Assessing the effect of the United States’ “citation advantage” on other countries’ scientific impact as measured in the Web of Science (WoS) database

Gingras, Yves; Khelfaoui, Mahdi

doi:10.1007/s11192-017-2593-6

Cited by 38 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The US is an important "shoulder" for other country's domestic and international literature. Similar findings have been published by Gingras and Khelfaoui (2018). The differential analysis between more and less highly-cited papers reveals a significantly greater likelihood that research citing domestic literature will be less well cited for Germany and the Netherlands.…”

Section: Uksupporting

confidence: 79%

“…To put this another way, papers which stand on domestic shoulders are expected to be less well-cited than papers that stand on international shoulders. The results also point to a national bias in citing (see section 2) which has been explained by Gingras and Khelfaoui (2018) as follows: national publications are "more visible in their country than international publications, in all disciplines" (p. 525). However, the difference in citing between "domestic" and "international" research is not visible for the UK highly-cited papers.…”

Section: Ukmentioning

confidence: 78%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The negative effects of citing with a national orientation in terms of recognition: National and international citations in natural-sciences papers from Germany, the Netherlands, and the UK

Bornmann

Adams

Leydesdorff

2018

Journal of Informetrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nations can be distinguished in terms of whether domestic or international research is cited.We analyzed the research output in natural sciences of three leading European research economies (Germany, the Netherlands, and the UK) and ask where their researchers look for the knowledge that underpins their most highly-cited papers. Is one internationally oriented or is citation limited to national resources? Do the citation patterns reflect a growing differentiation between the domestic and international research enterprise? To evaluate change over time, we include natural-sciences papers published in the countries from three publication years: 2004, 2009, and 2014. The results show that articles co-authored by researchers from Germany or the Netherlands are less likely to be among the globally most highly-cited articles if they also cite "domestic" research (i.e. research authored by authors from the same country). To put this another way, less well-cited research is more likely to stand on domestic shoulders and research that becomes more highly-cited is more likely to stand on international shoulders. A possible reason for the results is that researchers "overcite" the papers from their own countrylacking the focus on quality in citing. However, these differences between domestic and international shoulders are not visible for the UK.

show abstract

Section: Uksupporting

confidence: 79%

Section: Ukmentioning

confidence: 78%

The negative effects of citing with a national orientation in terms of recognition: National and international citations in natural-sciences papers from Germany, the Netherlands, and the UK

Bornmann

Adams

Leydesdorff

2018

Journal of Informetrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is possibly because of better quality of internationally collaborated research, or due to the fact that the more authors, institutions, and countries, the wider audiences and higher possibilities of being cited by domestic and international researchers. Similarly, Gingras and Khelfaoui () found that countries' domestic papers without international collaboration were more visible and cited more in home countries than internationally collaborative papers. Whether or not being the home country of first or corresponding author's country (i.e., international dominance) may influence the origin of citing countries: internationally collaborated publications dominated by a nation might resemble domestic publications more, thus related to higher national citation bias than those not dominated by the nation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Jaffe () also observed high rates of country self‐citations in various countries. Furthermore, Gingras and Khelfaoui () reported obvious national citation bias in both publications with or without international collaboration of the US, UK, Germany, Canada and France in selected fields, that is, publications of these countries are more visible in their own countries than their presence measured as their world shares of research output.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparative study of domestic and cross‐country impact of Chinese and U.S. publications in chemistry

Cai

Lyu

Zhou

2019

Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Based on publications in Chemistry in 2015, this paper investigated the citation impact on domestic and foreign scholarly communities of Chinese and US publications, and to what extent does such impact relate to international collaboration and government funding. First‐ or corresponding authorship in international collaboration is defined as dominance and is taken into consideration. Citations to publications are designated as domestic citations (Chinese or US citations), partner citations or other citations according to overlap of countries of citing and cited publications. Significant difference exists in the two countries. Most citations of Chinese publications are from domestic and partner countries, with domestic citations being the mainstay. In contrast, US papers receive more other citations than domestic or partner citations, and citations from partner countries contribute significantly. US papers have higher global impact than those of China. High domestic citation propensity is associated with non‐international collaboration, dominance of focal country in international collaboration, and national funding support. Such phenomenon is more pronounced in Chinese papers. In other words, citation impact of Chinese publications is more limited in domestic community, whereas that of the US is more global.

show abstract

“…Gingras and Khelfaoui [27] assessed "the significance of a parameter that is seldom taken into account in evaluation studies: the existence of a USA comparative citation (visibility) advantage built in the database [SCI] and thus affecting countries that collaborate more with the USA than with other countries". They analyzed " .…”

Section: Facilitating the Globalization Of Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

Eugene Garfield’s Ideas and Legacy and Their Impact on the Culture of Research

Baykoucheva

2019

Publications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Eugene Garfield advanced the theory and practice of information science and envisioned information systems that made the discovery of scientific information much more efficient. The Institute for Scientific Information (ISI), which he founded in Philadelphia in 1960, developed innovative information products that have revolutionized science. ISI provided current scientific information to researchers all over the world by publishing the table of contents of key scientific journals in the journal Current Contents (CC). Garfield introduced the citation as a qualitative measure of academic impact and propelled the concepts of “citation indexing” and “citation linking”, paving the way for today’s search engines. He created the Science Citation Index (SCI), which raised awareness about citations; triggered the development of new disciplines (scientometrics, infometrics, webometrics); and became the foundation for building new important products such as Web of Science. The journal impact factor (IF), originally designed to select journals for the SCI, became the most widely accepted tool for measuring academic impact. Garfield actively promoted English as the international language of science and became a powerful force in the globalization of research. His ideas changed how researchers gather scientific information, communicate their findings, and advance their careers. This article looks at the impact of Garfield’s ideas and legacy on the culture of research.

show abstract

Assessing the effect of the United States’ “citation advantage” on other countries’ scientific impact as measured in the Web of Science (WoS) database

Cited by 38 publications

References 40 publications

The negative effects of citing with a national orientation in terms of recognition: National and international citations in natural-sciences papers from Germany, the Netherlands, and the UK

The negative effects of citing with a national orientation in terms of recognition: National and international citations in natural-sciences papers from Germany, the Netherlands, and the UK

A comparative study of domestic and cross‐country impact of Chinese and U.S. publications in chemistry

Eugene Garfield’s Ideas and Legacy and Their Impact on the Culture of Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About