian/NASA Astrophysics Data System.”

URL : http://arxiv.org/abs/1209.2124

Web Impact Factor WIF and Link Analysis of…

Statut

Web Impact Factor (WIF) and Link Analysis of Indian Institute of Technologies (IITs): A Webometric Study :

“This paper examines and explores the web impact factor through a webometric study of the present 16 Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) of India. Identifies the domain systems of the websites; analyzes the number of web pages and link pages, and calculates the simple web impact factor (WIF), self link web impact factor and external web impact factor of all the IIT. Also reflects that some IIT have higher number of web pages, but correspondingly their link pages are very small in number and websites fall behind in their simple, self link and external link web impact factor.”

URL : http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/789/

Maximizing the impacts of your research a handbook…

Statut

Maximizing the impacts of your research: a handbook for social scientists :

“There are few academics who are interested in doing research that simply has no influence on anyone else in academia or outside. Some perhaps will be content to produce ‘shelf-bending’ work that goes into a library (included in a published journal or book), and then over the next decades ever-so-slightly bends the shelf it sits on. But we believe that they are in a small minority. The whole point of social science research is to achieve academic impact by advancing your discipline, and (where possible) by having some positive influence also on external audiences – in business, government, the media, civil society or public debate.

For the past year a team of academics based at the London School of Economics, the University of Leeds and Imperial College London have been working on the Impact of Social Sciences project aimed at developing precise methods for measuring and evaluating the impact of research in the public sphere. We believe our data will be of interest to all UK universities to better capture and track the impacts of their social science research and applications work.

Part of our task is to develop guidance for colleagues interested in this field. In the past, there has been no one source of systematic advice on how to maximize the academic impacts of your research in terms of citations and other measures of influence. And almost no sources at all have helped researchers to achieve greater visibility and impacts with audiences outside the university. Instead researchers have had to rely on informal knowledge and picking up random hints and tips here and there from colleagues, and from their own personal experience.

This Handbook remedies this key gap and, we hope, will help researchers achieving a more professional and focused approach to their research from the outset. It provides a large menu of sound and evidence-based advice and guidance on how to ensure that your work achieves its maximum visibility and influence with both academic and external audiences. As with any menu, readers need to pick and choose the elements that are relevant for them. We provide detailed information on what constitutes good practice in expanding the impact of social science research. We also survey a wide range of new developments, new tools and new techniques that can help make sense of a rapidly changing
field.”

URL : http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/35758/