Author self-citations in the field of ecology

Ecologists writing research articles frequently cite their own papers. Self-citations are frequent in science, but the reasons behind abnormally high rates of self-citations are questionable. My goals were to assess the prevalence of author self-citations and to identify the combination of attributes that best predict high levels of self-citations in ecology articles. I searched 643 articles from 9 different ecology journals of various impact factors for synchronous (i.e., within reference lists) and diachronous (i.e., following publication) self-citations, using the Web of Science online database. I assessed the effect of the number of authors, pages, and references/citations, the proportion of diachronous/synchronous self-citations, and the impact factor, on the proportion of synchronous and diachronous self-citations separately. I compared various candidate models made of these covariates using Akaike’s Information Criterion. On average, ecologists made 6.0 synchronous self-citations (12.8% of references), and 2.5 diachronous self-citations (25.5% of citations received 2.8 to 4.5 years after publication) per article. The best predictor of the proportion of synchronous self-citations was the number of authors. My study is the first to report recidivism in the inclusion of self-citations by researchers, i.e., the proportion of diachronous self-citations was best explained by the proportion of synchronous self-citations. The proportion of self-citations also increased with the number of pages and the impact factor of ecology journals, and decreased with the number of references/citations. Although a lot of variance remained unexplained, my study successfully showed regularities in the propensity of ecologists to include self-citations in their research articles.     

Characteristics of papers published in journals: an analysis of open access journals,country of publication,and languages used

This study explores how the citation of open access (OA) journal articles occurs by analyzing the impact of certain journal characteristics, namely, whether the journal is OA and whether its country of publication is the same as the affiliation of a paper’s author. As the language of a paper is an important factor contributing to paper citations, this study uses papers in English. This analysis included publications from 77 countries from 2010 to 2012. This analysis included 19,530 journals and 3,215,742 papers without duplication. The results showed that papers published in OA and international journals were cited in more countries than non-OA and domestic journals, and a higher percentage of these were being cited by foreign countries. From these findings, it was determined that the more widely accessible OA journals were effectively being accessed by researchers from multiple countries. However, of the top 10% most cited papers in international journals, a higher percentage of these came from non-OA compared to OA journals. Among domestic journals, no such difference was found. Papers published in non-OA international journals were most cited in foreign countries with a large number of published papers. Hence, the effect of OA’s expanded accessibility, while having an apparent effect on heightening the interest of foreign readership, has a limited impact in terms of increasing citations.     

Bibliometric analysis of pentachlorophenol remediation methods during the period of 1994 to 2005

A bibliometric analysis was performed to assess the quantitative trend of published pentachlorophenol (PCP) remediation studies, including both degradation and sorption. The documents studies were retrieved from the Science Citation Index (SCI) for the period from 1994 to 2005. The trends were analyzed with the retrieved results in publication language, document type, page count, publication output, publication pattern, authorship, citation analysis and country of publication. The results indicated that degradation was the emphasis for PCP remediation. The average impact factor of the journals was higher for publishing degradation studies in comparison to that publishing sorption studies. And there was a positive correlation between CPP and IF for journals published more than two papers. The publishing countries of both degradation and sorption denoted that most of these researches were done by USA and Canada. Two to four authors was the most popular level of co-authorship.     

Influence of publication languages on the citation rate of scientific articles: A case study of East German journals

In order to quantify the influence of publication languages on the rate of citation of scientific articles, such East German journals from the Science Citation Index database were selected which publish relevant shares of contributions in several languages, especially in English and German. For a fixed period of time (1988) the selective citation impact of both English- and German-language articles was calculated. The results of our investigation reveal a non-uniform picture: In some cases English-language papers exhibit a significantly higher citations-per-paper average than German-language articles, but in a few cases German-language publications achieve a higher mean citation rate. For the half of selected journals there does not exist a statistically significant difference of citation frequencies of publications in both languages. Possible causes of these phenomena (editorial practice of journals, native countries of authors) are considered.     

Bibliometric analysis of tsunami research

The use of the bibilometric analytical technique for examining tsunami research does not exist in the literature. The objective of the study was to perform a bibliometric analysis of all tsunami-related publications in the Science Citation Index (SCI). Analyzed parameters included document type, language of publication, publication output, authorship, publication patterns, distribution of subject category, distribution of author keywords, country of publication, most-frequently cited article, and document distribution after the Indonesia tsunami. The US and Japan produced 53% of the total output where the seven major industrial countries accounted for the majority of the total production. English was the dominant language, comprising 95% of articles. A simulation model was applied to describe the relationship between the number of authors and the number of articles, the number of journals and the number of articles, and the percentage of total articles and the number of times a certain keyword was used. Moreover the tsunami publication patterns in the first 8 months after the Indonesia tsunami occurred on 26 December 2004 indicated a high percentage of non-article publications and more documents being published in journals with higher impact factors.     

Papers written by Nobel Prize winners in physics before they won the prize: an analysis of their language and journal of publication

In this paper, we analyzed data relating to the language of papers written by winners of Nobel Prizes in physics before they won the prize and their journals of publication, and we identified the change in scientific language corresponding with shifts of the center of the scientific world. Using the science citation index as the main data source, we also collected information on the distribution of prize-winning scientists by country, by each scientist’s number of published papers, and by language. We then analyzed their papers in terms of the different journals based in different countries. The results are presented in three parts: (1) the main languages used in the papers are English and German. The proportion of papers in English is gradually increasing, while that of papers in German is decreasing. (2) The prize winning scientists’ papers have been published mainly in journals in their own nation and in the United States. (3) Journals based in their own countries are very helpful to these scientists early in their careers.     

Journals that increase their impact factor at least fourfold in a few years: The role of journal self-citations

The aim of this study was to ascertain the possible effect of journal self-citations on the increase in the impact factors of journals in which this scientometric indicator rose by a factor of at least four in only a few years. Forty-three journals were selected from the Thomson—Reuters (formerly ISI) Journal Citation Reports as meeting the above criterion. Eight journals in which the absolute number of citations was lower than 20 in at least two years were excluded, so the final sample consisted of 35 journals. We found no proof of widespread manipulation of the impact factor through the massive use of journal self-citations.     

Scientometrics of laser research in India and China

An analysis of 1223 papers published by India (347papers) and China (876papers) at conferences and in journals during 1993 and 1997 in the field of laser S&T indicates that China"s output was twice to that of India. However, Activity Indices for both the countries in 1993 and 1997 were almost the same. Chinese scientists preferred to publish in domestic journals, while Indian scientists published in foreign journals. The number of papers by Indian scientists in SCI covered journals and journals with high-Normalized Impact Factors was more than for China, and, thus India was better connected to the mainstream science compared to China. The impact made by Indian papers was more than for Chinese papers, as reflected by normalized impact per paper, proportion of papers in high quality journals, and publication effective index. Indian papers also got more citations per paper than Chinese papers. Team research appears to be better in China than in India, as reflected by the number of mega-authored papers produced by the two countries. This revised version was published online in June 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Collaboration Patterns in Indian and Bulgarian Epidemiology of Neoplasms in Medline for 1966–1999

The publication output of India and Bulgaria on epidemiology of neoplasms as reflected in Medline on CD-ROM for 1966–1999 was scientometrically analyzed. Indians have published 347 papers in 24 domestic journals but 444 papers in169 journals from 21 countries. Bulgarians have published 88 papers in 6 Bulgarian journals but 63 papers in 39 journals from 13 countries. Some 17 journals from 8 countries contained papers by Indian and Bulgarian authors both. Oncology dominated with 46 different journals. Indians have published papers in foreign journals of 30 thematic profiles but Bulgarians - of 12 ones. The collaboration of Indians and Bulgarians resulted from joint bilateral projects and/or postgraduate studies abroad. This revised version was published online in June 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Citation patterns of Korean physicists and mechanical engineers: Differences by type of publication source and type of authorship

By comparing the citation patterns of Korean researchers in physics and mechanical engineering, this study identifies the extent to which type of publication source (Korean non-SCI, Korean SCI, and international SCI) and type of authorship (purely Korean authors, Korean-foreign co-authors, and foreign-Korean co-authors) influence the choice of sources cited by Korean scientists. Koreans publishing physics or mechanical engineering papers in international SCI journals are more likely to cite articles published in journals of the science mainstream countries (the U.S., the U.K., the Netherlands, and Germany) than articles published in national journals, while Koreans publishing in Korean journals tend to cite articles published in national journals. In terms of authorship, articles published in mainstream journals are more highly cited by internationally co-authored papers than Korean-authored papers in both disciplines. This revised version was published online in June 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Some bibliometric correlates of quality in scientific research

The following kinds of data were collected on three samples of cancer research literature representing three levels of quality: (1) collaboration as measured by the number of authors per paper, (2) quantitative productivity of countries, (3) diachronous citations covering the first five years of publication, (4) total self-citations, (5) proportions of self-citations made by first-named authors, and (6) the extent of dispersion of articles among journals. Analyses showed that as the number of authors per paper increases, the proportion of high quality papers also increases and the Collaborative Index can be used to measure quality in the aggregate. It was found that the quantity and quality of cancer research done in a country are positively related. All analyses of the citation data confirmed the hypotheses that highly rated papers are significantly more highly cited than average papers and the rates of uncitedness decline with quality. The proportion of self-citations to total citations decreases with increasing quality and, on average, first-named authors of quality papers cite them proportionally fewer times than first-named authors of run-of-the mill papers do. This study also shows that, as quality increases, the extent of literature scatter or dispersion increases.     

An attempt of surveying and classifying bibliometric indicators for scientometric purposes

An attempt is made for the survey and classification of bibliometric indicators applicable for assessment of publication performance of researchers active in natural sciences. Indicators can be classified as publication and citation ones which may refer to impact and quantity of publication activity of researcher(s), teams, institutes or countries. Taking into account the possible reference standards, the indicators are classified as simple, specific, balance, distribution and relative ones. In order to evaluate publication activity both qualitatively and quantitatively, relative citation indicators can be recommended, which relate citations received to the sum of impact factors of the journals, where the papers were published or give the relative measure of the average citedness of papers related to that of papers in journals in a similar subfield.     

Two-phase edge outlier detection method for technology opportunity discovery

It has been observed that Southeast Asian countries and universities have ranked poorly in global research productivity and impact. The same is true for the field of language and linguistics. Some studies revealed that productivity and citation patterns in this field are lower compared to other fields of study. Thus, this study sought to examine the research performance of SEA countries and universities in the field of language and linguistics for efficient policy-making. The research performance of each SEA country and university was assessed through Scopus database using the following bibliometric indicators: total number of publications (P), total number of citations excluding self-citations (C), citations per publication (CPP), percent of non-cited articles (%PNC), and h-index. Findings revealed that SEA countries have only produced almost 2 % of all published articles in language and linguistics and around 1 % share in overall worldwide field citations. Interestingly, both the SEA countries and universities exhibit a trend toward increasing their yearly research productivity and citations. However, research productivity and citations in the field of language and linguistics are dominated by selected universities in each country particularly in Brunei, Singapore, Malaysia, and the Philippines. This study has implications for research policy-making and future studies.     

Use of citation per publication as an indicator to evaluate pentachlorophenol research

The objective of the study was to perform a bibliometric analysis of all pentachlorophenolrelated publications in the Science Citation Index (SCI). Analyzed parameters included document type, language of publication, page count, publication output, authorship, keywords plus, publication pattern, citation and country of publication. The US produced 29% of the total single country publications where the seven major industrial countries accounted for the majority of the total production (66%). An indicator citation per publication was successfully applied in this study to evaluate the impact of number of authors, countries, and journals. The mean value of citation per publication of collaborative papers was higher than that of single country publications. In addition analysis of keywords plus in different period was applied to indicate a research trend.     

Online determination of the journal impact factor and its international properties

The article describes the method for the online determination of the journal impact factor (JIF). The method is very simple and can be used both for the ISI defined journal impact factor and for the calculation of other generalised journal impact factors. But the direct online method fails for non-ISI journals i.e. journals not indexed by ISI to the three citation databases. For such journals only the “External Cited Impact Factor” associated with citations from ISI journals (ECIFisi) can be determined online by the common method. As an extra benefit the online method makes available the determination of the geographical distribution of citations and citable units in relation to any given JIF, i.e. the international impact for a particular journal in a given year. The method is illustrated by calculating the generalised JIF, self-citations and ECIF(isi) as well as the international impact for Journal of Documentation and Scientometrics.     

Scholarly gratitude in five geographical contexts: a diachronic and cross-generic approach of the acknowledgment paratext in medical discourse (1950–2010)

This study analyzed the use of acknowledgements in medical articles published in five countries (Venezuela, Spain, France, UK and USA) from 1950 to 2010. For each country, we selected 54 papers (18 research papers, 18 reviews and 18 case reports), evenly distributed over six decades, from two medical journals with the highest impact factors. Only papers written by native speakers in the national language were included. The evolution of the frequency and length of acknowledgments was analyzed. Of 270 articles studied, 127 (47%) had acknowledgments. The presence of acknowledgments was associated with country (p = 0.001), this section being more common and longer in US and UK journals. Acknowledgments were most common in research papers (70 vs. 40% in case reports and 31% in reviews, p < 0.001). Reviews without acknowledgments were significantly more common than those with (69 vs. 31%), but there was no trend in case reports. Altogether, articles with acknowledgments predominated only after 2000. Since the frequency of use of acknowledgments remained stable over time in US and UK journals but increased in non-Anglophone journals, the overall increase is attributed to the change in non-English publications. Authors acknowledged sub-authorship more in English language journals than in those published in the national language in France, Spain and Venezuela. However, the practice of acknowledging is increasing in non-Anglophone journals. We conclude that the concept of intellectual indebtedness does not only differ from one geographical context to another, but also over time and from one academic genre to another.     

Landmark papers written by the Nobelists in physics from 1901 to 2012: a bibliometric analysis of their citations and journals

We collected 382 landmark papers written by 193 Nobel Laureates in physics from 1901 to 2012 and used bibliometric methods, citation frequencies, impact factor (IF), and tendency of the landmark journals to analyze their contents. The results show: (1) Of landmark papers published during 1980–2009, 74.7 % were cited more than 500 times. Average citation frequencies and proportion of highly cited papers were higher for theoretic discoveries than for experimental methods. However, the proportion of highly cited papers in both domains was lower than for an invention. The average test period for the latter was markedly shorter too. (2) Landmark papers by Nobelists were mainly published in journals with IF from 5.0 to 10.0, but journals below IF 5.0 ranked first among all landmark journals. (3) As to countries where landmark papers were published, the Netherlands ranked at the top of the countries with the most landmark journals, besides the United States and England. In addition, the majority of landmark papers written by non-mainstream countries’ Nobelists were published in foreign journals with IF <7.0. These data indicate some regularity and tendency of landmark papers written by Nobelists in physics.