Search

In 2014, a union of German research organisations established Projekt DEAL, a national-level project to negotiate licensing agreements with large scientific publishers. Negotiations between DEAL and Elsevier began in 2016, and broke down without a successful agreement in 2018; in this time, around 200 German research institutions cancelled their license agreements with Elsevier, leading Elsevier to restrict journal access at those institutions. We investigated the effect on researchers' publishing and citing behaviours from a bibliometric perspective, using a dataset of ∼400,000 articles published by researchers at DEAL institutions between 2012-2020. We further investigated these effects with respect to the timing of contract cancellations, research disciplines, collaboration patterns, and article open-access status. We find evidence for a decrease in Elsevier’s market share of articles from DEAL institutions, with the largest year-on-year market share decreases occuring from 2018 to 2020 following the implementation of access restrictions. We also observe year-on-year decreases in the proportion of citations, although the decrease is smaller. We conclude that negotiations with Elsevier and access restrictions have led to some reduced willingness to publish in Elsevier journals, but that researchers are not strongly affected in their ability to cite Elsevier articles, implying that researchers use other methods to access scientific literature. Im Jahr 2014 gründete ein Zusammenschluss deutscher Forschungsorganisationen das Projekt DEAL, ein Projekt auf nationaler Ebene zur Aushandlung von Lizenzverträgen mit großen Wissenschaftsverlagen. Die Verhandlungen zwischen DEAL und Elsevier begannen 2016 und scheiterten 2018 ohne eine erfolgreiche Einigung; in dieser Zeit kündigten rund 200 deutsche Forschungseinrichtungen ihre Lizenzverträge mit Elsevier, was Elsevier dazu veranlasste, den Zeitschriftenzugang für diese Einrichtungen zu beschränken. Die Autor*innen untersuchten die Auswirkungen auf das Publikations- und Zitierverhalten von Forschenden aus bibliometrischer Sicht anhand eines Datensatzes von ∼400.000 Artikeln, die von Forschenden an DEAL-Einrichtungen zwischen 2012-2020 veröffentlicht wurden.

Author affiliations provide key information when attributing academic performance like publication counts. So far, such measures have been aggregated either manually or only to top-level institutions, such as universities. Supervised affiliation resolution requires a large number of annotated alignments between affiliation strings and known institutions, which are not readily available. We introduce the task of unsupervised hierarchical affiliation resolution, which assigns affiliations to institutions on all hierarchy levels (e.g. departments), discovering the institutions as well as their hierarchical ordering on the fly. From the corresponding requirements, we derive a simple conceptual framework based on the subset partial order that can be extended to account for the discrepancies evident in realistic affiliations from the Web of Science. We implement initial baselines and provide datasets and evaluation metrics for experimentation. Results show that mapping affiliations to known institutions and discovering lower-level institutions works well with simple baselines, whereas unsupervised top-level- and hierarchical resolution is more challenging. Our work provides structured guidance for further in-depth studies and improved methodology by identifying and discussing a number of observed difficulties and important challenges that future work needs to address.

A potential motivation for scientists to deposit their scientific work as preprints is to enhance its citation or social impact. In this study we assessed the citation and altmetric advantage of bioRxiv, a preprint server for the biological sciences. We retrieved metadata of all bioRxiv preprints deposited between November 2013 and December 2017, and matched them to articles that were subsequently published in peer-reviewed journals. Citation data from Scopus and altmetric data from Altmetric.com were used to compare citation and online sharing behavior of bioRxiv preprints, their related journal articles, and nondeposited articles published in the same journals. We found that bioRxiv-deposited journal articles had sizably higher citation and altmetric counts compared to nondeposited articles. Regression analysis reveals that this advantage is not explained by multiple explanatory variables related to the articles’ publication venues and authorship. Further research will be required to establish whether such an effect is causal in nature. bioRxiv preprints themselves are being directly cited in journal articles, regardless of whether the preprint has subsequently been published in a journal. bioRxiv preprints are also shared widely on Twitter and in blogs, but remain relatively scarce in mainstream media and Wikipedia articles, in comparison to peer-reviewed journal articles.

Citation metrics have value because they aim to make scientific assessment a level playing field, but urgent transparency-based adjustments are necessary to ensure that measurements yield the most accurate picture of impact and excellence. One problematic area is the handling of self-citations, which are either excluded or inappropriately accounted for when using bibliometric indicators for research evaluation. Here, in favor of openly tracking self-citations we report on self-referencing behavior among various academic disciplines as captured by the curated Clarivate Analytics Web of Science database. Specifically, we examined the behavior of 385,616 authors grouped into 15 subject areas like Biology, Chemistry, Science & Technology, Engineering, and Physics. These authors have published 3,240,973 papers that have accumulated 90,806,462 citations, roughly five percent of which are self-citations. Up until now, very little is known about the buildup of self-citations at the author-level and in field-specific contexts. Our view is that hiding self-citation data is indefensible and needlessly confuses any attempts to understand the bibliometric impact of one’s work. Instead we urge academics to embrace visibility of citation data in a community of peers, which relies on nuance and openness rather than curated scorekeeping.

The 12th iteration of the Bibliometric-enhanced Information Retrieval (BIR) workshop series is a full-day ECIR 2022 workshop. BIR tackles issues related to, for instance, academic search and recommendation, at the intersection of Information Retrieval, Natural Language Processing, and Bibliometrics. As an interdisciplinary scientific event, BIR brings together researchers and practitioners from the Scientometrics/Bibliometrics community on the one hand and the Information Retrieval community on the other hand. BIR is an ever-growing topic investigated by both academia and the industry.

In recent years, increased stakeholder pressure to transition research to Open Access has led to many journals converting, or 'flipping', from a closed access (CA) to an open access (OA) publishing model. Changing the publishing model can influence the decision of authors to submit their papers to a journal, and increased article accessibility may influence citation behaviour. In this paper we aimed to understand how flipping a journal to an OA model influences the journal's future publication volumes and citation impact. We analysed two independent sets of journals that had flipped to an OA model, one from the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) and one from the Open Access Directory (OAD), and compared their development with two respective control groups of similar journals. For bibliometric analyses, journals were matched to the Scopus database. We assessed changes in the number of articles published over time, as well as two citation metrics at the journal and article level: the normalised impact factor (IF) and the average relative citations (ARC), respectively. Our results show that overall, journals that flipped to an OA model increased their publication output compared to journals that remained closed. Mean normalised IF and ARC also generally increased following the flip to an OA model, at a greater rate than was observed in the control groups. However, the changes appear to vary largely by scientific discipline. Overall, these results indicate that flipping to an OA publishing model can bring positive changes to a journal., 16 pages, 5 figures, Accepted in Scientometrics

This paper examines the national and international growth of prehistoric archaeology in Italy from 1875 to 2000. A bibliometric approach is proposed for a case study of a scientific discipline, language and period that are poorly represented in current bibliographic databases. These constraints led to the generation of a data set with articles from 5 journals (2842 articles and 1221 unique authors). Publication language and author nationalities were manually included in the data set. Journal internationality measures and co-authorship network analyses showed: 1) that internationalisation was not the most striking change over the study period: it was one of a number of features that journal editors addressed in their own way; 2) results confirm a change in the social organisation of scientific production in archaeology, with the emergence of co-authorship and reflect the differentiation of local research trends. This is discussed with reference to previous work on the history of prehistoric archaeology. Une analyse bibliométrique des aspects nationaux et internationaux du développement de l’archéologie préhistorique en Italie de 1875 à 2000 est proposée, soit une discipline, une langue et une période peu couvertes dans les bases bibliographiques usuelles. Cela a conduit à créer un jeu de donnée ad hoc intégrant cinq revues (2842 articles, 1221 auteurs uniques). Les langues de publication et la nationalité des auteurs ont été pris en compte. Mesurer l’internationalité des revues et analyser le réseau de co-auteurs montre : 1) que l’internationalisation ne fut pas le fait le plus marquant de cette période, constituant une ressource – parmi d’autres – diversement employée par les éditeurs ; 2) une transformation dans l’organisation sociale de la production (co-autorat) et la différenciation d’orientations locales de recherche, confortant ainsi des études antérieures sur l’histoire de l’archéologie préhistorique.

Innovation is recognize as a matter of survival and success to firms and technological capabilities can lead to an innovative behavior by using technological resources and competences. The literature about technological capability and innovation is vast, counting on several approaches and a large number of researchers involved within. Based on this, our aim is to use a bibliometrics approach to map out the authors, institutions, journals and the evolution of the publication as well, to provide the path needed to build a theoretical framework about the theme. We held this research on the Scopus database using a standard search protocol to perform the selection of the sample. Our results indicates an emerging field of study and a large number papers and citations concentrated in few journals. Most cited authors are related to seminal works on the subject and most cited papers are ones from late 90’s and early 2000.

Eine wachsende Anzahl von wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaften, Zeitschriften, Institutionen und wissenschaftlich Tätigen protestieren und bekämpfen den "allmächtigen" Journal Impact Faktor. Die bekannteste Initiative von Protest und Empfehlungen heißt DORA, The San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment. Kritisiert wird die fehlerhafte, verzerrte und intransparente Art der quantitativen Evaluationsverfahren und ihre negativen Auswirkungen auf das wissenschaftliche Personal, insbesondere auf junge Nachwuchskräfte und ihre wissenschaftliche Entwicklung, insbesondere die subtile Diskriminierung von Kultur- und Sozialwissenschaften. Wir sollten nicht unkritisch im Metrik-Paradigma gefangen bleiben und der Flut neuer Indikatoren aus der Szientometrie zujubeln. Der Slogan "Putting Science into the Assessment of Research" darf nicht szientistisch verkürzt verstanden werden. Soziale Phänomene können nicht bloß mit naturwissenschaftlichen Methoden untersucht werden. Kritik und Transformation der sozialen Aktivitäten, die sich "Evaluation" nennen, erfordern sozialwissenschaftliche und wissenschaftsphilosophische Perspektiven. Evaluation ist kein wertneutrales Unternehmen, sondern ist eng mit Macht, Herrschaft, Ressourcenverteilung verbunden. A growing number of learned societies, journals, institutions and scientists argue and campaign against the ‘almighty‘ journal impact factor. The most famous initiative of protests and recommendations is named DORA, The San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment. The critics emphasize the erroneous, biased and "opaque" nature of quantitative evaluation procedures and their negative effects on scientific personnel, especially early career scientists and scientific development. The often subtle discrimination of cultural and social sciences is overseen and not discussed at all. We should not uncritically be captured by the metrics paradigm and hail the next indicator presented. DORA’s slogan "Putting Science into the Assessment of Research" may not be understood only as a scientometrical abbreviation. Social phenomena cannot be studied merely by quantitative and natural sciences methods. Critique and transformation of the social activities - which evaluation is - demand to consider the perspectives of philosophy of sciences and social sciences. Evaluation is not a value-free establishment, but closely linked to power structures, including the decision making for the available resources apportionment.

Zitatdatenbanken bilden die Datengrundlagen für zahlreiche szientometrische Untersuchungen, Evaluationen wissenschaftlicher Leistungen und Uni-Rankings. In der Literatur finden sich kaum Hinweise auf endogene Fehler (Original richtig, Datenbankeintrag falsch) in den kostenpflichtigen Datenbanken. Banale Fehler (z.B. Falschschreibung der Namen von Autorinnen oder Autoren) in Datenbanken hätten nur geringe Relevanz. Die Fehlersuche zu Pierre Bourdieu als "cited author" im SSCI (Vergleich Original - SSCI-Record) ergab mehr als 85 Mutationen. Die Fallstudien zeigen eine hohe Anzahl endogener Datenbankfehler. In den Rechtswissenschaften übliche Referenzen in Fußnoten laufen große Gefahr, in Phantomreferenzen verwandelt zu werden (Fallstudie Harvard Law Review: 99 Prozent Fehler). Dem Anspruch des SSCI, die "relevanten" globalen Sozialwissenschaften abzubilden - für alle im SSCI erfassten Disziplinen -, stehen offenbar Mängel in Datenerfassung und -verarbeitung im Wege. Citation indexes provide the data for many scientometric studies’, evaluations of scientific advancements and university rankings. In the literature, there are hardly any indications of endogenous errors (i.e. original references are correct, data base entry contains errors or is faulty) in the licensed databases. Trivial mistakes (e.g. misspelling of author names) in databases are counted of little relevance. Debugging Pierre Bourdieu as a cited author in the SSCI revealed more than 85 mutations. The case studies show a high number of endogenous database errors. Footnotes, common in jurisprudence, run the risk of being turned into phantom references as was the case for an article in Harvard Law Review case study: 99% of error rate. The claim of SSCI to map the “relevant” global social sciences - for all disciplines covered in the SSCI - appears to be hampered by deficiencies in data collection and processing.

Defined errors are entered into data collections in order to test their influence on the reliability of multivariate rankings. Random numbers and real ranking data serve as data origins. In the course of data collection small random errors often lead to a switch in ranking, which can influence the general ranking picture considerably. For stabilisation an objective weighting method is evaluated. The robustness of these rankings is then compared to the original forms. Robust forms of the published Shanghai top 100 rankings are calculated and compared to each other. As a result, the possibilities and restrictions of this type of weighting become recognisable.

Employing bibliometric approaches and network analysis this article seeks to explore the cooperation structures within German Political Science. We analyze a dataset consisting of 5279 articles that were published between 2000 and 2011 in 20 journals. We find an extreme unequal distribution of productivity as well as a trend towards more coauthorships - although single authors are still the norm. The network we constructed based on joint publications is in many aspects similar to those structures known from the natural sciences, but it is much smaller and more fragmented - we only find three larger components (49-112 authors). Finally we measure the importance of a single author within the network using a newly developed index that takes account of a persons' productivity as well as her position within the network. Adapted from the source document.

The BIR workshop brings together experts in Bibliometrics and Information Retrieval. While sometimes perceived as rather loosely related, these research areas share various interests and face similar challenges. Our motivation as organizers of the BIR workshop stemmed from a twofold observation. First, both communities only partly overlap, albeit sharing various interests. Second, it will be profitable for both sides to tackle some of the emerging problems that scholars face today when they have to identify relevant and high quality literature in the fast growing number of electronic publications available worldwide. Bibliometric techniques are not yet used widely to enhance retrieval processes in digital libraries, although they offer value-added effects for users. Information professionals working in libraries and archives, however, are increasingly confronted with applying bibliometric techniques in their services. The first BIR workshop in 2014 set the research agenda by introducing each group to the other, illustrating state-of-the-art methods, reporting on current research problems, and brainstorming about common interests. The second workshop in 2015 further elaborated these themes. This third BIR workshop aims to foster a common ground for the incorporation of bibliometric-enhanced services into scholarly search engine interfaces. In particular we will address specific communities, as well as studies on large, cross-domain collections like Mendeley and ResearchGate. This third BIR workshop addresses explicitly both scholarly and industrial researchers., 4 pages, 38th European Conference on IR Research, ECIR 2016, Padova, Italy. arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:1501.02646

Objetivo: Caracterizar a produção científica disponibilizada em periódicos online sobre o Modelo Calgary de Avaliação da Família. Métodos: Pesquisa bibliométrica cuja amostra correspondeu 52 artigos publicados entre 2004 e 2013 em periódicos de enfermagem, nas bases de dados LILACS, BDENF e na Biblioteca Digital SciELO. Dados coletados de março a abril de 2014. Resultados: Os dados evidenciaram que em 2009 teve o maior quantitativo de trabalhos (15.38%). Os periódicos com maior número de publicações foram a Revista de Pesquisa: Cuidado é Fundamental e a Revista da Escola Anna Nery Revista de Enfermagem. O maior quântico dos artigos obtiveram Qualis B2 e B1, com destaque para base de dados LILACS. Quanto à modalidade das publicações predominaram estudos originais. Ressalta-se a titulação de mestre entre os pesquisadores dos estudos. Conclusão: Os resultados evidenciaram a produção científica investigada como uma temática de interesse e crescimento no campo da Enfermagem.

This paper attempts to share a series of reflections on the existing conditions for the publication of scholarly articles in Colombia. In particular, we are interested in providing some elements for the debate on the policy of indexing academic journals that the Administrative Department of Science, Technology and Innovation for Colombia (Colciencias) and its National System of Indexing and Official Approval of Specialized Journals of CT+I Colombia (Publnidex), has defined, making emphasis on the consequences of this new model of indexing, which is supported in the almost exclusive recognition of journals that are indexed by two private profitmaking companies: Thomson Reuters (Isi) and Scopus-Elsevier. En este ensayo nos proponemos compartir una serie de reflexiones sobre las condiciones existentes para la publicación de artículos académicos en Colombia. En particular nos interesa ofrecer elementos para el debate sobre la política de indexación de revistas académicas que ha definido el Departamento Administrativo de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación para Colombia (Colciencias) por medio de su Sistema Nacional de Indexación y Homologación de Revistas Especializadas de CT+I Colombia (Publindex). En el ensayo destacamos algunas consecuencias de tal modelo, sustentado en la confianza y delegación que Colciencias tiene en un modelo de indexación establecido por dos empresas privadas y con ánimo de lucro: Thomson Reuters (Isi) y Scopus Elsevier. El objeto principal del ensayo es contribuir al mejoramiento de las políticas editoriales agenciadas desde Colciencias.

The aim of this study is to examine the effect of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) development on country's scientific ranking as measured by H-index. Moreover, this study applies ICT development sub-indices including ICT Use, ICT Access and ICT skill to find the distinct effect of these sub-indices on country's H-index. To this purpose, required data for the panel of 14 Middle East countries over the period 1995 to 2009 is collected. Findings of the current study show that ICT development increases the H-index of the sample countries. The results also indicate that ICT Use and ICT Skill sub-indices positively contribute to higher H-index but the effect of ICT access on country's H-index is not clear., Arezoo Aghaei Chadegani

New search modes have been introduced recently to support the exploratory search on the basis of automatically linked references and citations. References are therefore linked to the complete data corpus via specific matching procedures. This represents a step towards a navigable citation index in the field of social sciences in German language. In SOWIPORT werden anhand von automatisch verlinkten Referenzen und Zitationen seit kurzem neue Suchmodi zur Unterstützung explorativer Suche angeboten. Literaturreferenzen werden dazu über spezifische Matching-Verfahren mit den Dokumenten aus dem gesamten Datenbestand verlinkt. Damit ist ein erster wichtiger Schritt in Richtung eines navigierbaren Zitati-onsindex für die deutschsprachigen Sozialwissenschaften getan.

The search for scientific literature in scientific information systems is a discipline at the intersection between information retrieval and digital libraries. Recent user studies show two typical weaknesses of the classical IR model: ranking of retrieved and maybe relevant documents and the language problem during the query formulation phase. At the same time traditional retrieval systems that rely primarily on textual document and query features are stagnating for years, as it could be observed in IR evaluation campaigns such as TREC or CLEF. Therefore alternative approaches to surpass these two problem fields are needed. Recent developments in the area of applied informetrics show very promising effects by using long-known informetric and bibliometric methods like the analysis of power-law distributions described by Lotka's, Zipfs or Bradford's laws. This contribution will concentrate on the description of the different approaches in digital libraries, information retrieval, and informetrics to give a broad overview on current methods in applied informetrics., Historical Social Research Vol. 38, No. 3 (2013): Focus: Informetrics and Digital Libraries. Starting Point and Frequency: Year: 1979, Issues per volume: 4, Volumes per year: 1

Based on the Inspec's data, the results of information search carried out using specialized terms, after studying the dynamics of their use for 2000-2011 years of publications, were diagnosed; analyses of publishing interactions among SB RAS scientific centers are shown.

Citations are a classic dimension of scientific communication. This paper looks at two different scenarios in which citation analysis can be applied to novel Web 2.0 environments: One case study deals with citations on Twitter and the other with analyzing blog posts and social bookmarking systems. (Autorenreferat)

"Was ist Emerging Science, und wie lässt sich messen, ob es sich bei einem Fachgebiet um Emerging Science handelt oder nicht? Häufig wird Emerging Science als Forschungsfront mit Hilfe verschiedener Verfahren der Zitationsanalyse diagnostiziert. Bettencourt et al. verwenden Kollaborationsanalysen und legen das Augenmerk auf eine strukturelle Diagnose des Emergenzprozesses an sich. Dem Modell nach zeigt sich die Etablierung eines Paradigmas in einem Fachgebiet in Form einer topologischen Veränderung seiner Sozialstruktur. In der vorliegenden Arbeit wird das Modell auf die 'New Science of Networks' und das Fachgebiet der Szientometrie angewendet. Erwartungsgemäß zeigen sich Unterschiede in ihren Evolutionsprozessen. Modell und Methoden der Netzwerkanalyse werden vor dem Hintergrund der Wissenschaftsforschung, der Komplexitätstheorie und der Relationalen Soziologie diskutiert. Besondere Berücksichtigung findet dabei die Selbstähnlichkeit des Wissenschaftssystems. Diskutiert werden auch die Auswirkungen unterschiedlicher Zählmethoden auf die Ergebnisse der Untersuchungen." (Autorenreferat)

In der Studie sind 3.889 Datensätze analysiert worden, die im Zeitraum 1976-2004 in der Datenbank Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA) im Forschungsbereich der Informetrie nachgewiesen sind und das Wachstum auf diesem Gebiet belegen. Die Studie zeigt anhand einer Bradford-Verteilung (power law) die Kernzeitschriften in diesem Feld und bestätigt auf der Basis dieses LISA Datensatzes, dass die Gründung einer neuen Zeitschrift, "Journals of Informetrics" (JoI), 2007 etwa zur rechten Zeit erfolgte. Im Verhältnis dazu wird die Entwicklung der Zeitschrift Scientometrics betrachtet und auch die der "Nachrichten für Dokumentation" (NfD) bzw. "Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis" (IWP). In our study we analysed at first 3,889 records which were indexed in 1976-2004 in the Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA) database in the research field of informetrics. The growth of this topic is documented. We can show the core journals of the field as a Bradford distribution (power law) and corroborate on the basis of the LISA data set that it was 2007 the appropriate time to found a new journal "Journal of Informetrics" (JoI). The development of the Journal "Scientometrics" is compared, as well as with the German "Nachrichten für Dokumentation" (NfD) respectively "Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis" (IWP).

"Zeitschriften spielen eine herausragende Rolle in der wissenschaftlichen Kommunikation. Bibliometrische Analysen von wissenschaftlichen Zeitschriften umfassen sowohl die Beschreibung und Bewertung einzelner Zeitschriften als auch statistische Analysen von Ensembles wissenschaftlicher Zeitschriften. Beispiele für einfache bibliometrische Indikatoren auf Zeitschriftenebene sind die Größe einer Zeitschrift (Anzahl der Publikationen) und die Anzahl der Zitierungen. Der bekannteste daraus abgeleitete Indikator ist der 'Journalimpaktfaktor' als durchschnittliche Zitationsrate eines Artikels in der entsprechenden Zeitschrift. Dieser Indikator wird häufig zur Bewertung einer Zeitschrift herangezogen. Der Impaktfaktor steht für die Wahrnehmung einer Zeitschrift im Raum wissenschaftlicher Kommunikation. Diese wird letztlich von der Qualität der in der Zeitschrift erscheinenden Artikel bestimmt. Statistische Analysen von Zeitschriftengruppen führen in der Regel auf schiefe Verteilungen bibliometrischer Indikatoren, z.B. das Bradford'sche Gesetz. Die vorliegende Arbeit behandelt das Phänomen der Verteilung von Zitierungen, die eine Zeitschrift erhält, auf die Länder, die in dieser Zeitschrift publizieren. Die unterschiedliche Teilhabe von Ländern an dem Renommee einer Zeitschrift wird durch einen neuen Indikator - die Anzahl der Matthäus-Zitierungen - charakterisiert. Im ersten Teil der Arbeit wird in die neue Untersuchungsmethodik didaktisch eingeführt. In einem zweiten Teil werden empirische Analysen vorgestellt. Dabei wird die Verteilung des neuen Indikators innerhalb eines umfangreichen Zeitschriftenensembles analysiert und anderen Indikatoren gegenübergestellt. Die Autoren halten die Anzahl der Matthäus-Zitierungen in einer Zeitschrift für einen Ausdruck des Wettbewerbs von Ländern um Wahrnehmung in der internationalen wissenschaftlichen Kommunikation. Die empirische Analyse zeigt, dass dieser Wettbewerb sich vorrangig in einer relativ kleinen Gruppe von Zeitschriften, den Matthäus- Kernzeitschriften, vollzieht. Diese Zeitschriften nehmen eine besondere Stellung in der internationalen Wissenschaftskommunikation ein." (Autorenreferat) "Journals play an outstanding role in scientific communication. Bibliometric analyses of scientific journals cover both the description and evaluation of certain journals and statistical analyses of ensembles of scientific journals. Examples of simple bibliometric indicators on the journal level are the size of a journal (number of publications) and the number of citations. The most well-known indicator is the 'journal impact factor' as the average citation rate of an article in a certain journal. This indicator is used frequently for the evaluation of a journal as well as for the evaluation of institutions or countries my means of their publications in a certain journal. The impact factor stands for the perception of a scientific journal in the area of scientific communication. This is determined finally by the quality of the articles appearing in the journal. Statistic analyses of groups of journals lead usually to so-called skew distributions of bibliometric indicators, e.g. the Bradford law. This paper examines the phenomenon of the distribution of citations which a journal receives in the countries that publish in it. The different share that countries have in the reputation of a journal can be characterized by a new indicator, namely, the number of Matthew citations. The first part of this paper introduces the new methodological approach didactically. The second part presents empirical analyses. The distribution of the new indicator is analyzed within a large journal ensemble and then compared to other journal indicators. We regard the number of Matthew citations in a journal as an expression of the competition among countries over how they are perceived in international scientific communication. The empirical analysis shows that this competition occurs mainly within a relatively small group of journals, which we called Matthew Core Journals. These journals take a special position in the international scientific communication." (author's abstract)

"The foundation of every research project is a comprehensive literature review. The search for scientific literature in information systems is a discipline at the intersection of information retrieval and digital libraries; recent user studies in both fields show two typical weaknesses of the classical IR approach: ranking of retrieved and maybe relevant documents and the language problem during the query formulation phase. At the same time the performance of traditional retrieval systems that rely primarily on textual document and query features have been stagnating for years, as could be observed in IR evaluation campaigns such as TREC or CLEF. Therefore alternative approaches to surpass these two problem fields are needed. Recent developments in the area of applied informetrics show very promising effects by using long-known informetric and bibliometric methods like the analysis of power-law distributions described by Lotka's, Zipf's or Bradford's laws, or the application of co-occurrences analysis for entities like authors, journals or references of scientific literature. This work will concentrate on the description of the open problems and the current approaches to surpass these by using applied informetrics methodologies." (author's abstract)

Open Science, die offene Wissenschaft, zielt auf die möglichst umstandslose Nutzbarkeit und Verfügbarkeit weitgehend aller im Forschungsprozess anfallenden Informationen, in erster Linie von Textpublikationen, Forschungsdaten und Forschungssoftware. Überdies soll sie auch Transparenz in wissenschaftliche Arbeit moderierende Prozesse (wie die Begutachtung bzw. den Review von Textpublikationen) und in die Gewinnung von zur Bewertung von Wissenschaft herangezogenen Parainformationen (Impact-Metriken) bringen. Open-Science-Befürworter versprechen sich hiervon eine effizientere, innovationsfreundlichere und transparentere Wissenschaft, denn offene Informationen können schneller und leichter verbreitet und nachgenutzt sowie überprüft werden als nicht-offene. Die Arbeit basiert auf einer fachübergreifenden Bestandsaufnahme der Open-Science-Elemente Open Access zu Textpublikationen, Open Access zu Forschungsdaten, Open Access zu Forschungssoftware, Open Review und Open Metrics, die allesamt typischerweise eher in den STM-Fächern (Science, Technology, Medicine) zu finden sind als in den Sozial- oder Geisteswissenschaften. Ausgehend von dieser Synopse widmet sie sich weitergehend den fachinhärenten Spezifika der Soziologie, die gemeinhin als Nachzüglerin der Open Science betrachtet wird, und untersucht empirisch die Prävalenz und Relevanz von Open Access zu Textpublikationen, Open Access zu Forschungsdaten, Open Access zu Forschungssoftware, Open Review und Open Metrics in der Soziologie.