• Title/Summary/Keyword: Author self-citations

Search Result 6, Processing Time 0.028 seconds

Research Output of the Pakistani Library and Information Science Authors: A Bibliometric Evaluation of Their Impact

  • Anwar, Mumtaz Ali;Jan, Sajjad Ullah
    • Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice
    • /
    • v.5 no.2
    • /
    • pp.48-61
    • /
    • 2017
  • This paper uses 601 cited papers of Pakistani LIS researchers with the purpose to examine the individual performance of these Library and Information Science (LIS) researchers in terms of their research output and its impact on the LIS (national/international) literature by using various bibliometric indicators. A list of 139 authors was compiled with the help of the Library, Information Science, and Technology Abstracts (LISTA) and some other sources. Data were collected from Google Scholar and SPSS version 20 was utilized in order to identify the relationship between self-citations and various performance indices of the authors. The average citations received per paper vary from 1.80 to 10.08. About half of the papers were single-authored whereas less than one-fifth were by three or more authors. The authors who worked in collaboration produced more papers and received more citations. The h-index, g-index, hI-index, hI-norm, and e-index were used to determine the rank for each author. The intra-group citations grid revealed the volume of self-citations and a small group who cite each other more due to close academic and social relationships. The correlations between self-citations and the impact indices used revealed significant differences. Findings are useful for concerned institutions regarding award, promotions, etc. Further, future research should seriously consider the self-citations and social networking of authors while examining their citations-based research performance.

Impact of Self-Citations on Impact Factor: A Study Across Disciplines, Countries and Continents

  • Pandita, Ramesh;Singh, Shivendra
    • Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice
    • /
    • v.3 no.2
    • /
    • pp.42-57
    • /
    • 2015
  • Purpose. : The present study is an attempt to find out the impact of self-citations on Impact Factor (IF) across disciplines. The study examines the number of research articles published across 27 major subject fields covered by SCImago, encompassing as many as 310 sub-disciplines. The study evaluates aspects like percentage of self-citations across each discipline, leading self-citing countries and continents, and the impact of self-citation on their IF. Scope. : The study is global in nature, as it evaluates the trend of self-citation and its impact on IF of all the major subject disciplines of the world, along with countries and continents. IF has been calculated for the year 2012 by analyzing the articles published during the years 2010 and 2011. Methodology/Approach. : The study is empirical in nature; as such, statistical and mathematical tools and techniques have been employed to work out the distribution across disciplines. The evaluation has been purely under-taken on the secondary data, retrieved from SCImago Journal and Country Ranking. Findings. : Self-citations play a very significant part in inflating IF. All the subject fields under study are influenced by the practice of self-citation, ranging from 33.14% to 52.38%. Compared to the social sciences and the humanities, subject fields falling under the purview of pure and applied sciences have a higher number of self-citations, but a far lesser percentage than the social sciences and humanities. Upon excluding self-citations, a substantial amount of change was observed in the IF of subject fields under study, as 18 (66.66%) out of 27 subjects fields faced shuffle in their rankings. Variation in rankings based on IF with and without self-citation was observed at subject level, country level, and continental level.

What is the position of Clinical and Experimental Reproductive Medicine in its scholarly journal network based on journal metrics?

  • Huh, Sun
    • Clinical and Experimental Reproductive Medicine
    • /
    • v.41 no.4
    • /
    • pp.147-150
    • /
    • 2014
  • Objective: Clinical and Experimental Reproductive Medicine (CERM) converted its language to English only beginning with the first issue of 2011. From that point in time, one of the goals of the journal has been to become a truly international journal. This paper aims to identify the position of CERM in its scholarly journal network based on the journal's metrics. Methods: The journal's metrics, including citations, countries of author affiliation, and countries of citing authors, Hirsch index, and proportion of funded articles, were gathered from Web of Science and analyzed. Results: The two-year impact factor of 2013 was calculated at 0.971 excluding self-citation, which corresponds to a Journal Citation Reports ranking of 85.9% in the category of obstetrics and gynecology. In 2012, 2013, and 2014, the total citations were 17, 68, and 85, respectively. Authors from nine countries contributed to CERM. Researchers from 25 countries cited CERM in their articles. The Hirsch index was six. Out of 88 original articles, 35 studies received funds (39.8%). Conclusion: Based on the journal metrics, changing the journal language to English was found to be successful in promoting CERM to international journal status.

The Standard of Judgement on Plagiarism in Research Ethics and the Guideline of Global Journals for KODISA (KODISA 연구윤리의 표절 판단기준과 글로벌 학술지 가이드라인)

  • Hwang, Hee-Joong;Kim, Dong-Ho;Youn, Myoung-Kil;Lee, Jung-Wan;Lee, Jong-Ho
    • Journal of Distribution Science
    • /
    • v.12 no.6
    • /
    • pp.15-20
    • /
    • 2014
  • Purpose - In general, researchers try to abide by the code of research ethics, but many of them are not fully aware of plagiarism, unintentionally committing the research misconduct when they write a research paper. This research aims to introduce researchers a clear and easy guideline at a conference, which helps researchers avoid accidental plagiarism by addressing the issue. This research is expected to contribute building a climate and encouraging creative research among scholars. Research design, data, methodology & Results - Plagiarism is considered a sort of research misconduct along with fabrication and falsification. It is defined as an improper usage of another author's ideas, language, process, or results without giving appropriate credit. Plagiarism has nothing to do with examining the truth or accessing value of research data, process, or results. Plagiarism is determined based on whether a research corresponds to widely-used research ethics, containing proper citations. Within academia, plagiarism goes beyond the legal boundary, encompassing any kind of intentional wrongful appropriation of a research, which was created by another researchers. In summary, the definition of plagiarism is to steal other people's creative idea, research model, hypotheses, methods, definition, variables, images, tables and graphs, and use them without reasonable attribution to their true sources. There are various types of plagiarism. Some people assort plagiarism into idea plagiarism, text plagiarism, mosaic plagiarism, and idea distortion. Others view that plagiarism includes uncredited usage of another person's work without appropriate citations, self-plagiarism (using a part of a researcher's own previous research without proper citations), duplicate publication (publishing a researcher's own previous work with a different title), unethical citation (using quoted parts of another person's research without proper citations as if the parts are being cited by the current author). When an author wants to cite a part that was previously drawn from another source the author is supposed to reveal that the part is re-cited. If it is hard to state all the sources the author is allowed to mention the original source only. Today, various disciplines are developing their own measures to address these plagiarism issues, especially duplicate publications, by requiring researchers to clearly reveal true sources when they refer to any other research. Conclusions - Research misconducts including plagiarism have broad and unclear boundaries which allow ambiguous definitions and diverse interpretations. It seems difficult for researchers to have clear understandings of ways to avoid plagiarism and how to cite other's works properly. However, if guidelines are developed to detect and avoid plagiarism considering characteristics of each discipline (For example, social science and natural sciences might be able to have different standards on plagiarism.) and shared among researchers they will likely have a consensus and understanding regarding the issue. Particularly, since duplicate publications has frequently appeared more than plagiarism, academic institutions will need to provide pre-warning and screening in evaluation processes in order to reduce mistakes of researchers and to prevent duplicate publications. What is critical for researchers is to clearly reveal the true sources based on the common citation rules and to only borrow necessary amounts of others' research.

A Study on the Ideologies of the Clothing Advertisements in Women's Monthly Magazines (여성잡지 의류광고에 나타난 이데올로기 연구)

  • 김인숙;이명희
    • Journal of the Korean Society of Costume
    • /
    • v.37
    • /
    • pp.211-230
    • /
    • 1998
  • Advertisements provide consumers with in-formation and knowledge about products and help a society to sustain homogeneity by actively reflecting important characteristics of mass culture. Yet this reflection is a selective and purposeful representation by the party of the fashion manufactures and carries the intention of stimulating and augmenting desire for commodities aiming to perpetuate capitalism. This study understood this selective reflection of mass culture by advertisements as a feature of hegemonic struggle between/fashion business and consumers and defined the values selected by advertisements as ideologies supporting the consumption ideology of capitalism. The purpose of this study was to examine the contents of the ideologies expressed in the clothing advertisements in women's magazines to persuade consumers into consumption. The method of study was mainly qualitative with subsidiary citations from the results of content analysis. The objects of analysis were clothing advertisements in 1996 issues of CeCi and Woman Sense, which were identified as the two most popular women's monthly magazines. The ideologies identified were ideologies concerning (1) Self Identity, (2) Sensibility, (3) Sex Role, (4) Globalism, (5) Youth, (6) Leas-ure and Pleasure. Repeated and insisted as natural and true, there values were proposed to be believed as common senses and studies re-port that values of advertisements are ac-cepted as more readily as they are more unreasonable, and the acts and behaviors expres-sed within advertisements are often imitated in real life situations. Therefore, it is highly probable that these values emphasized within advertisements are enacted in thoughts and behaviors of consumers' real life. Accordingly the author suggests that critical interpretation of advertisements is seriously required to fully understand the commodity ridden post industrial society of today and to lead a subjective life within it.

  • PDF

Cases of Ethical Violation in Research Publications: Through Editorial Decision Making Process (편집심사업무 관점에서 학술지 윤리강화를 위한 표절 검증사례)

  • Hwang, Hee-Joong;Lee, Jung-Wan;Kim, Dong-Ho;Shin, Dong-Jin;Kim, Byoung-Goo;Kim, Tae-Joong;Lee, Yong-Ki;Kim, Wan-Ki;Youn, Myoung-Kil
    • Journal of Distribution Science
    • /
    • v.15 no.5
    • /
    • pp.49-52
    • /
    • 2017
  • Purpose - To improve and strengthen existing publication and research ethics, KODISA has identified and presented various cases which have violated publication and research ethics and principles in recent years. The editorial office of KODISA has been providing and continues to provide advice and feedback on publication ethics to researchers during peer review and editorial decision making process. Providing advice and feedback on publication ethics will ensure researchers to have an opportunity to correct their mistakes or make appropriate decisions and avoid any violations in research ethics. The purpose of this paper is to identify different cases of ethical violation in research and inform and educate researchers to avoid any violations in publication and research ethics. Furthermore, this article will demonstrate how KODISA journals identify and penalize ethical violations and strengthens its publication ethics and practices. Research design, data and methodology - This paper examines different types of ethical violation in publication and research ethics. The paper identifies and analyzes all ethical violations in research and combines them into five general categories. Those five general types of ethical violations are thoroughly examined and discussed. Results - Ethical violations of research occur in various forms at regular intervals; in other words, unethical researchers tend to commit different types of ethical violations repeatedly at same time. The five categories of ethical violation in research are as follows: (1) Arbitrary changes or additions in author(s) happen frequently in thesis/dissertation related publications. (2) Self plagiarism, submitting same work or mixture of previous works with or without using proper citations, also occurs frequently, but the most common type of plagiarism is changing the statistical results and using them to present as the results of the empirical analysis; (3) Translation plagiarism, another ethical violation in publication, is difficult to detect but occurs frequently; (4) Fabrication of data or statistical analysis also occurs frequently. KODISA requires authors to submit the results of the empirical analysis of the paper (the output of the statistical program) to prevent this type of ethical violation; (5) Mashup or aggregator plagiarism, submitting a mix of several different works with or without proper citations without alterations, is very difficult to detect, and KODISA journals consider this type of plagiarism as the worst ethical violation. Conclusions - There are some individual cases of ethical violation in research and publication that could not be included in the five categories presented throughout the paper. KODISA and its editorial office should continue to develop, revise, and strengthen their publication ethics, to learn and share different ways to detect any ethical violations in research and publication, to train and educate its editorial members and researchers, and to analyze and share different cases of ethical violations with the scholarly community.