Inflationary bibliometric values: The role of scientific collaboration and the need for relative indicators in evaluative studies

Persson, Olle; Glänzel, Wolfgang; Danell, Rickard

doi:10.1023/b:scie.0000034384.35498.7d

Cited by 470 publications

(376 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

303

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…On the other hand, honorific authorship and hyper-authorship can be considered two symptoms of an inflationary process (Glänzel and Schubert 2004) leading us to the second source of the collaboration myth. Persson et al (2004) have shown that the number of (co-)authors is increasing faster than the number of publications indexed in the Science Citation Index (SCI) database of Thomson Scientific. This trend allows only one single conclusion, namely, that the collaboration network is becoming denser and co-authorship is gradually intensifying (see Figure 3).…”

Section: Myth #2: Citing Yourself Is Blowing Your Own Trumpetmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seven Myths in Bibliometrics About facts and fiction in quantitative science studies

Glänzel

2008

Collnet Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Seven myths with cognitive and methodological background are analysed for validity. Although, there is always a grain of truth in bibliometrics myths too, the generality of their statements is disproved on the bases of methodological studies and by referring to typical counterexamples. It is shown how and where the logical fallacy lies in the inference from the reality behind the myths leading to the erroneous generalisation of the actual statements.

show abstract

Section: Myth #2: Citing Yourself Is Blowing Your Own Trumpetmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seven Myths in Bibliometrics About facts and fiction in quantitative science studies

Glänzel

2008

Collnet Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…44,45 Another matter dealt with in the early 1990s was the positive correlation between the Impact Factor (IF) of a journal in which an article is published and, by extrapolation, the number of citations received by the article, and the participation of more than one author (individual or institutional). [46][47][48][49] As a general rule, the greater the number of partners, the greater the impact of the documents produced, particularly in the case of international collaboration.…”

Section: Previous Research On Scientific Collaborationmentioning

confidence: 99%

New Approach to the Visualization of International Scientific Collaboration

Chinchilla‐Rodríguez¹,

Vargas-Quesada

Hassan-Montero

et al. 2009

Information Visualization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, visual representations are created in order to analyze different aspects of scientific collaboration at the international level. The main objective is to identify the international facet of research by following the flow of knowledge as expressed by the number of scientific publications, and then establishes the main geographical axes of output, showing the interrelationships of the domain, the intensity of these relations, and how the different types of collaboration are reflected in terms of visibility. Thus, the methodology has a twofold application, allowing us to detect significant differences that help characterize patterns of behaviour of a geographical system of output, along with the generation of representations that serve as interfaces for domain analysis and information retrieval.

show abstract

“…The main thrust of the evaluation structure was a team-based scoring system based on scientometrics. Teambased scientometrics sensitive to changes in collaboration such as publications/professor communicated the importance of collaboration to the groups (Persson et al 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impelling research productivity and impact through collaboration: a scientometric case study of knowledge management

Ceballos

Fangmeyer

Galeano

et al. 2017

Knowledge Management Research & Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A case study for impelling university research productivity and impact through collaboration is presented. Scientometric results support the hypothesis that a knowledge management model increased research collaboration and thereby boosted a university's number of publications and citations. Results come from fifteen years of data at a Mexican university with 2400 researchers who produced 24,000 works in fifteen research disciplines. These data are treated with social network visualizations and algorithms to identify patterns of collaboration and clustering, as well as with normalizations to make disciplines comparable and to verify increasing citation impact. The knowledge management model implemented in the study may be a costeffective way for universities to intensify collaboration and improve research performance.

show abstract

Inflationary bibliometric values: The role of scientific collaboration and the need for relative indicators in evaluative studies

Cited by 470 publications

References 5 publications

Seven Myths in Bibliometrics About facts and fiction in quantitative science studies

Seven Myths in Bibliometrics About facts and fiction in quantitative science studies

New Approach to the Visualization of International Scientific Collaboration

Impelling research productivity and impact through collaboration: a scientometric case study of knowledge management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About