Co-author Weighting in Bibliometric Methodology and Subfields of a Scientific Discipline

Abstract

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec><jats:title>Purpose</jats:title><jats:p>To give a theoretical framework to measure the relative impact of bibliometric methodology on the subfields of a scientific discipline, and how that impact depends on the method of evaluation used to credit individual scientists with citations and publications. The authors include a study of the discipline of physics to illustrate the method. Indicators are introduced to measure the proportion of a credit space awarded to a subfield or a set of authors.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Design/methodology/approach</jats:title><jats:p>The theoretical methodology introduces the notion of credit spaces for a discipline. These quantify the total citation or publication credit accumulated by the scientists in the discipline. One can then examine how the credit is divided among the subfields. The design of the physics study uses the American Physical Society print journals to assign subdiscipline classifications to articles and gather citation, publication, and author information. Credit spaces for the collection of Physical Review Journal articles are computed as a proxy for physics.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Findings</jats:title><jats:p>There is a substantial difference in the value or impact of a specific subfield depending on the credit system employed to credit individual authors.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Research limitations</jats:title><jats:p>Subfield classification information is difficult to obtain. In the illustrative physics study, subfields are treated in groups designated by the Physical Review journals. While this collection of articles represents a broad part of the physics literature, it is not all the literature nor a random sample.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Practical implications</jats:title><jats:p>The method of crediting individual scientists has consequences beyond the individual and affects the perceived impact of whole subfields and institutions.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Originality/value</jats:title><jats:p>The article reveals the consequences of bibliometric methodology on subfields of a disciple by introducing a systematic theoretical framework for measuring the consequences.</jats:p></jats:sec>

A bibliometric study of collaborative research productivity among library and information science academicians in Pakistan 1975–2021

“…The majority of (1,208, 67.60%) the contributions was made by male faculty members, followed by female faculty members (579, 32.40%). Research studies produced by LIS faculty as the principal author was 702 (39.28%), while coauthor contribution was 1085 (60.72%) till October 2021.The other studies also support collaboration among faculty members as principal author and coauother (Palmblad and van Eck, 2018; Smolinsky and Lercher, 2020).…”

Bilateral Co-authorship Indicators Based on Fractional Counting

“…Finally, we note that, in this article, we did not try to gauge citation scores derived from co-authorship. This may add another layer of complexity (Smolinsky & Lercher, 2020).…”

Information literacy and research support services in academic libraries: A bibliometric analysis from 2001 to 2020

“…Thus, researchers found easy access to the research support services through academic libraries to the Web of Knowledge. In the past, the research support services in academic libraries have been a serious concern across the globe [7,34–36], as several types of research have been conducted on research support services in developing and developed countries [9,18,37–39]. The trend of research-on-research support services in developed countries has significance due to the use of modern technology that transformed academic libraries.…”

“…Thus, a considerable scientific study has raised concerns on research support services that further enhanced the capacity of the academic libraries [40–42]. Most of these studies revealed that academic libraries are providing and facilitating research support services to research scholars and academics [7,25,34,35].…”