اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدA Probe into Causes of Non-citation Based on Survey Data
105
0
0.0
(
0
)
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
Empirical analysis results about the possible causes leading to non-citation may help increase the potential of researchers work to be cited and editorial staffs of journals to identify contributions with potential high quality. In this study, we conduct a survey on the possible causes leading to citation or non-citation based on a questionnaire. We then perform a statistical analysis to identify the major causes leading to non-citation in combination with the analysis on the data collected through the survey. Most respondents to our questionnaire identified eight major causes that facilitate easy citation of ones papers, such as research hotspots and novel topics of content, longer intervals after publication, research topics similar to my work, high quality of content, reasonable self-citation, highlighted title, prestigious authors, academic tastes and interests similar to mine.They also pointed out that the vast difference between their current and former research directions as the primary reason for their previously uncited papers. They feel that text that includes notes, comments, and letters to editors are rarely cited, and the same is true for too short or too lengthy papers. In comparison, it is easier for reviews, articles, or papers of intermediate length to be cited.
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
In over five years, Bornmann, Stefaner, de Moya Anegon, and Mutz (2014) and Bornmann, Stefaner, de Moya Anegon, and Mutz (2014, 2015) have published several releases of the www.excellencemapping.net tool revealing (clusters of) excellent institutions
worldwide based on citation data. With the new release, a completely revised tool has been published. It is not only based on citation data (bibliometrics), but also Mendeley data (altmetrics). Thus, the institutional impact measurement of the tool has been expanded by focusing on additional status groups besides researchers such as students and librarians. Furthermore, the visualization of the data has been completely updated by improving the operability for the user and including new features such as institutional profile pages. In this paper, we describe the datasets for the current excellencemapping.net tool and the indicators applied. Furthermore, the underlying statistics for the tool and the use of the web application are explained.
We analyzed publications data in WoS and Scopus to compare publications in native languages vs publications in English and find any distinctive patterns. We analyzed their distribution by research areas, languages, type of access and citation pattern
s. The following trends were found: share of English publications increases over time; native-language publications are read and cited less than English-language outside the origin country; open access impact on views and citation is higher for native languages; journal ranking correlates with the share of English publications for multi-language journals. We conclude also that the role of non-English publications in research evaluation in non-English speaking countries is underestimated when research in social science and humanities is assessed only by publications in Web of Science and Scopus.
In research policy, effective measures that lead to improvements in the generation of knowledge must be based on reliable methods of research assessment, but for many countries and institutions this is not the case. Publication and citation analyses
can be used to estimate the part played by countries and institutions in the global progress of knowledge, but a concrete method of estimation is far from evident. The challenge arises because publications that report real progress of knowledge form an extremely low proportion of all publications; in most countries and institutions such contributions appear less than once per year. One way to overcome this difficulty is to calculate probabilities instead of counting the rare events on which scientific progress is based. This study reviews and summarizes several recent publications, and adds new results that demonstrate that the citation distribution of normal publications allows the probability of the infrequent events that support the progress of knowledge to be calculated.
Citation analysis is one of the most frequently used methods in research evaluation. We are seeing significant growth in citation analysis through bibliometric metadata, primarily due to the availability of citation databases such as the Web of Scien
ce, Scopus, Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, and Dimensions. Due to better access to full-text publication corpora in recent years, information scientists have gone far beyond traditional bibliometrics by tapping into advancements in full-text data processing techniques to measure the impact of scientific publications in contextual terms. This has led to technical developments in citation context and content analysis, citation classifications, citation sentiment analysis, citation summarisation, and citation-based recommendation. This article aims to narratively review the studies on these developments. Its primary focus is on publications that have used natural language processing and machine learning techniques to analyse citations.
Researchers affiliated with multiple institutions are increasingly seen in current scientific environment. In this paper we systematically analyze the multi-affiliated authorship and its effect on citation impact, with focus on the scientific output
of research collaboration. By considering the nationality of each institutions, we further differentiate the national multi-affiliated authorship and international multi-affiliated authorship and reveal their different patterns across disciplines and countries. We observe a large share of publications with multi-affiliated authorship (45.6%) in research collaboration, with a larger share of publications containing national multi-affiliated authorship in medicine related and biology related disciplines, and a larger share of publications containing international type in Space Science, Physics and Geosciences. To a country-based view, we distinguish between domestic and foreign multi-affiliated authorship to a specific country. Taking G7 and BRICS countries as samples from different S&T level, we find that the domestic national multi-affiliated authorship relate to more on citation impact for most disciplines of G7 countries, while domestic international multi-affiliated authorships are more positively influential for most BRICS countries.
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
