Search

This article introduces a team-based model of researchers in a specialty and investigates the manifestation of such teams in a specialty's literature. The proposed qualitative behavioral model, with its mathematical expression as a growth model, is significant because it simultaneously describes the two phenomena of collaboration and author productivity (Lotka's law) in a specialty. The model is nested: A team process models the creation of research teams and the success-breeds-success process of their production of articles, while at a lower level the productivity of authors within teams is also modeled as a success-breeds-success process. Interteam collaboration (weak ties) is modeled as random events. This simple growth model is shown to faithfully mimic six network metrics of bipartite article-author networks. The model is demonstrated on three example article collections from specialties that have a wide range of degree of collaboration: (a) a distance education collection with low collaboration degree, (b) a complex networks collection with typical collaboration degree, and (c) an atrial ablation collection with heavy collaboration degree. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The study presents the trends in authorship pattern and author's collaborative research in IEEE Journal of Translational Engineering in Health and Medicine with a sample of 1599 journal citations collected during the period 2013-2021. The average number of authors per citation is 1.8. In the study, the degree of collaboration (C) during the overall 9 years (2013-2021) is 3.8 and the study found that in IEEE Journal of Translational Engineering in Health and Medicine multi-authored articles are high and predominant on single authorship. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The study investigate the publication trends in Pearl: A Journal of Library and Information Science that is recognised one of the important Journals in the field of Library and Information Science. The study covers 223 research papers in Pearl during 2011-2016 that were published in 24 issues of 6 volumes. Maximum 43 (19.29%) papers were published in the volume number 5 papers in 2011. 97 (43.50%) papers were two-authored and 87 (39.02%) were single authored, average author productivity per author was 0.55 during 2011-2016, A great number of 81 (19.95%) authors from Karnataka State had contributed their papers in Pearl. 367 (90.40%) Indian and 39 (9.61%) foreign authors also contributed their papers in the journal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Based on the principles of the h-index, I propose a new measure, the w-index, as a particularly simple and more useful way to assess the substantial impact of a researcher's work, especially regarding excellent papers. The w-index can be defined as follows: If w of a researcher's papers have at least 10w citations each and the other papers have fewer than 10(w+1) citations, that researcher's w-index is w. The results demonstrate that there are noticeable differences between the w-index and the h-index, because the w-index plays close attention to the more widely cited papers. These discrepancies can be measured by comparing the ranks of 20 astrophysicists, a few famous physical scientists, and 16 Price medalists. Furthermore, I put forward the w(q)-index to improve the discriminatory power of the w-index and to rank scientists with the same w. The factor q is the least number of citations a researcher with w needed to reach w+1. In terms of both simplicity and accuracy, the w-index or w(q)-index can be widely used for evaluation of scientists, journals, conferences, scientific topics, research institutions, and so on. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents the third study of research trends in science education. In this review, a total of 990 papers published in theInternational Journal of Science Education, theJournal of Research in Science Teaching, andScience Educationfrom 2008 to 2012 were analyzed. The results indicate that in the recent five years (2008–2012), the top three research topics in the published papers were those regarding the context of students' learning, science teaching, and students' conceptual learning. The changes in the most popular research topics in the past 15 years also evidentially indicate shifts in the journals' preferences and researchers' interest. For example, in 2003–2007, context of students' learning replaced students' conceptual learning, which was the most published research topic from 1998 to 2002. The research topic of students' learning contexts continued to rank the first in 2008–2012. Moreover, there was an increasing trend of research papers regarding science teaching from 1998 to 2012. The analysis of highly cited papers revealed that research topics such as argumentation, inquiry-based learning, and scientific modeling were recently highlighted by science educators. In recent 15 years, productive researchers' publications also focused on the topics about context of students' learning, science teaching, and students' conceptual learning. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

In this study, we examined empirical results on the h index and its most important variants in order to determine whether the variants developed are associated with an incremental contribution for evaluation purposes. The results of a factor analysis using bibliographic data on postdoctoral researchers in biomedicine indicate that regarding the h index and its variants, we are dealing with two types of indices that load on one factor each. One type describes the most productive core of a scientist's output and gives the number of papers in that core. The other type of indices describes the impact of the papers in the core. Because an index for evaluative purposes is a useful yardstick for comparison among scientists if the index corresponds strongly with peer assessments, we calculated a logistic regression analysis with the two factors resulting from the factor analysis as independent variables and peer assessment of the postdoctoral researchers as the dependent variable. The results of the regression analysis show that peer assessments can be predicted better using the factor ‘impact of the productive core’ than using the factor ‘quantity of the productive core.’ [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper aims to evaluate the scientific publication research productivity in Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science (MJLIS) for period of nineteen years between 1996 and 2014 with total of 315 research publications. For the purpose of this present study, the various attributes of this publication to know about chronology wise total papers, total authors, total citations, average authors per paper, average citation per paper, exponential growth rate, degree of collaboration, collaborative index, relative growth rate, doubling time, co-authorship index, subject wise distribution, institution and country wise distribution and length of papers have also analyzed. The scientometric tools and techniques such as Degree of Collaboration, Collaborative Index, Exponential Growth Rate, and Co-authorship index for measuring the output so as to arrive the appropriate results and findings during the period of study. The results reveal that out of 315 papers, 8.89% are the greatest number of research outputs in the year 2011 and the lowest number 4.13% are in the year 1998. The highest number of average authors per paper is 2.90 in the year 2012 and the average Exponential growth rate is 1.007 and showing the increasing trend in the journal. The highest number of citations is in the year 2010 whereas the least number of citations are in 1998. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lotka's law was formulated to describe the number of authors with a certain number of publications. Empirical results (Morris & Goldstein, 2007) indicate that Lotka's law is also valid if one counts the number of publications of coauthor pairs. This article gives a simple model proving this to be true, with the same Lotka exponent, if the number of coauthored papers is proportional to the number of papers of the individual coauthors. Under the assumption that this number of coauthored papers is more than proportional to the number of papers of the individual authors (to be explained in the article), we can prove that the size-frequency function of coauthor pairs is Lotkaian with an exponent that is higher than that of the Lotka function of individual authors, a fact that is confirmed in experimental results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the most important requirements of building applicable models and meaningful indicators for the use of scientometrics at the micro and meso level is the correct identification and disambiguation of authors and institutes. Platforms like ResearcherID or ORCID with author registration providing high reliability but lower coverage now provide appropriate data sets for the development and testing of stochastic models describing the publication activity and citation impact of individual authors. This paper proposes a triangular model incorporating papers, citations and authors analogously to the dichotomous model used at higher levels of aggregation like countries or fields. This model is applied to a set of authors in any field of science identified by their ResearcherID. However, the main advantage of classical citation indicators to study citation impact under conditional productivity turned out to be the main problem in this triangle: the possible heterogeneity of the collaborating authors results in low robustness. A mere technical solution to this problem would be fractional counting at three levels but the conceptual issue, the different roles of co-authors causing this heterogeneity will never be solved by any algorithm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The specific impact index, or s-index, is introduced as a measure of a scientist's projected impact per paper. The index is complementary to other indices that measure overall impact as it can distinguish between authors maximizing the quantity of their output and authors maximizing the quality of their output. It also can be used to monitor career progress. The main advantage of the new index is that it reduces age bias from older papers that have more time to accumulate citations than do more recent papers. The index was tested on 24 scientists in different fields and of different statures. The overall projected impact estimated from the index correlates well with Hirsch's h-index squared (r2=0.99). The impact of different aging models was evaluated as well. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hirsch's (2005) h index of scholarly output has generated substantial interest and wide acceptance because of its apparent ability to quantify scholarly impact simply and accurately. We show that the excitement surrounding h is premature for three reasons: h stagnates with increasing scientific age; it is highly dependent on publication quantity; and it is highly dependent on field-specific citation rates. Thus, it is not useful for comparing scholars across disciplines. We propose the scholarly “index of quality and productivity” (IQp) as an alternative to h. The new index takes into account a scholar's total impact and also corrects for field-specific citation rates, scholarly productivity, and scientific age. The IQp accurately predicts group membership on a common metric, as tested on a sample of 80 scholars from three populations: (a) Nobel winners in physics (n = 10), chemistry (n = 10), medicine (n = 10), and economics (n = 10), and towering psychologists (n = 10); and scholars who have made more modest contributions to science including randomly selected (b) fellows (n = 15) and (c) members (n = 15) of the Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. The IQp also correlates better with expert ratings of greatness than does the h index. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Present study focuses on authorship patterns in Knowledge Management using scientometrics. The study found Del Giudice M as the most productive author with an h-Index of 20. The study found that Del Giudice M. is the most locally cited author with 25 articles with a fractionalised value of 7.05. The study identified Del Giudice M, Lee S, Bontis N, Ferraris A, and Serenko A as the most prolific authors from 2010 to 2023 The most striking observation is the presence of an Indian author, whose paper published in the Journal of Service Research was cited 738 times with a TCpY of 52.71. The study also reveals that more documents were collaborative, which accounts for the prevalence of publications with multiple authors with the USA leading the scene. This study deliberates mostly on authorship patterns in Scientometric research connected to Knowledge Management to cultivate a fairer, more varied, and influential research environment that accurately represents the depth and complexity of Knowledge Management practices and issues. This paper analysis Lotka’s Law, Most Local Cited Authors in KM, the authorship pattern, most locally cited authors, the productivity of authors over time, and most globally cited publications in Knowledge Management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

J.E. Hirsch (2005) introduced the h-index to quantify an individual's scientific research output by the largest number h of a scientist's papers, that received at least h citations. This so-called Hirsch index can be easily modified to take multiple coauthorship into account by counting the papers fractionally according to (the inverse of) the number of authors. I have worked out 26 empirical cases of physicists to illustrate the effect of this modification. Although the correlation between the original and the modified Hirsch index is relatively strong, the arrangement of the datasets is significantly different depending on whether they are put into order according to the values of either the original or the modified index. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The study is based on the Bibliometric analysis of 412 research articles published in 10 volumes of 40 issues appeared in the SRELS Journal of Information Management (SRELS-JIM) during periods of 2000 to 2009. This paper will review on authorship pattern; degree of collaboration, author productivity and further it reveals that out of total 686 contributors, 360 (52.48%) contributors contributed a joint authored paper that amounts to 180 (43.69%) articles. Overall average number of authors per article is 1.66 and average productivity per author is 0.60; majorities 544(79.30%) of articles are published by Indian contributors followed by USA and alternative contributors. The findings must reveal various aspects of the characteristics and patterns of contributions of this journal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Society for Modeling and Simulation International (SCS) is celebrating its 60th anniversary this year. Since its inception, the Society has widely disseminated the advancements in the field of modeling and simulation (M&S) through its peer-reviewed journals. In this paper we profile research that has been published in the journal SIMULATION: Transactions of the Society for Modeling and Simulation International from the turn of the millennium to 2010; the objective is to acknowledge the contribution of the authors and their seminal research papers, their respective universities/departments and the geographical diversity of the authors’ affiliations. Yet another objective is to contribute towards the understanding of the overall evolution of the discipline of M&S; this is achieved through the classification of M&S techniques and its frequency of use, analysis of the sectors that have seen the predomination application of M&S and the context of its application. It is expected that this paper will lead to further appreciation of the contribution of the Society in influencing the growth of M&S as a discipline and, indeed, in steering its future direction. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This study analyses the Indian Scientists contributions of research papers related to the topic in Data Mining was undertaken from Web of Science Databases has been used to retrieve the data for 22 years (1999-2020) by the searching the keyword "Data Mining". The study reveals that, most of the researchers preferred to publish their research results in journals; as such 88.59% of articles were published in journals. More numbers of articles were published in the year 2019. The authorship trend shows that, out of total 1096 literature published, 95.53 % of the publication published under the joint author. It is observed that author productivity is not in agreement with Lotka's law, but productivity distribution data partially fits the law when the value of Chi-square to 25212.62. Further this study also identified to analyses source wise. Degree of collaboration, Areas of research concentration, word frequency, Geographical distribution of the literature and citation analysis is also noted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scientometrics is an effective method to quantitatively analyse the productivity and progress of all forms of written communication. This study aims to examine the scientific research productivity of Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal) for a selected period of 22 years between 1998 and 2019. Required data pertaining to this study under various parameters were collected from Scopus database. Further, analysis was carried out under various dimensions to measure the year wise distribution of articles published during the selected period, its relative growth rate, doubling time, collaboration coefficient, country and affiliation wise distribution of articles and its citation patterns etc. The findings of the study revealed that the highest numbers of articles were published in the year 2019 and the lowest appeared in the year 1998. In the year 2013, there was no single article of the journal indexed in Scopus database. The country wise distribution of articles showed that the highest contribution of 33.52% made from Nigeria, while the institution wise distribution indicated that the University of Ibadan was rated as the highest research producer. Analysis also revealed that the average citation per paper during the selected period was 1.51. Authors found from the analysis that the publication title 'Using Google Analytics for improving library website content and design: A case study' authored by Fang W. received a citation of 67 and ranked as the highly cited paper during the period of study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper presents a Scientometric analysis of publications of green electronics at global level during 1989 to 2014 as reflected web of science database. The study covers 7142 publications during the period. The study focused on author productivity, most used journals, sources, country, language etc.. It is found from the analysis that 92.31% of the articles were produced by multiple authors. It is found that the multi-author distribution is the most elevated contrast with single-author distribution. "Cederbaum LS" published highest number of articles for the study period. 91 percent of collaboration authors articles published during the study periods. Chinese Academy of Sciences had contributed the highest number of research publications. The USA country has the highest productivity and highest local and global citation scores measured. Physical Review B has emerged as the most preferred journal by authors for publication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this study, three journals in the field of astronomy and astrophysics were selected for mapping scholarly communication by using bibliometric methods. Moreover, a brief review of bibliometric studies in the field of astronomy and astrophysics was conducted. The annual publication distribution and authorship pattern of articles in the three journals were analyzed. All three journals published more multiauthored papers. Author productivity indexes, such as the average number of authors per paper and productivity per author were calculated. Lotka’s law of scientific productivity and goodness-of-fit tests were applied; the results revealed that the data set in this study did not conform to Lotka’s law. The h-, g-, and i10-indexes for each journal were calculated. Regarding the geospatial distribution of articles, the authors from the journals’ source country contributed more articles. In this paper, highly contributing institutions and authors are presented. A list of highly cited articles and journals is also presented. The author-given keywords were analyzed. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This study aims to present the bibliometric characteristics of the Journal, Library Progress (International). The study is based on research articles appeared in the journal during the period from 2010 to 2015. It illustrates various important aspects like-growth of articles and authors, authorship patterns, author productivity, single-and multi-authored papers by year geographical distribution of articles and most prolific authors and trend of research collaborations among authors etc. The findings of the study revealed that majority of the articles are authored by two authors. It constitutes alone 70 (53.44%). It is followed by single author 41 (31.30%). The average number of authors per paper of this journal is 1.85 and the average productivity per author is 0.54. India since being the host country, as such proved to be the sole major contributors of the journal in every respect. Individual contribution of authors to the journal has been tabulated as per articles contributed, highlighted in their standing order. Researchers from 3 countries and 17 states from India have contributed articles to the journal during the period of study. Collaborative Index, Degree of Collaboration and Collaborative Coefficient were calculated from the data and the following mean values were found 0.54, 0.69 and 0.37 respectively. Finally this study reveals the prominence of joint authorship, which indicates trend of collaborative research in LIS field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper focus on the growth and development of mobile technology research in terms of publication output as reflected in Web of Science database. During 2000-2013 a total of 10,638 publications were published in the field. The average number of publications published per year was 759.86 and the highest number of publications 1495 were published in 2013. Output of total publications, 9037 were produced by multiple authors and 1601 by single authors. Authors from USA have contributed maximum number of publications compared to the other countries and India stood 16th ranking in terms of productivity in this study period. The most prolific author is Kim who contributed 42 publications followed by Kim with 36 publications. Collaboration Index ranges from 3.67 (2000) to 4.57 (2009) with an average of 4.32 per joint authored paper which implies the research team falls between 3 and 5 in the field of mobile technology. University of California System (USA) is the highly contributed institutions with 243 publications followed by University of London (UK) with 149 publications, Florida State University System (USA), National Chiao Tung University (China) with 88 publications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The blockchain was first discussed in the financial sector. However, it has been the subject of debate in many different sectors today due to several advantages such as data security, privacy, and auto control. The records that are linked together by the encryption technologies form blocks and these blocks form the blockchain. Each block has a hash code that allows its connection to the previous block. In this way, it is ensured that the subject and context can be stored without being broken. With this structure, it is possible to say that the blockchain has many advantages in data storage, organization, and management. Due to these advantages, there is an increased interest in blockchain technology both in academia and in the private sector. However, there is still a gap in blockchain information related to blockchain inventions, therefore the aim of this paper is to describe the social and intellectual structure of blockchain research over scientific papers and patent analysis. To do that, we have extracted 4502 research papers from scientific databases. Data was gathered from the Web of Science. Bibliometrics and scientometrics methods were used to analyze the data. Network theory and social network analysis metrics were used in the creation of visuals, and collaborations in the context of authors, countries, and institutions were examined. H-index, dominance ranking, and citation analysis was used to reveal the intellectual structure of the area. Our objective is to understand the current research topics, challenges, and future directions regarding Blockchain technology from the intellectual, social structure, and intellectual property perspectives. In this context, the research questions we seek to answer in our research are to stimulate theory and understanding about blockchain studies by combining the main bibliometrics indicators and patent analytics. Finally, the basic dynamics for the patenting status and commercialization of blockchain technology have been assessed in terms of developed sectors and sectors open to development. The aspects of social, intellectual, and commercialization of the area were determined through these visuals and analysis, which will help researchers and other practitioners of the field. In terms of Low Aggregate Constraint Values, it is seen that the G05D1 is the most open area for improvement in blockchain technologies. On the other hand, it has been observed that the technology class with the highest saturation level is the technologies in the field of general-purpose storage technologies and programs such as G06F1. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The study deals with the Scientometric study on the publication of "Geochemistry". The records are collected from Web of Science Databases for the period of 1989-2020. A total of 2603 papers were identified in Web of Science database. The study reveals that, most of the researchers preferred to publish their research results in journal and more numbers of articles were published in the year 2019. The authorship trend shows that, out of total 2603 literature published, 92.5% of the publication published under the joint author. Four thousand three hundred and eighty nine authors have contributed the total of 2603 articles. Further this study also identified to analyses coverage growth rates, relative growth rate, doubling time, most prolific authors, Degree of collaboration, Areas of research concentration, Price's Square Root Law and Pareto Principle and citation analysis is also noted [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the past few years, several major scientific fraud cases have shocked the scientific community. The number of retractions each year has also increased tremendously, especially in the biomedical field, and scientific misconduct accounts for more than half of those retractions. It is assumed that co-authors of retracted papers are affected by their colleagues' misconduct, and the aim of this study is to provide empirical evidence of the effect of retractions in biomedical research on co-authors' research careers. Using data from the Web of Science, we measured the productivity, impact, and collaboration of 1,123 co-authors of 293 retracted articles for a period of 5 years before and after the retraction. We found clear evidence that collaborators do suffer consequences of their colleagues' misconduct and that a retraction for fraud has higher consequences than a retraction for error. Our results also suggest that the extent of these consequences is closely linked with the ranking of co-authors on the retracted paper, being felt most strongly by first authors, followed by the last authors, with the impact is less important for middle authors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper attempts to highlight the publication status and growth of nuclear physics research across the world by way of analyzing various features of research output based on Web of Science database. A total of 32286 publications were published on nuclear physics during the period 2004-2013. It was found that the number of published articles was higher in USA, Germany, Japan, Italy, France, China and Russia, etc. The highest number of publications 5,407 (16.75%) was published in 2012. The average number of publications published per year was 3228.6. The highest growth rate (64.90%) was observed in 2012. Out of the total publications 93.30% of contributions were collaborated with multi authorship and 6.70% of contributions were collaboration with single authors. The highest value of collaboration coefficient (CC) was 0.62 in 2008. Overall collaboration rate was very high. Physics and Astronomy accounts for the largest share 23413 (72.52%) of publications in the total worldwide output on nuclear physics followed by Medicine with 6608 (20.47%) publications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A brief communication appearing in this journal ranked UK-based LIS and (some) IR academics by their h-index using data derived from the Thomson ISI Web of Science™ (WoS). In this brief communication, the same academics were re-ranked, using other popular citation databases. It was found that for academics who publish more in computer science forums, their h was significantly different due to highly cited papers missed by WoS; consequently, their rank changed substantially. The study was widened to a broader set of UK-based LIS and IR academics in which results showed similar statistically significant differences. A variant of h, hmx, was introduced that allowed a ranking of the academics using all citation databases together. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper analyzes the mapping of research trends and author productivity of global literature on coronavirus output of research publications as indexed in the Web of Science from 1996 to 2020. A total of 12,706 publications were published on Coronavirus during 1996–2020. The highest number of publications, 783 or 6.162% was published in 2004. A total of 33,814 authors contributed to the 12,706 publications (i.e. the total publications shared by 37.57% of the authors). The most prolific authors were Yuen KY with 213 publications; Perlman with 179; Enjuanes with 160; and Baric with 59 publications. The data of one person to 25 people and the study witnessed accordingly measured the value of n = 334.6630. The University of Hong Kong was the most productive institution; it contributed 519 (4.085%) of the publications. The United States of America (USA) holds the highest share of 4,541 (35.73%) of publications followed by the Peoples Republic of China with 21.23%. The research area of virology produced the major share with 3,998 (31.46%) publications globally followed by Veterinary sciences with 1,908 (15.01%). The most productive journal was the Journal of Virology with 1,130 (8.89%); Virology published 480 (3.77%) from the top 25 ranked journals. The visualizing for mapping of coronavirus publications of Web of Science data recorded authors, institutions, and countries in this study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The study focuses on scientometric studies on 'Indian Journals of Traditional Knowledge' has been carried out, journal containing 938 articles from 2002-2012 have been taken into consideration for the present study. The analysis covers and discusses in terms of year-wise distribution of articles; year-wise authorship pattern; single vs multiple authored papers; month-wise distribution of articles; authorship pattern of cited references; geographical distribution of articles; country-wise distribution of articles; state-wise (India) contribution of articles; length of article; author-wise distribution of articles; etc. it registered annual growth 10 articles in 2002 to 139 articles in 2012. The highest number of articles, 139 (14.81%) were published in 2010 and lowest number i.e. 10 (1.06%) in 2003. A total of 938 articles were published during the period distributed over 39 issues of the journals. On an average 24 articles were published per issue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Of h-type indices available now, the g-index is an important one in that it not only keeps some advantages of the h-index but also counts citations from highly cited articles. However, the g-index has a drawback that one has to add fictitious articles with zero citation to calculate this index in some important cases. Based on an alternative definition without introducing fictitious articles, an analytical method has been proposed to calculate the g-index based approximately on the h-index and the e-index. If citations for a scientist are ranked by a power law, it is shown that the g-index can be calculated accurately by the h-index, the e-index, and the power parameter. The relationship of the h-, g-, and e-indices presented here shows that the g-index contains the citation information from the h-index, the e-index, and some papers beyond the h-core. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this study, we investigate whether there is a need for the h index and its variants in addition to standard bibliometric measures (SBMs). Results from our recent study (L. Bornmann, R. Mutz, & H.-D. Daniel, 2008) have indicated that there are two types of indices: One type of indices (e.g., h index) describes the most productive core of a scientist's output and informs about the number of papers in the core. The other type of indices (e.g., a index) depicts the impact of the papers in the core. In evaluative bibliometric studies, the two dimensions quantity and quality of output are usually assessed using the SBMs “number of publications” (for the quantity dimension) and “total citation counts” (for the impact dimension). We additionally included the SBMs into the factor analysis. The results of the newly calculated analysis indicate that there is a high intercorrelation between “number of publications” and the indices that load substantially on the factor Quantity of the Productive Core as well as between “total citation counts” and the indices that load substantially on the factor Impact of the Productive Core. The high-loading indices and SBMs within one performance dimension could be called redundant in empirical application, as high intercorrelations between different indicators are a sign for measuring something similar (or the same). Based on our findings, we propose the use of any pair of indicators (one relating to the number of papers in a researcher's productive core and one relating to the impact of these core papers) as a meaningful approach for comparing scientists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

J.E. Hirsch (2005) introduced the h-index to quantify an individual's scientific research output by the largest number h of a scientist's papers that received at least h citations. To take into account the highly skewed frequency distribution of citations, L. Egghe (2006a) proposed the g-index as an improvement of the h-index. I have worked out 26 practical cases of physicists from the Institute of Physics at Chemnitz University of Technology, and compare the h and g values in this study. It is demonstrated that the g-index discriminates better between different citation patterns. This also can be achieved by evaluating B.H. Jin's (2006) A-index, which reflects the average number of citations in the h-core, and interpreting it in conjunction with the h-index. h and A can be combined into the R-index to measure the h-core's citation intensity. I also have determined the A and R values for the 26 datasets. For a better comparison, I utilize interpolated indices. The correlations between the various indices as well as with the total number of papers and the highest citation counts are discussed. The largest Pearson correlation coefficient is found between g and R. Although the correlation between g and h is relatively strong, the arrangement of the datasets is significantly different depending on whether they are put into order according to the values of either h or g. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Jorge Hirsch (2005a, 2005b) recently proposed the h index to quantify the research output of individual scientists. The new index has attracted a lot of attention in the scientific community. The claim that the h index in a single number provides a good representation of the scientific lifetime achievement of a scientist as well as the (supposed) simple calculation of the h index using common literature databases lead to the danger of improper use of the index. We describe the advantages and disadvantages of the h index and summarize the studies on the convergent validity of this index. We also introduce corrections and complements as well as single-number alternatives to the h index. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper studies the applicability of Lotka's law for international business literature. The data included eleven thousand two hundred two (11202) references appended to research articles published in Journal of World Business during 2012-2014. It was found that Lotka's distribution is applicable to international business literature which was further conformed by using Chi square and K-S statistics tests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output," by J.E. Hirsch in the November 2005 issue.

In this study an attempt is made to investigate the scholarly communications in College & Research Libraries journal during the period of 1997-2011 and to study the key dimensions of its publication trends. For the analysis of the study 15 volumes containing 90 issues have been taken up for evaluation. Necessary bibliometric measures are applied to analyse different publication parameters. It is found that, contributions of articles to each volume of College & Research Libraries is nearly consistent and on an average 32 articles have been published every year. Single authored articles are found to be the highest followed by two and three authored articles. The average degree of collaboration in College & Research Libraries is 0.57. The average author per article is 1.88 for 479 articles. Lotka's law is tested and confers to a value of n=3.22. In all 12893 citations have been appended to 479 articles during the period 1997-2011. Journals (59.95 per cent) are the top form of source used by authors followed by books (17.32 per cent), webpages (7.44 per cent) and reports (3.95 per cent). Ranked list of prolific authors and ranked list of journals is prepared and presented in respective tables. Deborah D Blecic and Stephen E Wiberley have topped the ranked list of prolific authors with 6 articles each. College & Research Libraries which is also the source journal of this study has topped the ranked list of journals with 1311 (16.96 per cent) citations. USA has topped the list of ranking of country productivity with 93.24 per cent contributions followed by Canada and China. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study is to investigate the bibliometric analysis of Journal of Intellectual Property Rights (JIPR) for selected six years between 2007 and 2012. It is found that the highest number of contributions i.e., 56 (19.79 %) were published in the years 2012. The degree of collaboration in this journal is 0.34. Further, the study investigated the authorship pattern, volume wise and issue wise authorship, author’s productivity and the single and multi-authored papers and average citations, page distribution, rank wise geographical distribution of publications and several features. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The g-index is discussed in terms of the average number of citations of the publications in the g-core, showing that it combines features of the h-index and the A-index in one number. For a visualization, data of 8 famous physicists are presented and analyzed. In comparison with the h-index, the g-index increases between 67% and 144%, on average by a factor of 2. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study reveals the bibliometric study of the E-Journal, Library Philosophy and Practice from 2005 to 2014. The study covers the growth of literature and authorship patterns of the journal. Further, it analyzes various other bibliometrics aspects such as authors' degree of collaboration, geographical productivity in scholarly publications, subject wise distribution of articles and ranking pattern etc. For this study 1177 no. of articles was taken up for the evaluation. Necessary bibliometric measures are applied to analyze different publication parameters. In all with an average 117 articles were published each year. Single authorship is leading authorship trend but also two authored articles have shown good number of contribution with the 0.51 rate of degree of collaboration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Analyse articles in SRELS journal of information management published during the years 2004-2013 and to study the key dimensions of its publication trends. For this study 10 volumes containing 48 issues have been taken up for evaluation. Necessary bibliometric measures are applied to analyse different publication parameters. In all 499 articles are published with an average 49 articles each year. The collaborative measures are calculated as per Ajiferuke et al (0.35), Lawani (2.28) and Subramanyam (0.65). The average author per article is 1.83 for 499 articles. Lotka's law is tested and conforms to a value of n=2.27. There are 6224 citations found appended to 499 articles during the period 2004-2013. Journals (44.49%) are the top form of source used by authors followed by books (22.51%) and web pages (15.60%). Ranked list of prolific authors and ranked list of journals is prepared and presented in respective tables. Khaiser Nikam and MP Satija have topped the ranked list of prolific authors with 11 articles each. SRELS Journal of Information Management topped the ranked list of journals with 197 (7.11%) citations. Among different countries contributing to this journal, authors from India (94.75%) have made maximum contributions. Authors from Karnataka (43.59%) have contributed majority of articles among Indian States. Bradford's Law of Scattering is verified through Leimkuhler model and found fitting the data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hirsch's h index is becoming the standard measure of an individual's research accomplishments. The aggregation of individuals' measures is also the basis for global measures at institutional or national levels. To investigate whether the h index can be reliably computed through alternative sources of citation records, the Web of Science (WoS), PsycINFO and Google Scholar (GS) were used to collect citation records for known publications of four Spanish psychologists. Compared with WoS, PsycINFO included a larger percentage of publication records, whereas GS outperformed WoS and PsycINFO in this respect. Compared with WoS, PsycINFO retrieved a larger number of citations in unique areas of psychology, but it retrieved a smaller number of citations in areas that are close to statistics or the neurosciences, whereas GS retrieved the largest numbers of citations in all cases. Incorrect citations were scarce in Wos (0.3%), more prevalent in PsycINFO (1.1%), and overwhelming in GS (16.5%). All platforms retrieved unique citations, the largest set coming from GS. WoS and PsycINFO cover distinct areas of psychology unevenly, thus applying different penalties on the h index of researches working in different fields. Obtaining fair and accurate h indices required the union of citations retrieved by all three platforms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In today's publish or perish environment, the scholarly impact of a research article holds great importance. The present study examined 2343 articles having both altmetric attention scores and citations published by 22 core health care policy faculty members at Harvard Medical School. Web of Science was used to retrieve the citations, whereas Altmetric Explorer was used to determine the altmetric attention score. The evaluation metrics in this study were focused on article-level information to determine each faculty member's contribution to the health care policy department collected in November 2018. This paper further determined the predictive capability of altmetric attention score for the increase of citations from November 2018 to January 2020. The findings showed J. Michael McWilliams (Professor); Anupam B. Jena (Associate Professor); and Zirui Song (Assistant Professor) were the faculty members with highest altmetric attention score while Ronald C. Kessler (Professor); Nicole Maestas (Associate Professor); and Zirui Song (Assistant Professor) were the faculty members with the highest citation value. The lowest percentage (5.84%) of articles without any citations were published by the professors, whereas the lowest percentage (4.84%) of articles without any social media mention were published by the assistant professors. The health care faculty had the highest percentage of Mendeley readerships followed by tweets, news, and blogs mention in comparison to a meager percentage of policy-related documents mention for their retrieved articles. A significant strong positive correlation ( r R > 0.4) was observed between the aggregated ranked altmetric attention scores and ranked citation/increased citation values for all the faculty members. This study can be extended to determine the research productivity of any department, discipline, or group of faculty members. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract The present study conducts a scientometric study of the journal literature of heat transfer from 1900 to 2017 based on the database of Web of Science, 2018. A total of 120,628 items resulted from topic search using "heat transfer" as the search term. The results of this work reveal that the literature on heat transfer grows exponentially with an annual growth rate of about 9.71% for the last century the first two decades of this century through the emergence of new subjects, identified through word cloud of authors' keywords. The document types, countries and languages, journal distribution, number of authors, institution productivity and paper citations are analyzed. Highly productive journals and authors and highly cited papers are identified. The results reveal that USA and China are the two most productive countries contributing 17.4% and 14.3%, respectively. About 90% of papers are published with co-authors and 73% of the paper was published with two to four authors. The author distribution follows the trend of Lotka's law, with 61.3% of the authors published only one paper, and 15.9% of the authors published two papers. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer is the most productive journal contributing 9.4% of the publications. Most highly cited papers are identified and found to be consist with the emergence of new subjects in heat transfer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A bibliography record of oncology research outputinIndia for the period, 2005-2015 covering 10298 research itemswas evaluated to test the applicability of Lotka's law and author productivity distribution patterns. Data was collected from Web of Science database. The analysis was performed using Histcite software, which calculated the total number of authors and analyzed their research papers. A simple theory Lotka's law summarizes the logarithmic relation between researchers and publication quantities. The total number of contributors were 21443 and oncology research output conformed particularly well to Lotka's law with C = 0.618. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple bibliometric indicators, such as average number of citations per publication per researcher, or the recently proposed Hirsch index (h-index), are nowadays tracked by online repositories, including Web of Science (WOS), and often affect critical decision making. This work proposes appropriate scaling of the h-index based on its probability distribution that is calculated for any underlying citation distribution. The proposed approach outperforms existing index estimation models that have focused on the expected value only (i.e., first moment). Furthermore, it is shown that average number of citations per publication per scientific field, total number of publications per researcher, as well as researcher's h-index measured value, expected value, and standard deviation constitute the minimum information required for meaningful h-index ranking campaigns; otherwise contradicting ranking results emerge. This work may potentially shed light to (current or future) large-scale, h-index-based bibliometric evaluations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper introduces the generalized Egghe-indices as a new family of scientific impact measures for ranking the output of scientific researchers. The definition of this family is strongly inspired by Egghe's well-known g-index. The main contribution of the paper is a family of axiomatic characterizations that characterize every generalized Egghe-index in terms of four axioms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study assessed the intermix of local citation analysis and survey of journal use and reading patterns for evaluating an academic library's research collection. Journal articles and their cited references from faculties at the University of New South Wales were downloaded from the Web of Science (WoS) and journal impact factors from the Journal Citation Reports. The survey of the University of New South Wales (UNSW) academic staff asked both reader-related and reading-related questions. Both methods showed that academics in medicine published more and had more coauthors per paper than academics in the other faculties; however, when correlated with the number of students and academic staff, science published more and engineering published in higher impact journals. When “recalled” numbers of articles published were compared to “actual” numbers, all faculties over-estimated their productivity by nearly two-fold. The distribution of cited serial references was highly skewed with over half of the titles cited only once. The survey results corresponded with U.S. university surveys with one exception: Engineering academics reported the highest number of article readings and read mostly for research related activities. Citation analysis data showed that the UNSW library provided the majority of journals in which researchers published and cited, mostly in electronic formats. However, the availability of non-journal cited sources was low. The joint methods provided both confirmatory and contradictory results and proved useful in evaluating library research collections. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Measuring the productivity and output is a common practice for the institutions, when we discuss about research and publications. Keeping this in mind, the bibliometric analysis of Bundelkhand University, Jhansi from the year 2000-2019 is performed in the given paper. This study shows the growth of Bundelkhand University in terms of Primary research output and publicaions in all disciplines. The total number of publications (579) indexed in SCOPUS were retrieved and analyzed to find out the year wise growth, authorship pattern, collaborative coefficient, prolific authors and popular journals for communicating the research work. MS-Excel is used for analyzing and sorting the retrieved data. Collaborative coefficient is calculated by using the formula defined by Price & Beaver. The results of the study show that the year 2019 was the year of maximum publications (57). The highest citations were received in the year 2005 (1091) and ACCP for total number of publications was 10.71. The maximum publications published as journal articles and three-authorship pattern is dominating other patterns. Dr. S.P. Singh from department of Pharmacy was found as the most prolific author. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper presents bibliometric analysis of 10671 citations appearing in 471 papers published in Defence Science Journal (DSJ) during 2009-2014. Efforts have been made to study the productivity and citation patterns of researchers for their published papers based on various parameters. The paper studies the automation process taken place and significant changes occurred. The study reveals almost a constant trend of inflow of papers with increasing trend of multi-authored papers. Highest share of papers are being contributed by authors of Indian origin, majority being from DRDO, and journals being the predominant source of information cited by the researchers for their R&D works. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We analyze the publication output of 119 Chilean ecologists and find strong evidence that self-citations significantly affect the h-index increase. Furthermore, we show that the relationship between the increase in the h-index and the proportion of self-citations differs between high and low h-index researchers. In particular, our results show that it is in the low h-index group where self-citations cause the greater impact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]