• Journal of Information Processing Systems
• /
• v.14 no.4
• /
• pp.916-925
• /
• 2018

The academic research performance is often quantitatively measured by means of using citation frequency. The citation frequency-based indicators, such as h-index and impact factor, are commonly used reflecting the citation quality to some extent. However, these frequency-based indicators are usually carried out based on the assumption that all citations are equal. This may lead to biased evaluations in that, the attributes of the citing objects and cited objects are significant. A high-accuracy evaluation method is needed. In this paper, we review various citation quality-based evaluation indicators, and categorize them considering the algorithms being applied. We discuss the pros and cons of these indicators, and compare them from four dimensions. The outcomes will be useful for our further research on distinguishing citation quality.

• Journal of the Korean Society for information Management
• /
• v.25 no.4
• /
• pp.283-308
• /
• 2008

In this study, we testify that network structural attributes of a citation network can explain other aspects of journal citation behaviors and the importances of journals. And we also testify various citation impact indicators of journals including JIF and h-index to verify the difference among them especially focused on their ability to explain an institution's local features of citation behaviors. An institutional citation network is derived using the articles published in 2006-2007 by biotechnology faculties of Y University. And various journal citation impact indicators including JIF, SJR, h-index, EigenFactor, JII are gathered from different service sites such as Web of Science, SCImago, EigenFactor.com, Journal-Ranking.com. As a results, we can explain the institution's 5 research domains with inter-citation network. And we find that the co-citation network structural features can show explanations on the patterns of institutional journal citation behavior different from the simple cited frequency of the institution or patterns based on general citation indicators. Also We find that journal ranks with various citation indicators have differences and it implies that total-based indices, average-based indices, and hybrid index(h-index) explain different aspects of journal citation pattern. We also reveal that the coverage of citation DB doesn't be a matter in the journal ranking. Analyzing the citation networks derived from an institution's research outputs can be a useful and effective method in developing several library services.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science
• /
• v.45 no.2
• /
• pp.119-143
• /
• 2011

This study identifies the characteristics of recent citation-based indicators for assessing a single paper in the context of their co-relationships. Five predefined indicators were examined with three variants of h-index which are convened in this study; the formers are PageRank, SCEAS Rank, CCI, f-value, and single paper h-index and the latters are $h_S$-index, h1-index, and $h_S$1-index. The correlation analysis and cluster analysis were performed to group the indicators by common characteristics, after which the indicators were calculated with the dataset from KSCI DB. The results show statistical evidence that distinguishes h-index type indicators from others. The characteristics of the indicators were verified with citation frequency factors using correlation analysis. Finally, the implications for applications and further studies are discussed.

• Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice
• /
• v.10 no.4
• /
• pp.53-65
• /
• 2022

Altmetrics or alternative metrics gauge the digital attention received by scientific outputs from the web, which is treated as a supplement to traditional citation metrics. In this study, we performed a meta-analysis of correlations between classic citation metrics and altmetrics indicators of library and information science (LIS) articles. We followed the systematic review method to select the articles and Erasmus Rotterdam Institute of Management Guidelines for reporting the meta-analysis results. To select the articles, keyword searches were conducted on Google Scholar, Scopus, and ResearchGate during the last week of November 2021. Eleven articles were assessed, and eight were subjected to meta-analysis following the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The findings reported negative and positive associations between citations and altmetric indicators among the selected articles, with varying correlation coefficient values from -.189 to 0.93. The result of the meta-analysis reported a pooled correlation coefficient of 0.47 (95% confidence interval, 0.339 to 0.586) for the articles. Sub-group analysis based on the citation source revealed that articles indexed on the Web of Science showed a higher pooled correlation coefficient (0.41) than articles indexed in Google Scholar (0.30). The study concluded that the pooled correlation between citation metrics with altmetric indicators was positive, ranging from low to moderate. The result of the study gives more insights to the scientometrics community to propose and use altmetric indicators as a proxy for traditional citation indicators for quick research impact evaluation of LIS articles.

• Journal of the Korean Society for information Management
• /
• v.32 no.4
• /
• pp.205-221
• /
• 2015

The impact of a journal is commonly used as the impact of an individual paper within that journal. It is problematic to interpret a journal's impact as a single paper's impact of the journal, so there are several researches to measure a single paper's impact with its own citation counts. This study applied 8 impact indicators to Korean Citation Index database and examined discipline bias of each indicator. Analyzed indicators are simple citation counts, PageRank, f-value, CCI, c-index, single publication h-index, single publication hs-index, and cl-index. PageRank has the least discipline bias at highly ranked papers and journal bias in a discipline. On the contrary, simple citation counts showed strongly biased results toward a certain discipline or a journal. KCI database provides only simple citation counts. It needs to show PageRank (global indicator) to discover influential papers in diverse areas. Furthermore it needs to consider to provide the best of local indicators. Local indicators can be calculated only with papers in users' search results because they uses citation counts of citing papers and the number of references. They are more efficient than global indicators which explore the whole database. KCI should also consider to provide Cl-index (local indicator).

• Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science
• /
• v.52 no.4
• /
• pp.71-90
• /
• 2018

The importance of citation measures has been increasing in the evaluation of scholarly journals and it becomes a major issue for Korean Citation Index (KCI) journals. The Journal Impact Factor (JIF), a widely used measure for academic journals, has a problematic issue that it does not include the number of citations for a paper immediately made in the year in which the cited paper was published. On the contrary, the Diachronous Impact Factor (IMP) includes the number of citations made in the published year, but IMP is a measure for papers published a few years ago, not in the last year. It does not represent the recent value of journals effectively. To overcome these problems, Total Impact Factor (TIF) and Mean Impact Factor (MIF) are proposed as new journal citation indicators. This study calculated the performance of proposed indicators experimentally on KCI data. The result shows that TIF is a promising measure for the multidimensional evaluation of humanities and social sciences journals in Korea because it has high stability by year and includes the immediate citations of the published year.

• Journal of the Korean Society for information Management
• /
• v.39 no.1
• /
• pp.1-15
• /
• 2022

This study analyzes the relationship of citations appearing in the patent data to understand knowledge transfers and impacts between patent documents in the field of pharmaceutical research. Patent data were collected from a website, Google Patents. The top 25 assignees were selected by searching for patent documents related to pharmaceutical research. We identify the citation relationships between assignees, then calculate and compare the values of h-index and derived indicators by using the number of citations and rank for each document of each assignee. As a result, in the case of pharmaceutical research, the assignee, such as 'Pfizer, MIT, and Abbott' shows a high impact. Among the five bibliometric indicators, the g-index and hS-index show similar results, and the indicators are the most related to the rankings of Total Citation Frequency, Cites per Patents, and Maximum Citation Frequency. In addition, it is highly related to the five indicators in the order of Total Citation Frequency, Cites per Patents, and Maximum Citation Frequency. In some cases, it is difficult to make an accurate comparison with Cites per Patents alone, which is previously known to indicate the technological influence of patent assignees.

• Journal of the Korean BIBLIA Society for library and Information Science
• /
• v.13 no.1
• /
• pp.27-41
• /
• 2002

The study investigated the citation indicators and the citation analysis data developed in the KoMCI(Korean Medical Citation Index) project. With the full understanding of the current level of citation rates of Korean medical journals by Korean medical journals. and of the characteristics and problems associated with the KoMCI citation indicators, it is possible to further develop or modify citation indicators which will better represent the citation patterns of Korean medical journals. The highest impact factor reported in the KoMCI 2000 : Korean Medical Journal Citation Reports, which covered 69 Korean medical journals published in 2000 is 0.424 and the average is 0.182. It is because only 8.5% of references cited in Korean medical journal articles is to the Korean journal articles, The journal self-citation rates are very high (usually higher than 50%) due to the fact that there are only a few Korean journals published in the same subject area. The KoMCI impact factors of two Korean SCI journals for which SCI JCR reported the SCI 2000 impact factors are about 1/3 of the SCI impact factors. It is because SCI is based on the citations received from 5,900 journals whereas KoMCI is from 69 journals.

• Journal of Information Management
• /
• v.36 no.3
• /
• pp.51-70
• /
• 2005

It is meaningful to develop the scholarly digital archives in a respect that it could preserve the research papers using digital media. The scholarly digital archives provide scientists with the information source with which scientists could actively accomplish research. This study measured based on the citation analysis to what extent PMC, which is life science scholarly digital archives, has an effect on the scholarly communication in the same subject field. The findings are as follows. First, the three citation indicators, impact factor, immediacy index, and half-life, have no remarkable difference in between pre and post-digital archives era. Second, there were more cases that the major citation indicators increased rather than ones decreased with the appearance of the scholarly digital archives, as a result of ranking the scholarly journals after classifying according to subjects.

• Journal of the Korean Society for information Management
• /
• v.40 no.2
• /
• pp.59-80
• /
• 2023

Traditional models for categorizing researcher types have mostly utilized research output metrics. This study proposes a new model that classifies researchers based on the characteristics of research collaboration. The model uses only research collaboration indicators and does not rely on citation data, taking into account that citation impact is related to collaborative research. The model categorizes researchers into four types based on their collaborative research pattern and scope: Sparse & Wide (SW) type, Dense & Wide (DW) type, Dense & Narrow (DN) type, Sparse & Narrow (SN) type. When applied to the quantum metrology field, the proposed model was statistically verified to show differences in citation indicators and co-author network indicators according to the classified researcher types. The proposed researcher type classification model does not require citation information. Therefore, it is expected to be widely used in research management policies and research support services.