• Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice
• /
• 제7권2호
• /
• pp.23-31
• /
• 2019

We report results of selection-bias-free approaches to the analysis of the impact of open access (OA) models on citation metrics. We studied reference groups of Gold and Green OA articles and the group of non-OA (Paywall) articles with the new functionality of the Web of Science Core Collection database, the InCites platform of Clarivate Analytics, and the Dimensions database of Digital Science. For each reference group we obtained the values of the percent of cited articles and citation impact and their dependence on the depth of the citation period. Different research fields were analyzed in two schemas of the InCites platform. We report the higher values and growth rates of the citation metrics: citation impact and %Cited, in the OA reference groups over the Paywall group. The Green OA articles demonstrate the highest values of citation metrics among all the OA models. Dependence of the value of citation impact on citation period follows linear law with R2 values close to 0.9-1.0. The overall annual growth rates of citation impact of the Green OA, Gold OA, and the Paywall articles, k equal, respectively, 3.6, 2.4, and 1.4 in Dimensions and 4.6, 3.6, and 2.3 in the Web of Science Core Collection. We suppose that earlier results reported for the articles in pure OA journals vs. articles in Paywall journals were affected by the high citation impact of the Green and Hybrid OA articles that could not be elucidated in the Paywall journals at that time.

• Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice
• /
• 제11권4호
• /
• pp.40-50
• /
• 2023

Research in interdisciplinary fields like biomechanics is published in a variety of journals whose visibility depends on bibliometric indexing that is often driven by citation analysis of bibliometric databases. This study documented variation in publication metrics and research subject categories assigned to 14 biomechanics journals. Authors, citation, and citation rate (CR) were collected for the top 15 cited articles in the journals retrieved from the Google Scholar service. Research subject categories were also extracted for journals from three databases (Dimensions, Journal Citation Reports, and Scopus). Despite the focus on biomechanics for the journals studied, these biomechanics journals have widely varying CR and subject categories assigned to them. There were significant (p=0.001) and meaningful (77-108%) differences in median CR between average, low, and high CR groups of these biomechanics journals. Since CR are primary data used to calculate most journal metrics and there is no one biomechanics subject category, field normalization for journal citation metrics in biomechanics is difficult. Care must be taken to accurately interpret most citation metrics of biomechanics journals as biased proxies of general usage of research, given a specific database, time frame, and area of biomechanics research.

• Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice
• /
• 제10권4호
• /
• 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.

• 한국문헌정보학회지
• /
• 제57권3호
• /
• pp.249-277
• /
• 2023

본 연구의 목적은 인용 지표가 인용 색인 데이터베이스의 검색성능 향상에 기여할 가능성을 파악하는 데에 있다. 이를 위하여 본 연구는 문헌정보학 분야 10개의 질의를 Web of Science에서 검색하여 수집한 3,467건의 문헌과 2000년부터 2021년까지 SSCI 문헌정보학 분야 저널 85종에 수록된 60,734건의 문헌을 기반으로 적합성 판단을 거쳐, 검색 결과의 상위 100순위에 대한 성능 및 검색 방식과 인용 지표를 활용한 재순위화, 그리고 벡터 공간모형 검색시스템 구축 등에 따른 질의 확장 실험을 수행하였다. 그 결과 첫째, 인용 지표를 단독으로 사용한 재순위화의 성능은 Web of Science의 검색성능과 상이하였으며, 인용 지표는 Web of Science 기존 시스템에 적용되지 않는 독립적인 지표로 작용하고 있었다. 둘째, 고유 질의어 수에 질의어의 총 출현 빈도를 조합하고 인용수를 보조적으로 사용했을 때, 성능에 긍정적인 영향을 미칠 것으로 확인하였다. 셋째, 질의 확장에서는 전반적으로 벡터 공간모형 기반 검색시스템의 기본 성능 대비 성능이 향상되었다. 넷째, 이용자 적합성을 통해 질의 확장을 적용한 경우가 시스템 적합성을 적용한 경우보다 성능이 향상 되었다. 다섯째, 피인용 수를 적합 문헌과 더불어 사용하면 최상위권 내 적합 문헌에서의 순위 변동 가능성을 보여주었다.

• Clinical and Experimental Reproductive Medicine
• /
• 제41권4호
• /
• 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.

• Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice
• /
• 제3권2호
• /
• pp.16-30
• /
• 2015

The term megajournal is used to describe publication platforms, like PLOS ONE, that claim to incorporate peer review processes and web technologies that allow fast review and publishing. These platforms also publish without the constraints of periodic issues and instead publish daily. We conducted a yearlong bibliometric profile of a sample of articles published in the first several months after the launch of PeerJ, a peer reviewed, open access publishing platform in the medical and biological sciences. The profile included a study of author characteristics, peer review characteristics, usage and social metrics, and a citation analysis. We found that about 43% of the articles are collaborated on by authors from different nations. Publication delay averaged 68 days, based on the median. Almost 74% of the articles were coauthored by males and females, but less than a third were first authored by females. Usage and social metrics tended to be high after publication but declined sharply over the course of a year. Citations increased as social metrics declined. Google Scholar and Scopus citation counts were highly correlated after the first year of data collection (Spearman rho = 0.86). An analysis of reference lists indicated that articles tended to include unique journal titles. The purpose of the study is not to generalize to other journals but to chart the origin of PeerJ in order to compare to future analyses of other megajournals, which may play increasingly substantial roles in science communication.

• 정보관리학회지
• /
• 제38권1호
• /
• pp.53-69
• /
• 2021

본 연구에서는 다학제적 연구가 활발해진 국내 연구의 동향을 파악하기 위하여 2020 구글 스칼라 매트릭스에 색인된 국내 주요 학술지 데이터를 활용하여 전 학문분야를 포괄하는 네트워크 분석(대학협력 네트워크, 키워드 동시출현 네트워크, 학술지 인용 네트워크, 학문분야 인용 네트워크)을 실시하였다. 대학협력 네트워크 분석결과, 서울대학교, 계명대학교, 성균관대학교 등 협력연구를 활발히 진행하는 대학을 파악할 수 있었고, 키워드 동시출현 네트워크 분석결과, 이직의도, 직무만족 등 직무관련 키워드가 높은 빈도로 나타남을 확인하였다. 학술지 인용 네트워크에서는 한국콘텐츠학회논문지, 한국사회학, 한국심리학회지: 문화 및 사회문제 등 인용이 많이 되고 있는 핵심 학술지들을 확인하였으며, 학문분야 인용 네트워크에서는 교육학, 경영학, 사회복지학이 다른 학문에 가장 많은 영향을 미치는 학문임을 확인하였다. 본 연구에서는 기존의 국내 계량서지분석연구에서 시도하지 않았던 구글 스칼라 매트릭스 데이터를 처음 활용하였으며, 키워드, 학술지, 학문분야로 범위를 확장시켜가며 단계적 네트워크 분석을 실시하였다는 점에서 학술적 의의를 가지며, 연구결과는 국내 대학 간 공동연구의 전략 수립 및 다학제적 융합연구 기획에 활용될 수 있다는 점에서 실질적인 함의를 시사한다.

• Journal of information and communication convergence engineering
• /
• 제15권3호
• /
• pp.165-169
• /
• 2017

Altmetrics is an emergent research area whereby social media is applied as a source of metrics to evaluate scientific impact. Recently, the interest in altmetrics has been growing. Traditional scientific impact evaluation indictors are based on the number of publications, citation counts and peer reviews of a researcher. As research publications were increasingly placed online, usage metrics as well as webometrics appeared. This paper explores the potential benefits of altmetrics and the deep relationship between each metrics. Firstly, we found a weak-to-medium correlation among the 11 altmetrics and visualized such correlation. Secondly, we conducted principal component analysis and exploratory factor analysis on altmetrics of social media, divided the 11 altmetrics into four feature sets, confirming the dispersion and relative concentration of altmetrics groups and developed the altmetrics evaluation model. We can use this model to evaluate the scientific impact of articles on social media.

• 정보관리학회지
• /
• 제40권2호
• /
• pp.59-80
• /
• 2023

기존의 연구자 유형 구분 모델은 대부분 연구성과 지표를 활용해왔다. 이 연구에서는 인용 영향력이 공동연구와 관련이 있다는 점을 감안하여 인용 데이터를 활용하지 않고 공동연구 지표만으로 연구자 유형을 분석하는 새로운 방법을 모색해보았다. 공동연구 패턴과 공동연구 범위를 기준으로 연구자를 Sparse & Wide (SW) 유형, Dense & Wide (DW) 유형, Dense & Narrow (DN) 유형, Sparse & Narrow (SN) 유형의 4가지로 구분하는 모델을 제안하였다. 제안된 모델을 양자계측 분야에 적용해본 결과, 구분된 연구자 유형별로 인용지표와 공저 네트워크 지표에 차이가 있음이 통계적으로 검증되었다. 이 연구에서 제시한 공동연구 특성에 따른 연구자 유형 구분 모델은 인용정보를 필요로 하지 않으므로 연구관리 정책과 연구지원서비스 측면에서 폭넓게 활용할 수 있을 것으로 기대된다.

• Industrial Engineering and Management Systems
• /
• 제15권1호
• /
• pp.99-109
• /
• 2016

During the last two decades, impact factor has been widely used as a journal evaluation metric that differentiates the influence of a specific journal compared with other journals. However, impact factor does not provide a reliable metric between journals in different subject categories. For example, higher impact factors are given to biology and general sciences than those assigned to other traditional engineering and social sciences. This study initially analyzes the trend of the time series of the impact factors of the journals listed in Journal Citation Reports during the last decade. This study then proposes new journal evaluation metrics that adjust the impact factors across different subject categories. The proposed metrics possibly provides a consistent measure to mitigate the differences in impact factors among subject categories. On the basis of experimental results, we recommend the most reliable and appropriate metric to evaluate journals that are less dependent on the characteristics of subject categories.