Relative visibility of authors’ publications in different information services

Dorsch, Isabelle

doi:10.1007/s11192-017-2416-9

Cited by 13 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Dorsch [2] discussed the application of linked open data techniques and the establishment of institutional, national, and scholarly society-based repositories. A further option could be the inclusion of such lists-free of charge-in commercial information services (such as WoS or Scopus) in order to add the authors' (more or less) truebounded publication lists to the underbounded so-called "quality paper" lists.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is one further different approach. Dorsch [2], following Gaillard [11], Kirkwood [16], and Hilbert et al [4], banks on personal publication lists published on authors' or institutions' websites. Complete personal publication lists can also allow for a comprehensive picture of a scientific institutions' research activities [17].…”

Section: Relative Visibilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We propose to be guided by the scientific, academic, or scholarly character of the publishing source and to exclude all documents, which are not published in such media. Applying this rule, Dorsch [2] skipped all novels from the publication list of a distinguished scientist.…”

Section: What Is a Publication?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To determine the state of boundedness, we address the measure of relative visibility [2]. Relative visibility is the share of the number of the unit of assessment's publications on a certain information service or repository relative to the unit of assessment's entire oeuvre.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Truebounded, Overbounded, or Underbounded? Scientists’ Personal Publication Lists versus Lists Generated through Bibliographic Information Services

2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:A truebounded publication list of a scientific author consists of exactly all publications that meet two criteria: (1) they are formally published (e.g., journal article or proceeding paper); (2) they have scientific, scholarly, or academic content. A publication list is overbounded if it includes documents which do not meet the two criteria (such as novels); a publication list is underbounded if it is incomplete. Are authors' personal publication lists, found on their personal sites on the Internet or in institutional repositories, truebounded, overbounded, or underbounded? And are the respective publication lists generated through bibliographic information services truebounded, overbounded, or underbounded? As case studies, publications of nine International Society of Scientometrics and Informetrics (ISSI) Committee members (published between 2007 and 2016) were collected to create preferably complete personal publication lists according to the two criteria. We connect the "relative visibility of an author" with the concepts of truebounded, overbounded, and underbounded publication lists. The authors' relative visibility values were determined for the information services Web of Science (WoS), Scopus, and Google Scholar and compared to the relative visibility of the authors' personal publication lists. All results of the bibliographic information services are underbounded. Relative visibility is highest in Google Scholar, followed by Scopus and WoS.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Relative Visibilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: What Is a Publication?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Truebounded, Overbounded, or Underbounded? Scientists’ Personal Publication Lists versus Lists Generated through Bibliographic Information Services

2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For comprehensive evaluation of any individual research profile, no single bibliographic database or scholarly networking platform is currently sufficient. In fact, empiric analyses of information scientists' profiles on Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, ResearchGate, specialist databases, and social networking websites revealed that each of these services covered less than 50% of the authors' publication activity (58).…”

Section: Differences In the Use Of Scholarly Profilesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Researcher and Author Profiles: Opportunities, Advantages, and Limitations

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Currently available online profiling platforms offer various services for researchers and authors. Opening an individual account and filling it with scholarly contents increase visibility of research output and boost its impact. This article overviews some of the widely used and emerging profiling platforms, highlighting their tools for sharing scholarly items, crediting individuals, and facilitating networking. Global bibliographic databases and search platforms, such as Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and Google Scholar, are widely used for profiling authors with indexed publications. Scholarly networking websites, such as ResearchGate and Academia.edu, provide indispensable services for researchers poorly visible elsewhere on the Internet. Several specialized platforms are designed to offer profiling along with their main functionalities, such as reference management and archiving. The Open Researcher and Contributor Identification (ORCID) project has offered a solution to the author name disambiguation. It has been integrated with numerous bibliographic databases, platforms, and manuscript submission systems to help research managers and journal editors select and credit the best reviewers, and other scholarly contributors. Individuals with verifiable reviewer and editorial accomplishments are also covered by Publons, which is an increasingly recognized service for publicizing and awarding reviewer comments. Currently available profiling formats have numerous advantages and some limitations. The advantages are related to their openness and chances of boosting the researcher impact. Some of the profiling websites are complementary to each other. The underutilization of various profiling websites and their inappropriate uses for promotion of ‘predatory’ journals are among reported limitations. A combined approach to the profiling systems is advocated in this article.

show abstract

Publication and citation patterns of Austrian researchers in operations research and other sub-disciplines of business administration as indexed in Web of Science and Scopus

Schlögl,

Boric,

Reichmann

2023

Cent Eur J Oper Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are many studies which compared the publication and citation patterns among different research disciplines. However, one level below, potential differences within disciplines are not as well researched. Our article contributes to the research of said level by investigating the publication and citation behaviours of ten sub-disciplines of business administration and the potential differences between them. Of particular interest is a comparison of Operations Research with the other nine sub-disciplines. As research method, we conducted a scientometric analysis covering 283 professors at Austrian universities that offer a business administration program. Their publications over a ten-years period and the citations they have accumulated were retrieved from Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus. The results unveil strong differences between the analysed ten sub-disciplines, which are partially even greater than those between overall disciplines. Due to its interdisciplinary nature, we expected to see some peculiarities in the results for Operations Research. Authors from this sub-discipline are very present in WoS and Scopus. This sub-discipline achieves the highest average number of publications per researcher, and the highest self-citation rate. Apart from Operations Research, some other sub-disciplines also showed particular characteristics. This concerns especially Accounting, where publications often appear in German and in practitioner journals due to their national legalistic content. As was expected, Scopus overall has a higher coverage than WoS. However, the extent varies strongly among sub-disciplines.

show abstract

Relative visibility of authors’ publications in different information services

Cited by 13 publications

References 12 publications

Truebounded, Overbounded, or Underbounded? Scientists’ Personal Publication Lists versus Lists Generated through Bibliographic Information Services

Truebounded, Overbounded, or Underbounded? Scientists’ Personal Publication Lists versus Lists Generated through Bibliographic Information Services

Researcher and Author Profiles: Opportunities, Advantages, and Limitations

Publication and citation patterns of Austrian researchers in operations research and other sub-disciplines of business administration as indexed in Web of Science and Scopus

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About