Citation-based auditing of academic performance

Cronin, Blaise; Overfelt, Kara

doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-4571(199403)45:2<61::aid-asi1>3.0.co;2-f

Cited by 79 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Co-authorship can affect how cited and citing authors are evaluated and counted. Cronin and Overfelt (1993) examined citation counting using three approaches: (1) straight counts, providing credit only to the first author of the cited publication; (2) whole counts, which provide equal credit to all authors, and (3) adjusted or fractional counts, which provide proportional credit to cited authors. Egghe et al (2000) also examined citation credit based on the author listing order.…”

Section: Challenges With Citer-based Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Citation counts have long been controversial because of the varied reasons for citer motivation (Garfield 1962;Smith 1981;Brooks 1985;MacRoberts and MacRoberts 1989;White and Wang 1997), the way citations may be counted (Cronin and Overfelt 1993), and because citations may not address the quality of a research contribution (Lindsey 1989;Phelan 1989). Also, as MacRoberts and MacRoberts have noted, citing behaviour can be biased, and self-citation (i.e., when an author cites her or himself) is common (Snyder and Bonzi 1998).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Citer analysis as a measure of research impact: library and information science as a case study

Ajiferuke

Wolfram

2009

Scientometrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The investigators studied author research impact using the number of citers per publication an author's research has been able to attract, as opposed to the more traditional measure of citations. A focus on citers provides a complementary measure of an author's reach or influence in a field, whereas citations, although possibly numerous, may not reflect this reach, particularly if many citations are received from a small number of citers. In this exploratory study, Web of Science was used to tally citer and citation-based counts for 25 highly cited researchers in information studies in the United States and 26 highly cited researchers from the United Kingdom. Outcomes of the tallies based on several measures, including an introduced ch-index, were used to determine whether differences arise in author rankings when using citer-based versus citation-based counts. The findings indicate a strong correlation between some citation and citer-based measures, but not with others. The findings of the study have implications for the way authors' research impact may be assessed.

show abstract

Section: Challenges With Citer-based Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Citer analysis as a measure of research impact: library and information science as a case study

Ajiferuke

Wolfram

2009

Scientometrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Bibliometric citation 204 Scientometrics 75 (2008) analysis of the scientific literature has been often used to explain large-scale factors of information flow between researchers, research topics, and disciplines [MYERS, 1990;WHITE & MCCAIN, 1989CRONIN & OVERFELT, 1994;MACROBERTS & MACROBERTS, 1996]. Studying aspects of how scientists communicate directly with one another has also helped elucidate specific features of scientific problem solving, as "in-laboratory" studies of working scientists have shown [DUNBAR, 2001;DUNBAR & BLANCHETTE, 2001].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Language use reflects scientific methodology: A corpus-based study of peer-reviewed journal articles

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recently, philosophers of science have argued that the epistemological requirements of different scientific fields lead necessarily to differences in scientific method. In this paper, we examine possible variation in how language is used in peer-reviewed journal articles from various fields to see if features of such variation may help to elucidate and support claims of methodological variation among the sciences. We hypothesize that significant methodological differences will be reflected in related differences in scientists' language style. This paper reports a corpus-based study of peer-reviewed articles from twelve separate journals in six fields of experimental and historical sciences. Machine learning methods were applied to compare the discourse styles of articles in different fields, based on easily-extracted linguistic features of the text. Features included function word frequencies, as used often in computational stylistics, as well as lexical features based on systemic functional linguistics, which affords rich resources for comparative textual analysis. We found that indeed the style of writing in the historical sciences is readily distinguishable from that of the experimental sciences. Furthermore, the most significant linguistic features of these distinctive styles are directly related to the methodological differences posited by philosophers of science between historical and experimental sciences, lending empirical weight to their contentions.

show abstract

“…He ranked among the top-third of Indiana University School of Library and Infor mation faculty, according to lifetime cita tions received in the three ISI citation in dexes, in Blaise Cronin and Kara Overfelt's study. 5 The term "citation au tobiography" is introduced because the author has compiled his own citation record. This exercise was undertaken ini tially to support the author's case in the promotion and tenure process but then gained a "life of its own" as the author continued the process after tenure was granted.…”

Section: Thomas E Nisongermentioning

confidence: 81%

Citation Autobiography: An Investigation of ISI Database Coverage in Determining Author Citedness

Nisonger

2004

CRL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents a case study investigating the coverage completeness of the Institute for Scientific Information’s citation data for specific authors, based on analysis of this author’s lifetime citation record, which was compiled through the ISI database, searching the literature for nearly fifteen years, and through various Web search engines. It was found that (with self-citations disregarded) the ISI captured 28.8 percent of the total citations, 42.2 percent of print citations, 20.3 percent of citations from outside the United States, and 2.3 percent of non-English citations. The definition and classification of Web citations are discussed. It is suggested that librarians and faculty should not rely solely on ISI author citation counts, especially when demonstration of international impact is important.

show abstract

Citation-based auditing of academic performance

Cited by 79 publications

References 14 publications

Citer analysis as a measure of research impact: library and information science as a case study

Citer analysis as a measure of research impact: library and information science as a case study

Language use reflects scientific methodology: A corpus-based study of peer-reviewed journal articles

Citation Autobiography: An Investigation of ISI Database Coverage in Determining Author Citedness

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About