اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدThe use of percentiles and percentile rank classes in the analysis of bibliometric data: Opportunities and limits
113
0
0.0
(
0
)
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
Percentiles have been established in bibliometrics as an important alternative to mean-based indicators for obtaining a normalized citation impact of publications. Percentiles have a number of advantages over standard bibliometric indicators used frequently: for example, their calculation is not based on the arithmetic mean which should not be used for skewed bibliometric data. This study describes the opportunities and limits and the advantages and disadvantages of using percentiles in bibliometrics. We also address problems in the calculation of percentiles and percentile rank classes for which there is not (yet) a satisfactory solution. It will be hard to compare the results of different percentile-based studies with each other unless it is clear that the studies were done with the same choices for percentile calculation and rank assignment.
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
By using publications from Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC), Fosso Wamba and his colleagues published an interesting and comprehensive paper in Technological Forecasting and Social Change to explore the structure and dynamics of artificial inte
lligence (AI) scholarship. Data demonstrated in Fosso Wambas study implied that the year 1991 seemed to be a watershed of AI research. This research note tried to uncover the 1991 phenomenon from the perspective of database limitation by probing the limitations of search in abstract/author keywords/keywords plus fields of WoSCC empirically. The low availability rates of abstract/author keywords/keywords plus information in WoSCC found in this study can explain the watershed phenomenon of AI scholarship in 1991 to a large extent. Some other caveats for the use of WoSCC in old literature retrieval and historical bibliometric analysis were also mentioned in the discussion section. This research note complements Fosso Wamba and his colleagues study and also helps avoid improper interpretation in the use of WoSCC in old literature retrieval and historical bibliometric analysis.
Accessibility research sits at the junction of several disciplines, drawing influence from HCI, disability studies, psychology, education, and more. To characterize the influences and extensions of accessibility research, we undertake a study of cita
tion trends for accessibility and related HCI communities. We assess the diversity of venues and fields of study represented among the referenced and citing papers of 836 accessibility research papers from ASSETS and CHI, finding that though publications in computer science dominate these citation relationships, the relative proportion of citations from papers on psychology and medicine has grown over time. Though ASSETS is a more niche venue than CHI in terms of citational diversity, both conferences display standard levels of diversity among their incoming and outgoing citations when analyzed in the context of 53K papers from 13 accessibility and HCI conference venues.
The complexity of emergent wicked problems, such as climate change, culminates in a reformulation of how we think about society and mobilize scientists from various disciplines to seek solutions and perspectives on the problem. From an epistemologica
l point of view, it is essential to evaluate how such topics can be developed inside the academic arena but, to do that, it is necessary to perform complex analysis of the great number of recent academic publications. In this work, we discuss how climate change has been addressed by social sciences in practice. Can we observe the development of a new epistemology by the emergence of the climate change debate? Are there contributions in academic journals within the field of social sciences addressing climate change? Which journals are these? Who are the authors? To answer these questions, we developed an innovative method combining different tools to search, filter, and analyze the impact of the academic production related to climate change in social sciences in the most relevant journals.
Blockchain technology, and more specifically Bitcoin (one of its foremost applications), have been receiving increasing attention in the scientific community. The first publications with Bitcoin as a topic, can be traced back to 2012. In spite of thi
s short time span, the production magnitude (1162 papers) makes it necessary to make a bibliometric study in order to observe research clusters, emerging topics, and leading scholars. Our paper is aimed at studying the scientific production only around bitcoin, excluding other blockchain applications. Thus, we restricted our search to papers indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection, whose topic is bitcoin. This database is suitable for such diverse disciplines such as economics, engineering, mathematics, and computer science. This bibliometric study draws the landscape of the current state and trends of Bitcoin-related research in different scientific disciplines.
The use of bibliometric indicators would simplify research assessments. The 2014 Research Excellence Framework (REF) is a peer review assessment of UK universities, whose results can be taken as benchmarks for bibliometric indicators. In this study w
e use the REF results to investigate whether the ep index and a top percentile of most cited papers could substitute for peer review. The probability that a random universitys paper reaches a certain top percentile in the global distribution of papers is a power of the ep index, which can be calculated from the citation-based distribution of universitys papers in global top percentiles. Making use of the ep index in each university and research area, we calculated the ratios between the percentage of 4-star-rated outputs in REF and the percentages of papers in global top percentiles. Then, we fixed the assessment percentile so that the mean ratio between these two indicators across universities is 1.0. This method was applied to four units of assessment in REF: Chemistry, Economics & Econometrics joined to Business & Management Studies, and Physics. Some relevant deviations from the 1.0 ratio could be explained by the evaluation procedure in REF or by the characteristics of the research field; other deviations need specific studies by experts in the research area. The present results indicate that in many research areas the substitution of a top percentile indicator for peer review is possible. However, this substitution cannot be made straightforwardly; more research is needed to establish the conditions of the bibliometric assessment.
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
